The Weather Authority
Currents
Doppler Radar
7-Day
WOWT.com on Demand
  • 6 On Your Cell
  • RSS Feeds
  • Desktop Alert
  • Text Alerts
  • Daily E-News
  • What’s on 6
  • Children's Programming Changes
    YouCast - Submit Pics and Video
    Watch NBC Shows Online
    MarketPlace
  • Restaurants
  • Go Green!
  • Auto Map
  • Business Connections
  • Financial Advice
  • Legal Advice
  • New Home Listings
  • Your Home, Your Investment
  • Entertainment
  • Recipes
  • Jobs
  • The Wedding Planner
  • Martha's Tip of the Day
  • Advertise With WOWT
  • Governor Signs Smoking Ban Save Email Print
    Heineman: "The public health concern is a critical one"
    Posted: 11:33 AM Feb 26, 2008
    Last Updated: 3:26 PM Feb 26, 2008

    A | A | A

    Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman has signed into law a bill that bans smoking in bars, restaurants and workplaces throughout Nebraska. It takes effect in June, 2009.

    In a statement issued Tuesday morning the governor is quoted as saying, "After careful consideration, I signed LB 395 into law today. In weighing the merits of this bill, I took into account the valid concerns about local control and the rights of business owners, as well as the health concerns and the rights of the public to clean indoor air. The public health concern is a critical one and that is why I signed LB 395.”

    The strict statewide smoking ban modeled after the one in Lincoln was approved by lawmakers Friday, a major breakthrough for public-health advocates and an alarming sign to opponents that state government is being intrusive.

    Thirty-four of the Legislature's 49 senators voted for the ban.

    Previous attempts to pass a smoking ban have come close but fizzled out. Opponents of the bill from Sen. Joel Johnson of Kearney tried to thwart this one by using a filibuster. They gathered little support.

    "If they can make the bars in Dublin nonsmoking, I think we can make them nonsmoking in Nebraska as well," said Johnson, a retired physician.

    He and other supporters have argued that a ban could be the most effective public-health move in the history of the state, preventing the spread of smoking-related diseases such as cancer by shielding people from secondhand smoke.

    Cities and counties can't opt out of the ban, which covers bars, restaurants and all other workplaces in the state except for retail tobacco shops and places where smoking research is done. Hotel rooms also would be exempt.

    More Stories
    Pelini: Team Needs to Be More Disciplined

    Nader Campaign Plans Omaha Stop

    Two More Left Under Safe Haven

    Bus Bogs Down in Street Hole

    Banks & Recession Worry Financial Markets

    Shooting Victim In Stable Condition

    Music Hall Packed For Palin

    Salmonella Warning

    Post Your Comments
    First Name:
    Location:
    Enter Comments: characters left
    Email (optional):
    Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
    Read Comments
    Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
    Posted by: fred on Mar 17, 2008 at 07:00 PM
    I see those state workers in elkhorn area always smoking in cars and trucks,Why do we pay these people to smoke in state owned vehicles.

    Posted by: Phil on Mar 12, 2008 at 11:04 PM
    This is great news for the 80% of the population who don't smoke. I get sick of having the minority who still smoke dictate where everyone else can go without being made ill. The smokers can now go outside, where smoking should logically take place!

    Posted by: B on Mar 7, 2008 at 10:35 AM
    To c: It needs to be up to the businesses not the idiodic special interest, greedy, right stealing polititions that are elected in Nebraska. I know who I'm NOT voting for next time around. Here's the kicker, I'M NOT A SMOKER!!!

    Posted by: Ralph on Mar 5, 2008 at 08:49 AM
    The governor did not take the business rights of owners in to account, PERIOD. The government needs to quick making decisions for business owners. Let the market place decide.

    Posted by: FarmBoy on Feb 29, 2008 at 09:12 AM
    To the "majority" (I am a soon to be x-smoker - from 1 1/2 packs to a now total of 3 - 5 cigs per day)...This is for all the "majority" comments out there....The Majority wants to allow relegion to be in public places and in school graduation ceremonies. Why hasn't this happened? Ah, because the same "majority" that helped private business to become not so private anymore, is the "majority" that pushed for this. Can the "majority" say double standard?

    Posted by: Smoking is stinky on Feb 29, 2008 at 02:23 AM
    i didnt go to these places because of the stinkiness either. now it will be nice. oh and to the smokers: YOU CAN STILL SMOKE YOUR STUPID CIGARRETTES - just not indoors among people who find it gross.

    Posted by: Truth B. Told on Feb 28, 2008 at 03:31 PM
    If the truth were out, we'd learn it's the tobacco industry lobbying for these smoking bans. They fear that too many would be customers are hanging out in smoky environments, using the second hand smoke to avoid buying cigarettes. The industry figures they will increase sales substantially by eliminating the havens of second hand smoke and forcing would be smokers to buy their own cigarettes.

    Posted by: Travis on Feb 28, 2008 at 10:23 AM
    "Smokers help pay for so much of what you do. They should have rights too." Since when has paying any tax given us the ability to direct how the money's spent? That's the difference between TAX and DONATION. With your logic, I should have control over money from my gas tax, electric tax, phone tax, propane tax, property tax, car tax, car rental tax, taxi tax, wheel tax, tire tax, sewer tax, garbage tax, recycling tax, restaurant tax, hotel tax, event tax, capital gains tax, gift tax, inheritance tax, retirement tax, estate tax, environment affecting tax, tax filing fees, bridge tolls, lottery tickets, parking meters and sales tax. YOU WANT RIGHTS, too? None of us have those rights! In fact, for the last few years I paid so much in taxes, I had no declarable income! The government taxed some other poor sap and paid me something called "earned income credit". It still seems weird to me, but of course I spent the money. It was blood from a stone, baby, BLOOD FROM A STONE!

    Posted by: Kyle on Feb 28, 2008 at 09:02 AM
    To the bar owners viewing this billnegatively, think of it this way. Alot of people I know, including myself and my parents, don't go to bars strictly *because* of the smell of cigarettes. So, with smoking banned, you may just get more buisness.

    Posted by: Patrick on Feb 28, 2008 at 07:30 AM
    What's with all the comments about falling cigarette tax revenue and Omaha's financial plight? Come On! The cigarette tax is a STATE tax and the UNICAM decides how that money is spent. This lack of knowledge paints a pretty poor picture of the average smoker's education level. Besides, we can easily conclude today that the city got into this financial trouble while cigarette tax revenues are still up. Our spend happy mayor didn't need falling revenue to get us in trouble. So you see, even nonsmokers can be idiots.

    Posted by: dc on Feb 27, 2008 at 09:51 PM
    All you smoking goofs comparing Nebraska to a communist state. If it were, they'd find out who you are, come to your house, and drag your drug-addicted carcasses off to a gulag. Stop being silly.

