Ohio Ballot Measure 4
was on the November 7, 2006 ballot
as an initiated constitutional amendment
, where it was defeated
| Ohio Measure 4|
|Yes|| 1,450,164|| 35.9%|
The language that appeared on the ballot said:
|| NOTE: Issues 4 and 5 are similar. If both measures pass, Issue 4 will take effect and Issue 5 will not. This is because Issue 4 is a constitutional amendment and supersedes the statutory provisions of Issue 5.
This proposed amendment would prohibit smoking in enclosed areas except tobacco stores, private residences or nonpublic facilities, separate smoking areas in restaurants, most bars, bingo and bowling facilities, separated areas of hotels and nursing homes, and race tracks. The amendment would invalidate retroactively any ordinance or local law in effect, and would prohibit the future adoption of any ordinance or local law to the extent such ordinance or law prohibited smoking or tobacco products in anyplace exempted by the amendment.
A majority yes vote is necessary for passage.
The campaign to pass Measure 4 was led by two different committees, the Smoke Less Ohio Voter Education Fund and the Smoking Ban Ballot Petition Committee. Primary donors to these organizations, which spent a cumulative total of $6.4 million, were:
- Smoke Less Ohio, $6.4 million (total to both committees)
- R.J. Reynolds, $264,000.
Arguments in favor
- This amendment allows indoor smoking in a variety of enclosed public places.
- This amendment would be beneficial to the tobacco and hospitality industries because it provides for numerous exceptions to an indoor smoking ban.
- This amendment would restrain governmental interference into the personal choice to smoke.
- This amendment would impose uniform smoking standards around the state.
Donors to the campaign for the measure:
- Smoke Less Ohio Voter Education Fund: $4,008,834
- Smoking Ban Ballot Petition Committee: $2,733,805
- Total: $6,742,639
- Patrons and workers in businesses that permit smoking would be subjected to the dangers of second hand smoke, a proven health hazard.
- Because of the relationship between smoking, second-hand smoke and ill health, permissive smoking laws contribute to the escalation of health care costs.
- The amendment would override home rule prohibitions that now exist in 21 Ohio municipalities, as well as any future attempts at local control of smoking. It would also override the proposed Smoke Free Workplace Act if both were passed. This proposal does not belong in the Ohio Constitution.