In June, Springfield voters will be at the polls to once again decide whether or not private businesses can allow smoking on their own private property. The most recent ban was voted on by the people last year. Since then, numerous voters have changed their mind. There are a number of reasons why. Some say they didn't realize how far the ban would reach. Others feel as if they were mislead by supporters of the ban when it came to the economic impact. Whatever the reason, with a year gone by, may wanted to revisit the issue.
Fortunately, there is a process for this. It entails getting a certain amount of signatures from other citizens who also want the issue to be voted on. It should be noted that this is the same process the proponents of the last smoking ban went though. Something interesting is occurring this time around though. Supporters of the current ban suddenly don't feel that this is an issue that people should be voting on Sure, it was good enough to vote on when they were confident it would pass. But now that momentum seems to be on the side of returning to the previous ban, they aren't so keen on the idea. How convenient.
I have heard it said that "We already voted on this" and "The people have spoken!". That is true. What isn't true, though, is the idea that once people vote on something they never get to vote on it again. In fact, the opposite is true. We live in a county that doesn't locked us for eternity into every decision we make. Some will argue that we just voted on it. Well, it was a year ago. That isn't really just voting on something. But that being said, if a year isn't enough time, how much is? Two years. Ten? There must be some time frame.
People have the right to vote. They have the right to change their mind. They have the right to gather signatures to get another vote. That is the way it is.