    Posted by: Asten on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:37 PM
    This is thrilling! It's unfortunate we have to wait another year and a half for this to take effect. Illinois' was in force less than 5 months after passage.

    Posted by: laugher on Feb 27, 2008 at 07:57 PM
    Like you didnt see it coming...Maybe you didnt because you cant see the death from cancer coming. Your paying to kill yourself...Why would there be anything smart said from people trying to kill themselves or not smart enough to know.

    Posted by: tax money????? on Feb 27, 2008 at 07:17 PM
    so because smokers can't smoke inside taxes will go up because they are not buying smokes. sounds like you should thank senators and the gov for getting you to quit. and smokers take more than 3 breaks a day smoking they think they deserve more. for all that think they need to smoke in a bar or resturant to survive please move and never come back we don't need you here! also good idea on boycotting bars and resturants hurt the people that tried to help you. most smokers are so ignorant get a clue

    Posted by: ... on Feb 27, 2008 at 06:03 PM
    Smokers help pay for so much of what you do. They should have rights too. It's just another thing the government is putting their two cents in where it isn't needed. Maybe they should re-think this new stadium since they might not have the cigarette tax to rely on to fund it.

    Posted by: Bill on Feb 27, 2008 at 06:01 PM
    Yes non-smokers could vote with their feet and just go find a non-stinky place somewhere. The problem is it only takes one inconsiderate smoker to stink up an entire room. and there are plenty of THOSE people around. therefore it used to be impossible for non-smokers to find a stink-free place. take your turn feeling like you have no place to go for a change.

    Posted by: tj on Feb 27, 2008 at 05:22 PM
    NON SMOKERs will be back on the blog 2 years from now boo hooing because the tax happy mayer of omaha will be increasing taxes to make up for revenue brought in by the tax on smokes and the fact the IA will be getting more business...Yippee I cant wait!

    Posted by: Chris on Feb 27, 2008 at 05:07 PM
    E in Papillion, I'm confused. You said, "I don't see any laws banning [drinkers] from being irresponsible" right after you discuss arrest and losing a license. Wait. Maybe you're confused. You also claim, "Soon they will pass laws saying we can't smoke in our own home...because it offends the person who might come to the door." Well, I think we would agree that you wouldn't SHOOT someone who comes to your door. Similarly, you wouldn't STAB someone on your doorstep. And you probably wouldn't FLICK MATCHES at someone through your doorway. Just what level of injury are you willing to inflict on others to defend your "freedom of choice won by the blood of my family"?

    Posted by: Paul on Feb 27, 2008 at 05:03 PM
    Thank Goodness. Now I don't have to worry about the smokers killing me. I can FINALLY drink my 10 beers and not stink or worry about poor health.

    Posted by: kms on Feb 27, 2008 at 05:02 PM
    yeah! no more smoke! no more smoke! no more smoke! smokers - why do you care to go out and make youself smell absolutely disgusting! yeah! going out in omaha will be so much more easier...I only go to places that are non-smoking. Smokers, if you want to smoke...go outside!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:51 PM
    Wow! 140 comments on the smoking ban, but only 60 comments on forcing homeschoolers to take standardized tests. I guess we can see which minority gets riled more easily!

    Posted by: Ken on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:49 PM
    You know, the irony is: a smoking ban almost got me to take up smoking. When our building went nonsmoking, our boss had to take his smoking outside. As soon as he went, a bunch of other smokers would grab their cigarettes and head out for face time. I seriously thought about joining the "club". Instead, I concentrated on being the best at my job and keeping my boss updated with short memos. When I got the promotion, no one knew why, and our boss quit smoking. I think I made the right choice.

    Posted by: Cindy on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:35 PM
    My question is, if smoking cigarettes is so bad for everyone, why is the addiction to nicotine not given the same sympathy and treatment options as cocaine, heroin, alcohol, and crack? It is just as addicting and yet our choices are cold turkey, pop a pill, or gum. Real nice!

    Posted by: Derek on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:32 PM
    I am a non-smoker and I love the fact that I will be able to go places and not inhale smoke. But, I am also a person that believe that a business owner should be able to decide how they want to run there business. I hate the fact that the government is taking away the rights of a local business. Now when I want to eat, the first thing I do is make sure that the place is smoke free. If it isn't I don't go. The way that businesses should stop allowing smoking is if there business is hurting because of it, not because the government wants it that way. Just my opinion, and just to reemphasize I do like non smoking places, I just don't think the government should tell small business owners what to do.

    Posted by: Patrick on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:30 PM
    Valerie, you defend your right to smoke anywhere you choose by saying, "Live and Let Live." Yet, by smoking, you are choosing an earlier death for yourself, and by smoking around others, you are choosing an earlier death for them. Your motto should be, "DIE AND LET DIE." I beg of you, in the name of all that is holy, please don't kill me!!!

    Posted by: E on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:29 PM
    YIPPEE!!!

    Posted by: Lorrie on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:18 PM
    JUNE 2009 WILL NOT COME SOON ENOUGH. FINALLY, TO BREATH CLEAN AIR, IT'S ABOUT TIME!

    Posted by: M on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:12 PM
    What do non-smokers care if smoker's have a "smoker's only" place? Why do you need 100% of the choices - is it that smokers are more fun and you want to be where the fun is? Are fellow nonsmokers dull and boring? What's up with that anyway?

    Posted by: Tony on Feb 27, 2008 at 04:06 PM
    I cannot wait until June 09. I will be able to enjoy a night out without coming home smelling like a chimney sweep. It will be fantastic!

    Posted by: Vic on Feb 27, 2008 at 03:51 PM
    I am a smoker, and I truly believe we should all quit smoking. I did quit for 5 years, but when something very tramatic happened to my son, I picked up the habit again, I so wish I didn't. The smell is terrible, when we smokers have a cigarette and then enter a room, we smell bad, I know this, I only smoke at home; in my garage, never at work, or in my car, or in a restaurant, I don't drink alcohol, so I don't go to bars, no reason to, I don't like being around people who are drinking. They are loud and obnoxious. But I really wish that cigarettes were not sold, it would be so much easier to quit and stay quit if it wasn't so easy to get them. And everyone should calm down, because stress causes cancer, check it out, it's true.

    Posted by: Kristy on Feb 27, 2008 at 03:00 PM
    I just want to know what happened to rights? there are plenty of nonsmoking places for nonsmokers to go and plenty of smoking places for smokers to go. I quit smoking, but feel that the taxes smokers pay for cigarettes go towards helping this state, and here they go taking away the right to smoke indoors. I can understand no smoking in restaruants and such, but in bars?? Come on! If you are in a bar you are probably drinking and killing your liver! And by the way, why not ban alcohol too....last time I checked alcohol is just as bad, kills lots of people when you look at cirrhosis, drunk driving accidents, and not to mention alcoholism can rip a family apart...What next???

