by Gongwer News Service
May 22, 2009

After months of debate, a House Committee finally approved a bill that would snuff out smoking in most public places. But by exempting some businesses and leaving others to flounder, many said the move only served to widen the divide in the debate between the legislation’s supporters and those who say allowing exemptions would make some winners while forcing most others out of business.

And nowhere is the fight still raging the strongest than between the two chambers, with Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R-Rochester) holding fast to his insistence that the only smoking ban he will put to a vote would be a total ban.

As reported out, the H3 substitute of HB 4377 exempts all casinos in the state, though that exemption can be waived through the compact with any tribal casino or from all casinos if the majority of tribal casinos voluntarily ban smoking.

Tobacco-based businesses are also exempt, but they have to certify that they earn 10 percent of their income from tobacco products for cigar bars or 75 percent for specialty tobacco stores. And they have to physically separate the smoking area from any non-smoking areas

While many business owners testified that their restaurants, bar and Keno business would be harmed by a ban, it was the notion that casinos could see a 20-percent dip in gaming — because of competition with tribal casinos that aren’t bound by state laws, and that would result in hundreds of millions in lost tax revenue, and from cigar bars that rely on tobacco for their livelihood — that resulted in the exemptions.

And though Mr. Bishop has been outspoken against the exemptions, the issue doesn’t appear to be partisan in the Senate.

Sen. Raymond Basham (D-Taylor), who championed the issue in the Senate last session, has urged the House to pass the ban with no exceptions.

“By passing this bill with these exemptions today, legislators are once again stacking the deck in favor of special interests and forcing more than 10,000 casino employees to play the odds between cancer and a paycheck,” Mr. Basham said. “The movement of this legislation today gets the ball rolling, but in our current economy, we shouldn’t be forcing Michigan workers to choose between their job and their health, regardless of where they work.”

Restaurant and bar owners reiterated that the bill would put thousands in their industry out of work.

“Lawmakers just took the first step toward handing pink slips to nearly 7,500 Michigan workers,” said Lance Binoniemi, executive director of the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association. “Last time I checked, picking and choosing what businesses will fail in Michigan is not in our lawmakers’ job description.”

It seems those looking for modifications on the House floor may get their wish. Even as the committee moved quickly Thursday in reporting the bill, the chair said he did not feel that issues brought about in months of testimony have been completely resolved.

Chair Rep. Bert Johnson (D-Highland Park) said before the vote that negotiations to reach a full compromise are continuing. And the 9-1 vote (Rep. Jim Stamas (R-Midland) opposed the bill and Rep. Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge) abstained) indicated the bipartisan agreement Mr. Johnson had said he wanted before moving the legislation was in place on the House side.

But Mr. Johnson, while voting to report the bill, said it does not do enough to protect businesses in the state. He said the ban was going to mean loss of business for some bars and restaurants in the state at a time when they cannot afford those losses.

“It’s with some concern that we’re only offering H-3 and not endeavoring to protect some small businesses that are doing the Michigan thing, and that’s hanging on,” he said. “I’m not in the business of putting people out of business.”

Mr. Johnson would not give a timeline for addressing the measure on the floor, but he did say it would not linger in the chamber.

Governor Jennifer Granholm remains on record as saying she would agree to sign any smoking ban bill that reaches her desk.

And with interest groups such as the Campaign for Smokefree Air, which published a report that said Michigan is one of only 13 states left yet to pass a smoking ban of some sort, the governor will likely get the chance to sign one of the many versions of a ban floating around in the House.

While it isn’t likely, the legislature could agree to disagree and let voters decide by passing a bill introduced in April that would put a total workplace smoking ban to a vote on the 2010 ballot.

“For the past 10 years, the legislature has tried and failed to pass a smoke-free worksite bill that would protect our citizens from smoking-related diseases,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Tupac Hunter (D-Detroit). “Instead of continuing to argue about exemptions and concessions, we need to go to the voters and let them decide what is best for Michigan.”

For nearly 50 years in Michigan, Gongwer News Service has provided independent, comprehensive, accurate and timely coverage of issues in and around Michigan’s government and political systems. For subscription information, including a free trial, visit Gongwer online.