While much of the focus at the federal, state and local level has been on the continuing economic crisis, the General Assembly has taken action on a variety of bills that could directly impact Loudoun residents, their families and their daily lives.

House Agrees To Smoking Ban

Indicating the potential for a shift from a state that has been historically linked to the tobacco industry, the House of Delegates approved a ban on smoking in most of the commonwealth's bars and restaurants.

All of Loudoun's representatives in the House voted in favor of the bill, except Del. David Poission (D-32), who was away from Richmond on an excused absence. Poisson, who has long stood in support of smoking bans, said he would have voted for the bill, but "would have preferred a stronger" ban.

Under the bill, which stemmed from a compromise between Gov. Tim Kaine (D) and Speaker of the House William J. Howell, smoking is prohibited in Virginia restaurants except for outdoor areas, private clubs, times when a restaurant or portion thereof is used only for a private event and times when bars and clubs prevent the entry of minors. Restaurants may provide smoking areas if they are "structurally separate" from the rest of the facility from ceiling to floor, even if there is no separate ventilation system.

Del. Tom Rust (R-86) said he was pleased to see the cooperation between House leadership and Kaine on the bill , saying he has long been contacted by constituents on similar bills and he "has always supported efforts that move Virginia to being a more smoke-free state."

Del. Joe May (R-33) said, while he understands the opposition from some groups, he has heard from enough Northern Virginia restauranteurs about the need for such a ban.

"I've had a number of restaurant owners and operators contact me about supporting it because they say it keeps them from having to do it," May said. "I have heard that from more than one owner or operator."

Many of those opposed to the bill have cited the amount the tobacco industry contributes to the Virginia economy and raised concerns the state would be limiting personal freedoms.

But for Sen. Mark Herring (D-33) the smoking ban is much more a health issue than a personal freedom issue.

"It's a work health issue. Workers should have the right to breathe clean air free from the proven harmful effects of second-hand smoke," he said. "Workers don't have a choice whether they show up for work that day or not."

While no action has been taken in the Senate, Herring said he was confident of the way the bill would be received.

"We passed out probably four or five bills," he said. "The Senate has taken a pretty strong position on that."

Autism Bill Left In Senate

Despite initially gaining approval from two Senate committees, a bill that would have mandated health insurance coverage for children up to the age of six diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder stalled in the Senate.

Tuesday morning, both the Commerce and Labor Committee and the Finance Committee voted in favor of the bill, which was submitted by Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel (R-27), but by that evening there were more concerns about the bill.

The way the bill was originally drafted, it would have been mandated that health insurance companies provide coverage for children up to the age of 12, with the maximum annual coverage at $36,000. The Senate committees voted to decrease the age to six and to include the coverage of state government employees. But once the state health employees were added, members of the Senate became concerned about the fiscal impact such a requirement would have.

"If we'd passed the bill we would have been passing legislation resulting in an out of balance budget," Sen. Mark Herring (D-33), who voted in favor of the bill in committee, said.

Earlier in the session, Herring said, the Senate passed a bill that said if mandates were made, the state government should not be exempted. "We have consistently held that if the General Assembly is going to impose a mandate on private business, then it should apply to the state government as well," he said.

But the amendments made to the bill were contrary to that position, so the bill was sent back to the Finance Committee Tuesday night, effectively stalling it for the remainder of the session. All bills had to be referred out of the Senate to be considered by the House of Delegates by Tuesday.

Last week, a similar bill mandating coverage for children with autism was given a no vote in a House of Delegates committee, stunning parents and those Delegates that had worked to support the bill.

"Silence is not a morally acceptable response to this situation," Del. Robert Marshall (R-13), who submitted the House bill, said hours after the committee's lack of action. "Legislators were sent to Richmond to confront issues, not duck them."

Another wrinkle thrown into the issue for Loudoun parents was the Loudoun Chamber of Commerce's testimony in Richmond this week speaking out against mandates for health insurance. Previously, Tony Howard, president of the Loudoun Chamber of Commerce, said the Chamber was not planning on taking a position on the specific autism bill, but maintained its almost four-year opposition to mandates because of the negative impact they have on businesses.