    Posted by: lori on Feb 27, 2008 at 02:56 PM
    Why can't stand-alone bars that do not serve food at all, or have keno, establish themselves as PRIVATE clubs, offering a membership fee to their smoking patrons? That way, the bar would no longer be a PUBLIC venue, the smokers would have a place to gather, the small bar would not go out of business, and non-smokers would know that the price of admission was a pack of cigarettes? Seems other places in other states did this when they started smoking bans.

    Posted by: Bill on Feb 27, 2008 at 01:58 PM
    Yes smokers still have the unlimited breaks at work so that will not change. Noone does anything about that, since the habit of smoking is gingerly treated like some disease and it's victims are getting treated on their constant breaks. They should have added a 1000 foot barrier to smoking around every door to the outside also. Compare cigarettes to a cheeseburger again please - I LOVE that one. Suggesting fast food is just as dangerous to others is stupid. People NEED TO EAT and can eat fast food in moderation while affecting noone. I also dont have to take a shower to remove the stink after going out to burger king with friends.

    Posted by: Carl on Feb 27, 2008 at 01:29 PM
    Do smokers really need over a year to prepare? Why is it taking so long for this to go into effect?

    Posted by: James O on Feb 27, 2008 at 01:13 PM
    We will see what its is really about (money not health)when during the 2 week period the CWS is here,there is not a temporary injunction to the law.

    Posted by: c on Feb 27, 2008 at 01:05 PM
    I can breath

    Posted by: K on Feb 27, 2008 at 12:59 PM
    Some people are funny. I am a smoker, and hopefully a non real soon. I quit for a while and I hated going to bars where it was smokey. But I am the one that shouldn't go?? I should be able to go anyplace and breath clean air, whether I smoke or not. I am a smoker, and I am ashamed of how smokers think they deserve special rights. So people are supposed to put up with what you are SHOVING in their face just to enter a place they want to visit?? I don't think so. Everyone has a right to enter ANY establishment and not deal with smoke. I am thinking the whiners can leave our country and while your at it, take the thieves, molesters, lazy living on welfare, and drug dealers with you because you all think you are better than everyone else!

    Posted by: RM on Feb 27, 2008 at 12:47 PM
    Mayor Fahey should thank the governor for doing his job for him now all business in Omaha will be equal no exemptions. I would to know why it is going to take over a year for the law to go into effect it cant take that long for someone to figure out how to throw out the ashtrays.

    Posted by: K on Feb 27, 2008 at 12:20 PM
    Looks like a lot of smokers are mad about this little ban....take a venture to Chicago they have a ban on smoking and from my visits there it works pretty well bars are packed restaurants are packed. I have yet to see anything in the bill of rights that says a person shall be able to fire up a cigarette in a restaurant or bar. If I missed that someone let me know. If it is so imperative that you must have a cigarette go outside and smoke the nasty thing! Smokers if your not complaining about the high taxes already on cigarettes it is the issue on banning smoking in public places looks like your losing the battle!

    Posted by: meme on Feb 27, 2008 at 12:15 PM
    Cathy says,"If someone is overeating - that has no effect on anyone but themselves, unlike smoking!" Hmmmm really Cathy then tell me why they have said that starting next year there will be no fat jolly santa? You are so wrong...Fat people do set an example for their kids and others around them...Why do you think we have the population for the largest number of fat people. Oh probably cause they quit smoking huh....I can see you nonsmokers will never be able to go to Europe with all the whining you all do about smoke.

    Posted by: Smoker on Feb 27, 2008 at 11:57 AM
    This is just another meaningless gesture. The state can't portect us from drunk drivers, but it never makes drinking laws stricter. This legislation is an easy potshot at a politically incorrect issue. That the State is even thinking about something like this proves their worthlessness to me...

    Posted by: Dee on Feb 27, 2008 at 11:43 AM
    I am a smoker, and I have NO PROBLEMS with not smoking in restaurants. Eating is a requirement of life. Kids are in also in restaurants. My problem is with the bars. Under no circumstance do people ever NEED to go to a bar. Bars that do not serve food or allow minors in should be exempt from the smoking ban. Alcohol and cigarettes are legal and should be allowed in bars. I love the idea of boycotting bars and resturants except its not the bars and resturants doing anything wrong. The only way a boycott would catch anyones attention is a boycott on cigs, therefore loosing tax money.

    Posted by: llr on Feb 27, 2008 at 11:37 AM
    To c: It is FEDERAL labor law that says anyone who works a 4-hour shift gets a 15-minute break, an 8-hr shift gets two 15-minute breaks. This goes for everyone, not just smokers. People who smoke use those breaks for smoking. If you don't smoke, find something else to do with your 15-minute breaks. Yours is the lamest ideology I have ever heard. If you AREN'T getting your breaks, speak to your boss; if you just aren't taking them, that's YOUR fault.

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 27, 2008 at 11:23 AM
    if you see a smoker throwing their cigarette out of a window call 1-877-665-4887 to report littering. a litter tax should be applied to smokes since they are all over our roads, parking lots, clog sewers, etc.

    Posted by: RabidAmerican on Feb 27, 2008 at 10:50 AM
    I think we smokers should get a proportional amount of our tobacco tax money refunded. If we are limited on our use of a legal product, then a portion of our taxes should be returned to us for our inconvenience. It's tiresome being a "cash-cow" to sniveling, unappreciative, do-gooders. Let's push this money across the border as we did with gambling..... :-) I'm sure the restaurants in Iowa would appreciate our patronage! Nebraska's New Motto: 'The Good Life, We Know Better Than You Do.....' Freedom to pursue..... yeah, right.....

    Posted by: randy on Feb 27, 2008 at 10:50 AM
    and now...the casinos get more nebraska cash.

    Posted by: c on Feb 27, 2008 at 10:14 AM
    IT's funny to hear all the complaining from smokers, go outside if you NEED to smoke. in fact smokers get more rights at work every 20 min you can go out and smoke. non smokers don't get that

    Posted by: Kyle on Feb 27, 2008 at 09:34 AM
    I don't see what the big deal is. The law just says that smokers cannot smoke in a restaurant/bar now. That's perfectly okay by my book. If you can't go 30 minutes or an hour without a cigarette to enjoy a smoke-free dinner/drink, you need help.

    Posted by: Bill on Feb 27, 2008 at 09:18 AM
    Listen: Smokers don't have to stay outside. A smoker is a person who smokes cigarettes, a smoker is not a walking lit cigarette. lit cigarettes are not allowed inside, smokers are. people that smoke must smoke outside - when they are done and have successfully littered the ground around them, they can walk right back inside without the lit cigarette. they are still smokers, but yet they are indoors now. make sense? and about the smokers' boycott of everything? that's the best idea i've heard yet from the smoker crowd. now the rest of us will have less potential encounters with your offensive odor (smoking in the car and walking around afterwards in a cloud of stink).

