|
Smoking ban enforcement
We've already said we agree with the plan to ban smoking statewide in indoor areas because of the rights of employees to work in smoke-free environments and the rights of patrons to pursue happiness in smoke-free entertainment establishments. But what about enforcement?
The Freedom to Breathe Act has passed both houses of our state government last week and has been signed into law by Gov. Tim Pawlenty. The problem we see, though, is that the enforcement mechanisms of this bill are, right now, ambiguous and weak.
The first way the law would be enforced would be to rely on the business proprietors. That person is charged with posting no-smoking signs and asking those who do light up to put it out if an employee or client asks.
That's pretty weak. Instead of saying "no smoking, period," the law asks employees to step up and confront an owner if someone is violating the new law. Not exactly a recipe for long-term employment.
Then there's a second mechanism for enforcement: the Department of Health. According to the letter of the law: "The state commissioner of health shall adopt rules necessary and reasonable to implement" the ban. Translation: Department of Health people, you figure it out.
The only way to truly put teeth into this law is to make it driven by citizen complaints. The Department of Health needs to set up and publicize one toll-free phone number for people to call to complain. But even that is problematic, because then the burden is on the Department of Health to investigate those claims, and there are serious questions about staffing issues to do so.
As the state will find out, it's easy to say "no smoking." It's quite another to make it happen.
- Faribault Daily News
|
Mostly Clear, 80°
