From the Hill:
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has reversed his position on a federal ban aimed at workplace smoking and now believes the issue should be addressed by state and local governments.
The about-face is apparent in a Huckabee campaign statement, sent to The Hill Tuesday evening in response to questions about the smoking ban proposal. It clashes with the stance Huckabee has taken during his race for the White House and with his record as governor of Arkansas, when he signed into law a measure prohibiting smoking in most indoor public places.
At an August 2007 forum on cancer hosted by cyclist and activist Lance Armstrong and moderated by MSNBC host Chris Matthews, Huckabee said he supported a federal smoking ban.
“If you are president in 2009 and Congress brings you a bill to outlaw smoking nationwide in public places, would you sign it?” Matthews asked.
“I would, certainly would. In fact, I would, just like I did as governor of Arkansas, I think there should be no smoking in any indoor area where people have to work,” Huckabee responded, triggering applause from the crowd. Part of the interview has been posted on Youtube.com and viewed over 2,500 times.
Calling it a “workplace safety issue,” Huckabee added that the “same reason that we regulate that you can’t pour radon gas into a workplace is the same reason that we shouldn’t allow people to pour the toxic, noxious fumes of a cigarette into a place where people have to work.”
Huckabee’s campaign, however, is backtracking. In its statement to The Hill, the campaign stated, “At a Lance Armstrong cancer forum last August, Governor Huckabee said that if Congress presented him with legislation banning smoking in public places, he would sign it, because he would not oppose the overwhelming public support that such a congressional vote would reflect. However, since such sentiment for federal legislation doesn’t exist at this time, and since he has said that the responsibility for regulating smoking initially lies with the states, the governor believes that this issue is best addressed at the local and state levels.”
But at that same August event, Huckabee sought to take the lion’s share of the credit for the Arkansas law and argued that such an initiative would not be possible without the involvement of the executive.
“As a governor, I led our state to become the first state in the South to have a statewide ban on smoking anywhere indoors and I’m proud of that and it wasn’t the easiest thing in the world to get done,” Huckabee said. “It was hard.
And I’ll tell you something, Chris, it takes the personal involvement of the chief executive to make that happen,” he said.
Huckabee’s initial plan to enhance the federal government’s power to curb exposure to second-hand smoke predictably attracted criticism from conservatives.
I’m glad he made the right move, but at the same time, it reeks of political opportunism. If you’re going to take positions on the campaign trail, then you should stick by them. Look at what people have done to Mitt Romney for flipping positions, and it wouldn’t be fair for Huckabee to do this without someone questioning it.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Hey, all conservatives can be reminded from time to time of the principles of the 10th Amendment. Look at the “most” conservative candidate Fred Thompson; he voted for “No Child Left Behind”.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
And Huckabee was endorsed by the NEA. I thought they were the “great Satan”
January 15th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Tommy have you heard anything about push polling by the Huckster in SC? There is a recommended diary on Redstate about it.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
At least when he flips Huck flips in the direction of sanity. I’ll give him that. Now if he would only flip on those 1033 commutations and put them back in the jail.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Huckabee is such a pleeb.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Yea. I have heard about them in South Carolina. I don’t have any real details on it though.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Wow evangelicals let Huck down tonight.
“Mitt Romney leading Mike Huckabee 32-31% among born-again/evangelical Christians, with John McCain at 22%.”
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/01/christian_conse.html
January 15th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Before anyone casts judgement on Huckabee’s smoking policy enhancement, please be sure to visit this excellent site that discusses all of the difficult issues regarding Huckabee’s position.
http://www.dontpassgas.org/
Definately some of the best public service announcements ever made.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Actually Huck clarified this a long time ago:
http://onemom.wordpress.com/2007/09/06/huckabee-blogger-conference-call-september-6-2007-the-truth-squad/
The responsibility initially lies with the states of course. The only way this would be a federal responsibility is for it taking on that roll as part of OSHA as it regulates other work place safety.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Ah shucks, Huck. I thought your faith defined your stance on all these issues. I thought you didn’t have to wake every morning wondering what policies you were going to support.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Yep,
A) inhaling DDT laced tobaccy while poisoning the breathing space of my fellow man and…
B) suctioning out baby brains are just a couple of my Constitutional rights…look it up.
Interesting how “liberals” and “conservatives” agree on at least one of those two assertions while “libertarians” are okay with either depending on the zip code.
Tommy, you’re right, this does reek of political opportunism, but with the pounding Huck’s taking on talk radio, can’t say that I blame him. Now maybe Rush will only use a third of his show to hammer Huck;)
January 15th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
what a lamer. huck has flipped on just as many things as mitt. but because mitts are social issues, huck gets to play the “i believe the same thing today a yesterday” card. lame.