    Posted by: Jen on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:54 AM
    I believe if you are a business owner you should be the one to decide if your establishment is smoking or non-smoking. You are after all the one paying the bills! I just believe there are more important issues for the states to be dealing with than this!

    Posted by: Jon on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:38 AM
    I am an ex smoker. I live in a small community where at least two of the restaurants have banned smoking in thier establishments on their own, and business is better than ever. Let the owners of the establishment make the decision

    Posted by: IM A SMOKER DEAL WITH IT on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:33 AM
    well Nebraska needs to change their sign from"NEBRASKA, WELCOME TO THE GOOD LIFE" to "RUSSIA, WELCOME TO THE STATE WHERE WE DECIDE WHAT YOU CAN AND CANT DO"

    Posted by: Jim on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:24 AM
    This is so stupid. I'm not a smoker but, it is just one more freedom the government is taking away from the public. It is not the governments job to protect us from our selves. If you don't like a smokey bar, don't go there.

    Posted by: Cathy on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:23 AM
    To M - passing a law that states you can only drink alcohol at home is a great idea - there would then be less accidents caused by drunk driving. As far as people thinking that overweight people should beware - that is just plain stupid. If someone is overeating - that has no effect on anyone but themselves, unlike smoking!

    Posted by: Jose on Feb 27, 2008 at 08:18 AM
    Gee, this will make it easier for me to quit, been trying to kick the habit. Everyone should quit smoking and watch the state go broke.

    Posted by: BILL WILL STILL GO OUT on Feb 27, 2008 at 07:59 AM
    BILL DON'T LIE YOU WILL STILL GO OUT TO THE BARS AND DRINK AND EAT. RON WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR BAR I WOULD LIKE TO BUY IT. OR IS IT NOT REALLY FOR SALE!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by: me on Feb 27, 2008 at 07:54 AM
    I think it's funny reading all the smokers crying and whining. Smoking is not a right granted by the constitution. And the argument that soldiers shed blood for your right to smoke is just rediculous, the suggestion that they did is just silly.

    Posted by: Kevin on Feb 27, 2008 at 07:51 AM
    "Liberty, in modern time, is generally considered a concept of political philosophy and identifies the condition in which an individual has the ability to act according to his or her own will." --wikipedia Don't homeschool your kids, your ideas aren't valid. Don't smoke, its bad for you. Don't eat fatty foods, you won't look like the ideal. Don't talk on the phone, the govt might be listening. We need your house to build a mini-mall that better serves the people. You are all ignorant and the govt knows whats better for you. When duty calls, though, you'd better respond... or else! America - it has come time to draw our line in the sand and start to take back our freedom or get used to Big Brother over our shoulders.

    Posted by: steve on Feb 27, 2008 at 07:48 AM
    people, get over it. I am an ex smoker and believe me this is the best thing that could have happened. you don't know what it is like to go anywhere, even a bowling alley, and not be able to breathe the next day because of you smokers. it will make you a lot less sick by not being around so much smoking, so I say great victory for Nebraska as a whole. as far as our civil rights go, I would rather be alive than whine about civil rights, so to all of you crying about the smoking ban, GET OVER IT and deal, cus it is going to be a reality, and I for one could not be happier.

    Posted by: John on Feb 27, 2008 at 06:46 AM
    Smokers are saying that non-smokers have the right not to go to a restaurant or bar that allows smoking. Well now the smokers have that same right not to go to those restaurants and bars, they can chose to stay home.

    Posted by: Kevin on Feb 27, 2008 at 06:41 AM
    Finally the gray cloud of stink will be blown out of Nebraska!

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 27, 2008 at 06:10 AM
    Joyce,just calm down! Chris, calm down!, Ron you are not going anywhere. Rosie, you are just confused. Matt, I agree with you 100%. You smokers are cry babies.

    Posted by: djscribe on Feb 27, 2008 at 06:09 AM
    Ok. The govenor says smoking is a "ctritical concern" and is a threat to public safety. If this is true than why aren't they banning cigarettes all together. I mean why are people buying and selling them if this is a high risk "drug". It's not going to make parents stop smoking around thier kids. So the threat remains. This is a drug that kills hundreds of thousands of people a year. I would think it would fall under the category of "national threat". And for those who feel their rights are violated by banning cigarettes, well maybe they should fall under the category of "right to die"(As long as they don't expect the country to buy thier funerals)From my p.o.v. it's a dangerous, highly addictive drug and is a national threat to human life. If we as a nation are going to continue to harbor "threats" in our own country, what good is a ban if the threat is readily available? I highly doubt we're going to see the "Marlboro Men" on back alleys pushing tobacco joints. Education is key.

    Posted by: Jill on Feb 27, 2008 at 05:57 AM
    I feel this is just another way for the government to control our lives. No Smoking, No Gambling, what next? Oh but wait, some random person can have a concealed handgun. That makes me feel real safe in a town where the government (mayor) cares more about a ballpark than the safety of his residents. Not to mention no one wants the new ballpark

    Posted by: Non Smoker who's fed up on Feb 27, 2008 at 12:18 AM
    Wow now I feel so safe! Maybe we should let the smokers live happily... Oh wait, they didn't kill their 10 month old baby girl did they? Change of plans, Let's send them to the dogs! Heck their crimes against humanity are so cruel and callous they should get the death penalty....if this state didn't fall back on spineless, bleeding heart, morals that is. (sarcasm for those wondering..) Come on people why not focus on punishing the real threats to our lives and the lives of the children we seem to give little thought about. Not all so called smoking related deaths can be pointed at smoking alone. Given other discriminating factors that may lead to a person's death like pollution, enviromental factors, etc. We have murderers getting free, and no punishment to suit their crimes. One day I would love to see that they (our wonderful powers that be) actually do something worthwhile instead of passing laws that do nothing. By the way I am a nonsmoker...... just for your information.

    Posted by: Joyce on Feb 27, 2008 at 12:10 AM
    This isn't really about second hand smoke. It's about protecting the smokers from themselves. If I want to go to a smoke free establishment there are 100's of them already existing in Omaha. I go to the Outback, Anthony's, Village Inn, La Mesa yada yada yellow pages. IE..Any restuarant/bar that doesn't have keno. You people better be careful what you're cheering for because the health police will be coming after you soon enough for your eating habits and your childrens eating habits. You've opened the door. It is proven fact that the obese in this country are a much larger drain on health care costs. "Step on the scale ma'am. You're 20 lbs over governments ideal weight. You'll pay a $200 fine AND your health care premiums are now 30% higher for your Twinkie addiction. Allowing your kids to eat Captain Crunch for breakfast in the morning constitutes ABUSE." Government care is best for them. Get used to it.

