So, which is the first group that comes to mind when you think about obstructionists putting up roadblocks on the path to progressive goodness? That's right, Indianapolis Democrats:
An Indianapolis City-County Council committee has snuffed out a stricter smoking ban for the city.
[. ..]
But some Democrats argued the measure didn't go far enough. Supporters had been hoping to have the new rules in place in time for the Super Bowl.
[. . .]
An overwhelming number of citizens showed up in support of the smoking ban and left surprised by the final vote.
I'm not a big fan of incrementalism. Most of the things that upset me, starting with the size of the federal government, happened one small step at a time, not all at once. That's why I'm always a little surprised at groups who kill smoking bans because they don't go far enough. They're failing to take a small step that will help get them where they want to to go; look how the ban on Fort Wayne was expanded after a few years. True, the proposed toughening of the Indianapolis ban would have exempted some places, such as private clubs, but the number of smoking -allowed establishments would have been reduced from 350 to 60.
The odds seem good, meanwhile, for a statewide ban of some sort to pass this year -- even Senate President Pro Tem David Long of Fort Waynes says so, and he's been one of the people beating back attempts to enact a ban. Last session, the ban effort was thwarted in part because of the same kind of "all or nothing" attitude as displayed in Indianapolis -- too many exemptions for casinos and taverns and such. Again, I'm mystified. Legislation that grants something now will lead to legislation that grants more later and eventually to legislation granting the whole thing. That's the way it's always worked. And however weak a statewide ban is, the fact remains that individual cities and counties can, under our home rule provisions, enact bans that go further than the state's.