"The cumulative effect of mandates is having a negative impact on all businesses, both large and small," Howard said this week. "It should be left to the employers, not the politicians."

Del. David Poisson (D-32), one of the biggest advocates of the bill, said he rejected the idea that it would hurt businesses.

"We have to look what this is going to do to families in Virginia. It's not just one or two, but a large number of them," he said. "Over the longer term, what toll is that likely to take, not only on the families, but on Virginia as a whole? The less these parents are able to take care of these burdens on their own, the more they are going to be reliant on services."

Parent Pat DiBari said he was disappointed to see the Chamber testifying about mandates, even in a general sense during the autism coverage debate. "Certainly there's an ideological position to mandates, but there are exceptions to every rule and we think this should be," he said.

After the failure to get any positive action from the Senate, DiBari said he was disappointed, but was proud of the statewide grassroots effort that had been started and he was hopeful for the future of the bill. Herring as well said he believes there is a future for the bill.

"I think the fact that we were able to get as much interest in the Senate is positive," he said. "I think we will see a renewed effort."

House Bill Would Require Alt Septic Approval

A bill that would overturn the Loudoun Board of Supervisors' five-year moratorium on alternative septic systems was passed in a close vote by the House of Delegates Tuesday, while a similar bill also made its way out of the Senate.

The bills, proposed by Del. Robert Hull (D-38) and Sen. Stephen Martin (R-11), would prohibit localities from banning the use of the alternative systems, and contain almost identical language. The only difference is the House bill requires the creation of a technical advisory committee "composed of representatives of local health departments, the alternative onsite sewage system industry, the home building industry, and others as he [State Health Commissioner] deems appropriate to advise and provide recommendations" on the systems.

The passage of both bills was seen as a blow to localities and has garnered strong reactions from some elected representatives.

"The House actions are irresponsible," Supervisor Jim Burton (I-Blue Ridge), who led the Loudoun efforts to impose a ban, said. "They have put the building industry's profits ahead and said they are more important to them than public health and I don't agree with it."

Del. Joe May (R-33) campaigned against the bill, and Burton credited May with the close vote seen in the House.

"We worked hard to get the opposition to the bill," May said, "and we covered some ground on it." May tried to get some amendments made to the bill, but was unable to get them adopted. He said he hoped to get "another shot" at opposing the bill in the Senate.

But the vote in support of Martin's bill may mean there is not much hope for either bill failing. Sen. Mark Herring (D-33), who voted in support of the bill, said his biggest concern was making sure that there were regulations on the alternative septic systems in place.

Herring pointed to legislation he proposed in 2007 that would require the state health department to ensure those who install and maintain the systems were qualified.

"We needed to make sure those regulations were in place before they prohibited their ability to ban the use of those systems," he said. "I thought it was important that the state health department promulgate good, strong regulations."

Even with the chance of the bill's passing, Burton said that was not the end of the issue.

"My concern is public safety because these systems that are failing are sitting on ground that doesn't perc. So there's no additional treatment from the ground when these systems fail," he said. "I am going to have pushback. It's not going to end with that legislation."

Texting In Cars Headed For Ban

If it gains traction in the Senate, drivers may soon be prohibited from composing or sending electronic messages while in a moving vehicle. The bill, which passed the House by an overwhelming majority, would make it illegal for drivers to "manually enter multiple letters or text in the device as a means of communicating with another person" or "read any email or text message transmitted to the device or stored within the device."

While submitted by Del. John Cosgrove (R-78), the topic has been a concern for Del. Joe May (R-33) for more than three years as he worked to make people understand the public safety issues involved.

"The support wasn't there to start with," May said. "But almost everyone recognizes that it is a hazard. We had quite a bit of research information and they were able to quantify what were the greatest risks. Reading and sending text messages were by far the most dangerous."

May said restricting text messages while driving is a compromise to the overall issue of transportation safety and communication devices.

The bill does exempt those text messages that are sent as means of dispatching routes or assignments as a part of business and for operators of emergency vehicles. Drivers may send or read messages when the car is fully stopped. Under the House bill violators would be fined $20 for the first offense and $50 for the second, and subsequent, offense.