    Posted by: Chris on Feb 26, 2008 at 11:58 PM
    Why do non smokers have more rights than smokers? This doesnt make any sense. Ok non smokers you get rewarded you can go anywhere you want but the smokers have to stay outside. Cant people who own a business or bar be the ones to decide? What if a owner wants a smoking only bar this bill needs to be appealed.

    Posted by: bill on Feb 26, 2008 at 11:50 PM
    I for one wont go to any bar or out to eat any more. I say to all smokers boycott bars and restaurants.

    Posted by: M on Feb 26, 2008 at 11:37 PM
    K- did you have lung cancer or some other type of cancer? If it wasn't lung cancer, then it was proably caused by some other carcinogen. Hotels should be exempt as they have the area's seperated. I have stayed on non-smoking floors and you all will be okay!

    Posted by: Ron on Feb 26, 2008 at 11:36 PM
    Thanks for deciding whats best for my bar and business. I guess you know what is better than I do. Look for my bar to be listed in the for sale section of the paper in a week. Im selling and moving out of nebraska. Owner with no rights!

    Posted by: Stephanie on Feb 26, 2008 at 11:06 PM
    It's about time we (as a state) do something this progressive! Never mind the naysayers- this is great!

    Posted by: jln on Feb 26, 2008 at 10:01 PM
    I really don't understand what smokers are freaking out about. Are you seriously telling us that you can't make it an hour or 2 without a smoke? Just how many times a day do you run outside to smoke while at work? Do you leave during a movie to go out and smoke? How about during a concert at the Qwest? Do you ever travel? If you can't make it an hour or two without a smoke, does that mean you never jump a flight to, pick your destination of choice. As far as the comments about how businesses will have to hire people to clean up the litter outside, it just reinforces in my mind something I have known for years. Smokers are quite inconsiderate. They sit at a table and hold their cigs away from themselves and blow the smoke towards others. They throw butts out the windows of their cars and on the ground before entering a building, thinking nothing of it. I my opinion, the only thing missing in the ban is a 50 ft smoke free zone around entrances to said businesses.

    Posted by: E on Feb 26, 2008 at 09:41 PM
    First, I am a smoker. I can go out for a meal or shop or anything I want for now. Soon they will pass laws saying we can't smoke in our own home or in our car because it offends the person who might come to the door or is behind me in a car. I know smoking can harm. It is my freedom of choice won by the blood of my family that gives me that right. Now I have some lawmakers who have to decide I am being irresponsible so I can't do it. We aren't any more dangerouse than a non smoking drunk behind the wheel yet even after arrest, they continue to drink and drive with or without a license. I don't see any laws banning them from being irresponsible.

    Posted by: Honey on Feb 26, 2008 at 09:29 PM
    The problem is not every one smokes and those who don't screamed the loudest. Next the government will be banning it in our homes and cars. Why not just make them illegal and then let the state figure out where to get the tax money from.

    Posted by: shari on Feb 26, 2008 at 09:28 PM
    T it's guite simple if you have a bad set of lungs then why do you feel compelled to go to the bar where there is smoke? They already have non-smoking bars and restaurants. Are you that driven by alcohol that you would put your health at risk and go where there is smoke anyways cause if you are then we need to watch out for you as you leave the bar...Remember drunk drivers kill just as fast as cigarettes kill.

    Posted by: Smokers are stinky on Feb 26, 2008 at 08:59 PM
    yes please go to council bluffs. you will be allowed to be stinky and make others stinky over there for a while. look on the bright side: you can still litter here and throw your butts out the discreetly cracked window of your chevy chevette on your drive to Amoco for some Luckys.

    Posted by: ralph on Feb 26, 2008 at 08:50 PM
    hey smokers get a clue......... this ban does not mean if you are a smoker you are not allowed in a bar to drink or eat. It just means you can't smoke in there. Please tell me you are able to do something with your time other than just sit in a bar and smoke. please stop your belly aching, its not the end of the world!

    Posted by: Chris on Feb 26, 2008 at 08:38 PM
    Great, now my neighbors will smoke up our hallways instead of going to a sportsbar. So my kids (Who would never be at a sportsbar) can enjoy their smoke. Great job Governor.Enjoy the Superbowl.

    Posted by: About Time on Feb 26, 2008 at 08:20 PM
    All I can say is quit complaining you conservative (leave the government out of everything) stiffs. Smoker's have been getting away with infringing on our Non-smoker's rights for decades. We all learned 40 years ago that smoking was not only bad (deadly)for the smoker but also for those around them. Lost in all of this is the littering issues that go with smoking. I am amazed at the number of smokers who freely throw their cigarette (trash) from their cars like it is no big deal. News Flash, it is littering and you are disgusting. Take your habit's and move to a nice smoking State where you can all litter it up and blow smoke in each other's faces.

    Posted by: Rosie on Feb 26, 2008 at 08:13 PM
    I am a nonsmoker against this ban. They sure like to spend tax money from the sale of ciagarettes, but treat smokers like second class citizens. I get a stuffy nose, headache, & sick to my stomach when people wear too much cologne. If I am around these people too much & get repeated sinus infections, the DNA in my respiratory tract may mutate, thus putting me at a much higher risk for cancer. We better ban cologne. Gee, I wonder if all those in support of this ban & those so concerned about their cancer & health risks are doing everything possible to live healthy lives. I hope they don't overeat, consume fatty foods, drink more than 1 drink per day, get 7-9 hours of sleep each night, exercise 30-60 minutes daily, avoid all foods with any type of preservatives, avoid pesticides, fertilizers, never eat an egg with a soft yolk, eat 5 servings of fruits & veggies & 30 grams of fiber, etc. daily. But that's probably too much work. It's easier to complain & tell others what THEY should do.

    Posted by: T on Feb 26, 2008 at 07:58 PM
    Why are all the smokers on here taking it as if the bill is banning them from doing things like going to a restaurant or bar? Nothing in the bill says you can't do it, you just can't smoke while you're out. Seriously, let's not compare this to segregation; no one is saying you're not allowed to go in, you just can't smoke while you're in. I myself have breathing problems and have avoided many places that allow smoking because I would rather eat than have an asthma attack over my meal and die. Forgive me for being born with a bad set of lungs.

    Posted by: sue on Feb 26, 2008 at 06:20 PM
    yeah TIM well it's idiots like you who dont smoke that think its ok to drink and drive and put my childrens life in danger when you leave your nonsmoking bar. Get a Clue

    Posted by: shari on Feb 26, 2008 at 06:14 PM
    Ok so they talk about smokers causing deaths, what about this quote? It is estimated that the annual cost to America of alcohol abuse tops $40 billion. The Surgeon General says the nation averages 100,000 deaths a year due to alcohol abuse. Hmmmm, so what are your chances of getting cancer in one nite at the bar opposed to getting killed as you drive away from the bar? C'mon you nonsmokers, drinking kills just as easily as smoking if not faster.

