AUGUSTA, Maine—Maine on Monday joins other states and Canadian provinces that have made it illegal to smoke in a car while children are present. But for the first year the law's in effect, violators will only get warnings.

A law passed by the Legislature earlier this year outlaws smoking in cars while youths under 16 are present. It's modeled after a tougher Bangor ordinance. California, Arkansas and Louisiana have passed similar laws, as have Puerto Rico and some Canadian provinces. Other states have also looked at the proposal.

When he signed Maine's bill into law in April, Gov. John Baldacci hailed the legislation as a strike against secondhand smoke, saying that tobacco use costs too many lives and too much money.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency, which urges smoke-free homes and cars, says secondhand smoke increases the number of asthma attacks and severity of asthma symptoms as well as lower respiratory tract infections for children under 18 months of age.

Developing lungs of young children are severely affected by exposure to secondhand smoke, the EPA says. Children receiving high doses of secondhand smoke, such as those with smoking mothers, run the greatest risk of damaging health effects. The U.S. Surgeon General also warns of links between secondhand smoke exposure and cancer and heart disease.

While opponents of the Maine law raised concerns it would infringe on people's private liberties, its chief sponsor said he's seen firsthand the positive effect of such a law.

Rep. Brian Duprey, R-Hampden, said he ordinarily would oppose legislation he sees as government interference in people's privacy.

But Duprey, who runs a child care business, said he was moved to act after seeing tots arrive at his facilities smelling of tobacco and often sick. After neighboring Bangor became the state's first city to adopt an ordinance to outlaw smoking in cars with children, Duprey said, the kids smelled better and the rate of illnesses dropped sharply.

Maine's law authorizes police to hand out only warnings until Sept. 1, 2009, but after that violators can get $50 fines.

California's law, by comparison, authorizes fines of up to $100, while Ontario violators face $250 fines. Another Canadian province, British Columbia, also followed Nova Scotia's example in passing such a law. Some Australian states also ban smoking in cars where children are present.

GREAT LAW!

 " Developing lungs of young children are severely affected by exposure to secondhand smoke, " 

It's pretty clear!

if it helps kids I'm all for it,they finally got one rite

Dam best I can figure all us older folks are walking dead.

Second hand smoke, no child car seats, no seat belts, no shoulder belts, lots of lead in gas, diesels belching black smoke, etc.

It must be a miracle we survived.

Although it is a good idea and being a smoker myself, I won't dispute the ill effects caused as a result from smoking. I myself don't smoke in the house, and only when the kids aren't in the Vehicles. This a joke and I can't really take it serious to be honest, couldn't count how many times I've been in a drive-thru with a diesel in front of me, just pumping out Carbon Monoxide and all that nasty stuff that would take me probably 10 life times to produce smoking cigarettes to even remotely equate to the amount produced from other sources of Carbon. HOW ABOUT THIS...BAN CIGARETTES all together. ANSWER ME THIS if it does that much harm. why are we still allowed to purchase them ????????, I know why because our Governments don't give a fiddler's damn about you or I or our children, It's the almighty dollar where the primary concern is, not our well being, too much revenue loss to ban them outright. This is a crock and a waste of time, money and effort, Yes I agree we need to start somewhere , but let's be realistic for half a second, and tend to the real issues. Ever notice that nice cloud that looms overhead in metro areas when it's 30*C with a humidex of 40*C. I will take this issue serious when I see the advocates for this movement and others much the same, implement their ideologies into their daily lives and live by example.

It is an addictive drug that kills people, right?

If the smack dealers gave the politicians the same ammount of money as big tobacco companies it would be legal too.

US Smack Company would be a Dow traded stock.

yes there are worse things than second hand smoke,but most parents I would not think would endanger there kids by smoking in a car with the younguns in it is there alot of other things that need to be done ,yes,but it is a step in the rite direction,I am not a smoker but have nothing against people that do smoke,they have rights also,as long as it doesn't infringe on anothers rights,it is getting to the point where you cannot smoke anywhere,do we tell exxon they cant fill the atmosphere with pollution,no because they have the money to buy pollution credits what a crock of shit if you have billions your exempt from these laws and we pay  $4 a gallon so they can buy these credits.What is this country coming to,are what has it become?there will come a time when we as the people will stand up and let the government know we will not stand for this bs anymore I love my country but as a wise man once told me "there is a thin line between love and hate"

Sad, but True Bob... it all starts at the top and rolls downhill

Unless you can demonstrate unequivocably to someone that what they are doing is causing others harm, you will rarely convince them to change their behavior. And, unfortunately, many of those having such a direct negative affect on the world won't give a damn anyway, even if you drew them a flowchart, provided personal testimony and enclosed photos of the starving and the dead. It's an uphill battle. None of us are perfect, but that doesn't excuse us from good. As individuals acting unilaterally all we can do is Live by example and hope others notice.

When will people learn that just because you make a law it doesnt mean people will follow it.  Next there will be a law telling parents what time there kids should go to bed.  Less government not more. Government that governs least governs best.  Micro managing is a crappy way to manage

No it doesn’t mean that people will follow it, or enforce it. Sometimes a law is to suggest to those that are blind to the logic of a situation what the correct course of action should be.

Children are subject to the whim of their elders. They are vulnerable. If a law will make the ADULTS at least consider that what they have been doing is not entirely acceptable then perhaps it has served its purpose without strict compliance or enforcement.

Sort of a “Hey moron, your child’s lungs are still developing, give him some air.” When he is old enough to make up his own mind then he can decide whether or not to smoke.

i agree with bob you say it best