This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2007, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Posted: 5:44 PM- Puffing on a cigarette in a car while a young child is along for the ride may get snuffed out by the Utah Legislature next year.

The House Health and Human Services Committee passed a bill Wednesday that would make it an infraction to smoke in a car if a child 5 years old or younger is strapped in, or is required to be strapped in, a car seat.

The bill, which passed in the Senate in the 2007 session but stalled in the House, isn't "anti-smokers" but rather "pro-children's health," said its sponsor, Sen. Scott McCoy, D-Salt Lake City.

"They (children) are essentially captives in a very small space with deadly smoke," he said.

The law would only be enforced as a secondary action, meaning a person couldn't be pulled over solely for smoking. The fine for violations would be up to $45, unless a person enrolls in a smoking cessation course, McCoy said.

Michael Siler, a spokesman for the American Cancer Society in Utah and chairman of the Utah Cancer Action Network, said the U.S. Surgeon General has "really left no question that secondhand smoke is a dangerous poison."

Children who inhale it are at increased risk for complications ranging from sudden infant death syndrome to respiratory infections, severe asthma and delayed lung development, he said.

Banning smoking in cars, Siler said, "is a way to protect the private rights of children."

But some committee members worry that such a law would infringe on the rights of everyone else.

"What a slippery slope we are starting down when we start mandating behavior in private places," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem. Rather than the state regulating smoking in cars, "we need to get back to personal responsibility."

Also at its Wednesday meeting, committee passed a bill that adds cervical and colorectal cancer to the state's Breast Cancer Mortality Reduction Program.

The state health department would receive $2.3 million in general funds - $1.5 million for breast and cervical cancer screenings, and $800,000 for colorectal cancer screenings - for those whose household incomes are not more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level.

Under the Utah Cancer Screening and Mortality Reduction Act, sponsored by Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, women between 40 and 50 would be eligible for breast and cervical cancer screening; colorectal screening would be available to persons 50 and older.

Prostate cancer screening may be added later.

Siler said Utah - where cancer is the second leading cause of death - has some of the lowest cancer screening rates in the country.

"We assert one of the main reasons is due to economics," he said. "Simply put, breast, cervical and colorectal screenings are expensive."

The sole dissenting vote was cast by Rep. John Dougall, R-American Fork, who said it is not the public's responsibility to pay for cancer screenings. "Which families will struggle because their tax burden is higher because of this?" he said.

The House committee gave the green light to two other bills:

One that would give the state health department $350,000 in general fund money to distribute information to health workers and the public about sexually transmitted diseases, probable side effects if left untreated, and treatment providers.

Another would require the health department to adopt rules under which telemedicine services already covered by Medicaid may be reimbursed.

lrosetta@sltrib.com" Target="_BLANK">lrosetta@sltrib.com