    Posted by: BJ on Feb 26, 2008 at 06:00 PM
    To put it simply, this was the right thing to do.

    Posted by: HEY RODDY on Feb 26, 2008 at 05:49 PM
    RODDY YOU MUST HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD, SMOKERS CAN GO OUT FOR A DRINK AND MEAL THEY JUST CAN'T SMOKE INSIDE. PLEASE GET A CLUE BEFORE POSTING YOUR COMMENT. YOUR ARE IGNORANT JUST LIKE THE REST OF CRY BABIES. DO ALL SMOKERS NOT KNOW HOW TO DO ANYTHING WITHOUT A CIG IN THEIR MOUTH. IT SURE SOUNDS LIKE IT. I WILL BUY YOU ALL SOME CHEESE FOR YOU WHINE.

    Posted by: jen on Feb 26, 2008 at 05:20 PM
    Thank God I have so many looking out for me! (i.e. Legislators and Heinie). I think they should ban Heinemans ugly ties.

    Posted by: Tom on Feb 26, 2008 at 05:16 PM
    I have no problem smoking outside, but when the nonsmokers start hanging around outside where I am smoking; and start complaining that they can smell the smoke, I will press charges for harrassment....Stay your hineys inside where they belong. The smokers just made it so they don't have rights either. They don't have the right to come outside where I am enjoying my cigarette in peace. I will be sitting in one of those nice outdoor tables with the umbrella above in the summer and nonsmokers are not invited.

    Posted by: Congratulations on Feb 26, 2008 at 05:13 PM
    Good for you non smokers. Next time you go out for a burger and pay 20 bucks for it, remember today. Next time you go out for a beer and pay 9 bucks for it remember today. I smoke by choice and I am not sick. You dont smoke by choice and are sick, sick, sick ! Get a life just stay out of mine !

    Posted by: Rather not say. on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:58 PM
    I am not a smoker, but I feel that is choice of freedom. We are controlled enough. Let them smoke. If you don't want to go in smoking establishements, then don't go. My idea: People will open private clubs that allow smoking. Charge will be $1 per year to join. Then you can smoke in these smoking establishments.

    Posted by: K. on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:58 PM
    Yes!!! Goodbye second hand smoke! I've already had cancer once and I'm only 31. Just wish this law went into effect sooner! Looking forward to breathing cleaner air!

    Posted by: Shari on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:46 PM
    M, I am with you, lets ban drinkers so they have to stay at home..I can see not smoking in restaurants or bars that sell food, but to ban smoking from just every bar. Why dont the non-smokers just go to the non smoking bars? Leave the smokers alone.

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:45 PM
    FINALLY, you don't have to DIE every single time you want to go hang out with friends. Omaha finally figured it out and hopefully smokers will too before they kill themselves and others around them. The ban should also include homes, especially with children in them. We have to stop the cycle of death!

    Posted by: Bar Owner on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:43 PM
    Everybody that comes to my place smokes. I will just close down, go on welfair and let all you cry baby no smokers support me.

    Posted by: Julie on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:43 PM
    Whether you like it or not, the ban evens out the playing field for businesses across the state. If a bar or restaurant closes now, they can't blame it on a smoking ban that drives business elsewhere.

    Posted by: Seriously? on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:34 PM
    Ummm..Roddy, no one is stopping you from eating a meal or going to the bar. Here's the deal: get your cancer fix before you eat, OUTSIDE or in your car (but please don't throw your nasty butts on the ground--I'm sick of seeing that litter everywhere). When you finish, you can rush out and have another. PLEASE tell me you are not suggesting that SMOKING is a innate civil right and/or comparing smoking to the horrible segregation of the 50s. Oh, and my second suggestion, QUIT!

    Posted by: Bill on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:33 PM
    when smokers are in a non-stinky environment, they can always go outside and stink. non-smokers can't unstink by going outside from a stinky bar. smokers litter also, acting as if the butts disintegrate on impact of the ground. gross. gross. gross. thank god this passed. i wish it was march 1st of this year instead of 6/09. now its smokers turn to stay home and wish they had a place to go. and one key point to note for smokers: YOU CAN STILL SMOKE, you just can't blow it in the face of healthy people. and comparing smoking to fast food or drunk driving is dumb. drunk driving is illegal everywhere - or would you really want to legalize that? and a cheeseburger killing people? it only affects the health of the person eating it, and bystanders dont need to take a shower after watching one being eating.

    Posted by: Benny on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:31 PM
    Hey you non smoking babies! What gives you the right to think that you can walk into any business in Nebraska and expect it to be non smoking just because you are there? Who the heck are you anyway? Go someplace where where the owner dont allow smoking. You have no right to put me out of business. If you dont smoke stay the heck out of my bar. I dont want you anyway!

    Posted by: tony on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:22 PM
    Another example, of city, state and fed. govt. taking away more rights that we used to have. If you dont like the smoke then dont enter. Too many people who have nothing better to do then to complain and change things...to all these people ...get a life...and let me live mine.

    Posted by: Voter on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:21 PM
    Gov Heineman, When are you up for election?

    Posted by: jj on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:04 PM
    so many real things to control in Nebraska, and we now go after the smokers, of wjich I am not. I feel they have rights also.

    Posted by: Liz on Feb 26, 2008 at 04:02 PM
    Dear y, you want non smokers to have a right taken away, how about the right to clean air when going out somewhere? Non smokers have not had that right, and now this ban gives us all the right to take a deep breath with out having some smelly smoker's stink in the air. Remember one smoker can pollute a roon with just one cancer stick. I am all for the ban. It needs to happen nationwide! Remember smoking bans began in pubs where the employees were tired of the stink and health risk! Now Iowa should wake up!

    Posted by: Phil on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:58 PM
    Excellent move by the legislature and the governor. This just brings Nebraska in line with most of the rest of the US on this improtant public health issue. It works fine everywhere else, it will work just fine here too!

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:50 PM
    Finally, one of the few reasons i may actually stay here than move after i graduate!

    Posted by: L on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:49 PM
    I approve of a smoking ban, as I hate smoking, but I wondered if there could be designated smoker bars? It would not be a place for me to go, but maybe others who smoke could go?

    Posted by: Vito on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:48 PM
    I wonder how much the Nebraska hotel owners association paid our elected officials to make hotel rooms exempt?