January 15th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Why is it that people only give romney a hard time for ‘flip flops’ i mean seriously, does it get worse than this?
he is transforming in front of our eyes in a matter of 3 weeks he has become a illegal immigration hawk who loves federalism which smacks in teh faceo f his earlier, not just comments, but actions.
January 15th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
John,
Let’s look at what Romney changed his stance on:
-Abortion
-Gay Marriage
-Gun Control
Not exactly the issues someone changes on as an adult who’s been elected to public office on a platform that’s pro-life, pro-gay, pro-gun control–unless he’s running for president as a “true conservative.” Give me a break.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080116/ap_po/on_deadline_michigan
January 16th, 2008 at 12:26 am
If you read and listen to what Huckabee said in the past and read the article and understand the law that was passed in Arkansas one would realize that he didn’t change his position on this.
The law passed in Arkansas did not affect Bars and Restaurant for one and this article that hotair is referring to even says that this law in Arkansas was among the least restrictive smoking bans.
As a governor he supported it as a GOVERNOR! That was a state issue for him. He has said in the past that he would rather the states handle it but would sign it at the federal level if the public clearly wanted it.
It don’t see where the story is on this article. Does anybody else see any inconstancy that I missed? I researched this a lot in the past.
January 16th, 2008 at 12:47 am
This guy is absolutely unbelievable!! He has flipped so many times in the last few months, and Mitt has flipped on 0!!!
January 16th, 2008 at 12:51 am
He had some of the evangelicals fooled for a while, but most of them have now seen him as the fraud that he is. I’m greatful they kept an open mind, and allowed themselves to be acted upon by a spirit far greater than that of Mike Huckabee. God bless America.
January 16th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Paul-
Posts like yours are the most annoying. Not only are your claims wrong, but you state them as if everyone knows them to be true. It reminds me of Gore’s “the debate is over…” nonsense.
Yes, Romney changed his stance on abortion. This is a big change that Mitt should and has answered for many times.
But stop claiming he changed where he hasn’t:
No, Romney never was in favor of gay marriage. Fools spew this as a fact when it simply never happened. He’s been very much in favor of protecting gays from discrimination, but when gay marriage was proposed he was very much against it. Never did he support it. Quit spamming nonsense.
No, Romney’s position on gun control did not change. He’s always been against assault rifles & automatic weapons. He’s always been against easy access to guns w/o background checks. Those were his positions then, those are his positions now.
I’m sure Romney’s changed his position on a number of other issues (who hasn’t), but two of your three claimed changes are flatly false.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:52 am
Mitt Romney did NOT change on so-called “gay marriage.” He has always been against that. Please don’t distort Mitt Romney’s record!
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: “Last year the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court struck a blow against the family, as I’m sure you know. The court forgot that [traditional] marriage is first and foremost about nurturing and developing children. Its ruling meant that our society is supposed to be indifferent about whether children have a mother and a father.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Boston Globe, 3/2/05)
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: “America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world if we suffer the collapse of the family here at home.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At UPI, 2/26/05)
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: “I stood at the center of the battlefield on every major social issue. I fought to preserve our traditional values and to protect the sanctity of human life. I vetoed bills. I filed new bills. I enforced the law that banned out-of-state same-sex couples from coming to Massachusetts to get married. I went to the court again and again. I testified here before Congress for the Federal Marriage Amendment. And I championed our successful petition drive that collected a record 170,000 signatures for a citizen ballot initiative to protect marriage.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Conservative Political Action Conference, 3/2/07)
Traditional Marriage. Governor Romney supports a Federal Marriage Amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman.
—–
“I will work with the people in this room, as I have for the past four years, to champion a federal marriage amendment to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Within months of taking office as governor, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court got the gay marriage ball rolling. They said it was in our state Constitution. John Adams, who wrote it, would be surprised. It was not in our Constitution, but it was in the heads of a one vote majority on the bench to birth new law without the benefit of democracy.
“The Court’s error I believe was that it focused on adult rights – if heterosexual couples can marry, it reasoned, then to have equal rights, homosexual couples should also be able to marry. But they forgot that one of the primary purposes of marriage is the development and nurturing of children. Every child deserves a mother and a father.
“The Court’s opinion is as astonishing as its ruling. It said that traditional marriage between a man and a woman ‘works a deep and scarring hardship…for no rational reason.’ No rational reason? How about the strength and preservation of our civilization?
“And this is no longer just a Massachusetts issue. As recently as a few months ago, a judge in Iowa said that gay couples have the right to marry because current marriage law ‘operates ONLY to harm same sex couples and their children.’ Astonishing.
“After the ruling in Massachusetts, I testified in Washington in favor of a federal marriage amendment. I wrote every Republican U.S. Senator to support it. But even some of our own voted against it. Make no mistake: a federal amendment is the only way we can protect marriage from liberal, unelected judges.” (Governor Mitt Romney’s Address to the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit, 2/19/07)