    Posted by: bb on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:45 PM
    Well thank goodness someone is here to save us from ourselves!!! We all know alcohol is bad for you so they should pass a law saying if you go to a bar you only get one drink a night. If you are at home you only get one drink a night no matter where you are if you are of age one drink and you are done it's bad for you and people around you....DUI....domestic violence, etc. Well lets not stop at that stop driving....bad for environment and others so ride a bike. If you live to far away to do that move or find different job. See how easy that is when someone decides what is best for you and everyone else. I can hear you complaining now!!! Not fun when someone comes up with the best way to live your life and you don't like it but you have no choice!!!

    Posted by: m on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:41 PM
    I think we should go after alchohol drinking in public next, because my life is in danger everytime one of those nonsmokers drinks in a restaurant and then gets into their car and drives, I've seen plenty of drunk people at restaurants, maybe I will start calling the cops everytime I see this going on, until I can get a bill passed that makes these people drink at home...YEA

    Posted by: It's ABout time! on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:41 PM
    Smoking in publick places is like walking in with a loaded gun. Sorry smokers but it's time Nebraska finally got with it. Non-smokers are in the majority. If New York City and LA don't allow smoking anywhere than Omaha, NE can certainly follow suit. I have many smoker friends that themselves complain of how they stink after spending time in a smoky bar.

    Posted by: Roddy on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:39 PM
    This is the most extreme form of segregation in years. Back in the 50's I had to sit in the back of the bus because of what I am. 50 years later, I cannot even get on the bus because of what I am. You know what I am talking about here. Just because I smoke, I can no longer go out for a meal or a drink in Nebraska. My entrance used to be the back door to places to have a meal or a drink. Now I am not allowed to use the back or front door. This is all about civil rights. Give the non-smokers their places and give us smokers separate but equal places. If I want to open a bar and declare it "smoking only" whats wrong with that? This bill tells non-smokers they can go anyplace they want all the time and tells smokers they can't even get on the bus.

    Posted by: m on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:34 PM
    Well I do hope that they put something to put the cigarettes in when I stand outside of my favorite restaurant, since there will no longer be an ashtray for me to put in out in and so I'm not getting tickets for littering. Now the restaurants will have to hire someone to clean up all the cigarette butts that will be laying around. And are the people going to hold their breath as they walk past me when I'm smoking outside? I know that smoking is bad for you, but I choose to do it, a lot of things are bad for you. I think that it was ok when there were designated smoking areas in restaurants, but for the non smoking people I guess not. What will they complain about now? Poor dears...

    Posted by: Matt on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:32 PM
    People who smoke need to remember that its a privilege, NOT a right. Some smokers can be down right rude with there smoking habits. They can see it affecting someone at a restaurant and then they continue to blow it your direction eventhough one may be in a smoking section and the other is not.

    Posted by: Ryan on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:28 PM
    Great move senators! For all the people that have died from second hand smoke....this is justice!

    Posted by: Amy on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:27 PM
    Weekly Reader in grade school said that in the future it was possible that communisum will be alive in America. I remember all of us kids swearing we would do all we could to keep our freedoms. Some of them have given their lives. What for?? For this kind of law!! Freedom in America is a coverup for lawmakers to act like the kings who wanted to be the world rulers. I am so tired of being dictated to in this state!!

    Posted by: J on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:26 PM
    I'm confused about the parallels made in this forum between a ban on cigarette smoking in a public place and the requirement that a motorcycle rider wear a helmet and a driver or passenger in a car wear a seatbelt. As I pointed out time and time again to my then teenaged sons, driving is a privilege granted to you by the state. The state sets the conditions by which you may operate the vehicle. Don't like the conditions? Don't drive or ride. So, explain to me, how enforcing a public health standard (not smoking) is equivalent to stripping you of Constitutional freedoms? You are STILL free to smoke, just not in a public place. The state already monitors licenses, permits, cleanliness, food prep, payment of employment and sales taxes by a business. This isn't different, if view as a health issue.

    Posted by: hcm on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:25 PM
    About time'

    Posted by: Gary on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:21 PM
    CATHY, You apparently have not read the news...Iowa, land of "freedom of choice," is on the verge of banning smoking also. Guess you'll have to drive to Kansas or South Dakota. Of course you'll run out of money buying gas and won't be able to afford to smoke once you get there!

    Posted by: Mark on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:18 PM
    Cathy, Just wait a while. I'm sure Iowa with their Communist Governor will soon do the same. Personal freedoms and business owner rights don't mean anything anymore.

    Posted by: Tim on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:17 PM
    Listen up fatties. You're next. I see your big fannies over at the junk food and pop machines every 20 minutes and the crinkle, crinkle, crinkle of the candy wrappers in your cubicle every 5 minutes. Time to start paying the junk food tax piper to make up for lost tobacco taxes. How about higher health care premium to boot. You overweight slobs are a much larger draw on the health care system than those smokers. "Crunch, crunch, crunch. Smack smack smack. I hate the smell of smoke. So is anyone gonna eat the last doughnut?"

    Posted by: BreathEasy on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:16 PM
    This is an amazing accomplishment. Thank you senators and the governor!

    Posted by: Freddy G. on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:15 PM
    Excellent idea Tim. ANYBODY that has a cold, the flu, pink eye, anything contageous, should be banned from going out in public. A cold could be fatal to some. The flu can kill, especially older folks. How about people that have TB ? They roam freely about the town. Ban sick people now before its too late! Especially in restaurants and bowling alleys !

    Posted by: Kim on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:06 PM
    I am a smoker (quit for a couple of yrs) and plan to quit again. All I can say is YEAH!! I know smoking is bad and it's not fair to impose that on others. I CHOOSE to smoke and I know it's harmful to others. So see not all of us smokers are against this. I have realized for years that smokers think they are owed some special rights and don't have respect for others. Not all, but most smokers act like that. And for Greg K. duh someone stinking up a bathroom isn't HURTING your health. Fact is smoking is bad, 2nd hand smoke is bad. Grow up people and take some responsibility!!

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 26, 2008 at 03:03 PM
    you are still going to have to walk through a cloud of smoke to get into theese establishments, oh and the litter outside of theese places is going to be insane.

    Posted by: Carol on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:57 PM
    People have the choice to enter a bar or turn and walk out. You vote with you feet. Not a state wide ban that takes away my right to walk in and have a drink and a smoke after work. The governor should concentrate on putting seatbelts on the school buses so our kids are safe. Mine has to wear one in the car cause it's the law, why not a bus. Stay out of my grown up business and focus on something that is necessary in this state and country.

    Posted by: Bud on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:54 PM
    Well said Pete. I couldn't agree more ! Now, I being a smoker, have become a victim of segregation and am no longer allowed to go anyplace I want.

    Posted by: y on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:40 PM
    My ancestors fought for this country, to make it the land of the free and the home of the brave, they would roll over in their graves to see how communisum is alive and well here in the United States. Some have freedoms but others do not. What next? I truly hope they go after something that takes away the freedoms of the nonsmokers...

    Posted by: Oh No No No ! on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:24 PM
    Hotel rooms exempt ? I think not ! What a crock ! On the way to my room I may have to walk by a smokers room and get a whiff of smoke which would surly cause me to suffer a slow painful death within the next 48 hours. Allowing smoking in a hotel room creates a designated smoking area in each room where its allowed. If I cannot have a designated smoking area in my business way in back and not available to the public, please tell me why hotel owners have that right. The boys in Lincoln must really think we are just a bunch of idiots. Mr Governor, I am very disappointed in you for allowing this to happen.

    Posted by: CATHY on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:14 PM
    I GUESS I WILL SPEND MORE OF MY TIME AND MONEY IN IOWA ...A STATE WHERE WE STILL HAVE A FREEDOM OF CHOICE..

    Posted by: Dennis on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:12 PM
    This has it good and its bad points. It is good that all places will be smoke free for it is healthier than having to breath smoke, It is not so good when you think of freedom of choice. But since it has been delcaired that smoking and 2nd hand smoke cause desease it should be banded but we should shut down tobacoo production completely if it is bad and make it and illegal drug, but then we should outlaw booz to because people cannot handle it either and it kills (drunk drivers, liver, etc, deseases). I like the idea of smoke free. Reason is now I can go and be with my friends that go to these places. They do not smoke but like to go to hopping/ and or good places that smoke. I don't go. I am not in favor of having the government taking away the rights.. Make it illegal to sell tobacco products like cocain and all the other illegal drugs out there. This would be a better approach.

    Posted by: Jarbeau on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:05 PM
    The ban is RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT! Keep in mind that your rights end as soon as they infringe on my rights.

    Posted by: Julie on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:52 PM
    What a great day!! I am completely ecstatic that this has finally happened! I am thrilled that I can take my kids out to eat and bowling without having them exposed to someone elses cancer causing cigarette smoke. If California who has many more people per capita then Nebraska could ban smoking years ago then why not Nebraska? And for all of the people whining about losing freedoms, etc, get over it!!! People are not going to stop going to bars, etc because they can't smoke. I'm sure most of them go to socialize and they aren't going to stay home just because they love their cigarettes more. In fact, people like me would be more inclined to meet friends now for a drink then before. Isn't the goal to make the world a little bit better place when you leave it??? This is a step in the right direction. Yeah!!!!

    Posted by: To ME on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:51 PM
    You say that this ban is selfish? Is it not a selfish disregard of other people health to fill the space around them with smoke? This ban is not an infringement on personal rights but rather an effort to protect the health of all citizens, including those who smoke. This is not a political issue being forced upon us by liberal hippies. Opponents of this ban say that this will drive some businesses into the ground, but I seriously doubt that. Are you really going to boycott eating out, visiting bars, and going to work just because you are not allowed to smoke there? If that is the case, your life will get very boring very fast. Life will go on. Smokers will continue to smoke, only doing it outside. People will be healthier, happier, and smell better after leaving the bar. In short, this is a good thing.

    Posted by: quit crying on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:51 PM
    oh my! what will all my smoker friends do at the bar now? probably the samething as before just with out the smoke

    Posted by: Kate on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:48 PM
    I want alcohol banned now because I am sick of m6y tax money going to people who drink and drive and kill others and have to sit in jail. If they have the right to take away smoking and I am going to have the right to introduce banning alcohol. What happened to the constitution... REMEMBER THAT!!!

    Posted by: hippie on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:46 PM
    why the heck we ever had to cater to drug addicts is beyond me. Stop smoking if you dont like it.

    Posted by: Greg K. on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:41 PM
    What's next? Are they gonna place a ban on people going to the bathroom in a public place? I, for one am often offended by the smell coming from the restrooms.

    Posted by: Smoker on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:30 PM
    Well I can live with that, but what about all the smokers that drink, now all they have is more time to drink. How many people are killed in DUI's vs second hand smoke? DUI's cause many more deaths. Sit back and watch people at a bar sometime, watch the party girls do shots, you will see one of them is driving, and might kill you or your loved ones. Smokers never endangered people like drunk drivers do.

    Posted by: John on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:28 PM
    Great way to stimulate the economy! Places will know have to build outdoor places to smoke. Which means they will have to hire workers and buy supplies. To bad this won't happen this year. Smokers stay outside

    Posted by: C on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:26 PM
    This a great bill!! all you smokers can complain all you want, you have never taken in effect the intrusivness as you light up whenever you want... A for the Gov.....

    Posted by: Dave on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:26 PM
    This is crazy!!! while i am an ex smoker, i am so tired of government(Local and state and federal) taking away my rights little by little. They dont think that we are smart enough to be able to make choices for ourselves?!! We pay extra taxes(that they squander on giveaway programs) so that we have the right to purchase things like booze and smokes. And here they are telling us that we can or cant do things that are legal. hmmmmm are we in North Korea? Lets do this than... Lets get a law passed that every county, city and state that takes away one of our rights does not then have the right to tax us or benefit from taxes for those commodities. Lets see how long they can go with out that tax base then. Problem solved.

    Posted by: Tim on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:23 PM
    For the next round of the legislature, I insist that they ban all sick people from all bars and restaurants. Before you enter, you'll be forced to submit to a medical exam. If you have any contagious illness, you will not be allowed to enter. I should be able to eat my meal in a public place and not have to worry that I might be exposed to an illness that could greatly impact my health. Sounds like a silly law doesn't it? But how is it any different then the law they have just passed.

    Posted by: Tim on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:15 PM
    About time if you ask me.......smoking KILLS...second hand smoke KILLS.....smokers KILL themselves and others. Its about time there is some clean air in this country. No more cancer sticks will be causing smoke to blow in my face.

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:11 PM
    It is sad that instead of passing a law ensuring clean indoor air they have passed a law banning smoking. They could have used the attention towards secondhand smoking to pass a clean indoor air law that protects all workers instead of just bartenders and waitress. The apparent lack of understanding of ventalation by the people who passed this law should have all Nebraskans worried.

    Posted by: Karin on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:08 PM
    This is wonderful! All the workers that have to breathe the 2nd hand smoke are so Thankful.

    Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:07 PM
    well now nebraska needs to change their sign when you come into the state to say WELCOME TO RUSSIA THE GOOD LIFE WHERE WE DECIDE WHAT YOU CAN AND CANT DO WITH YOUR LIFE !!!!!!next they will be telling us we cant smoke in our own homes give a NON smoker an inch and they take a damn mile

    Posted by: Dick on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:06 PM
    Great news!! Finally something really positive out of Lincoln. Now to start on smoking in apartments/condos?

    Posted by: Matt on Feb 26, 2