OMAHA — A bill to ban smoking statewide could get enough support this year to pass without the hedging of a local opt-out provision, the only way its primary backer wants to see the bill go through.

“It’s our intention to put all our eggs in one basket,” said Sen. Joel Johnson of Kearney, a retired surgeon who says banning smoking is the easiest thing the Legislature can do to improve the state’s health.

Johnson said that if the bill doesn’t pass, organizations that still support the ban could then start petition drives to take the issue to voters.

Of 37 state lawmakers who responded to a pre-session survey by The Associated Press, 18 said they would support the ban without any wiggle room for cities to opt out. Twelve lawmakers said no to the ban, three were unsure and four did not specify an answer. Twelve lawmakers did not return the surveys.

The issue pits individual rights against health interests, with some lawmakers arguing that the state shouldn’t be able to say how local businesses can operate. Other lawmakers opposed to the bill would support the statewide ban, but only if the opt-out provisions were included.

“This discussion is important, but it should be held at the local and business level,” said Sen. Philip Erdman of Bayard. “Workplaces, private businesses and their communities should have the responsibility to make that decision for themselves, their employees, their customers, and citizens.”

Johnson pulled the bill with two days left in the last session, saying the opt-out provisions would create a mishmash of local smoking laws.

The bill was originally an all-out ban similar to the one in Lincoln. But the state bill turned into a law that would have allowed city councils, county boards and voters to opt out of the ban or craft their own smoking laws.

Anti-smoking groups, including the American Cancer Society, opposed the bill in its final form last year and hope the ban as originally envisioned by Johnson will pass.

“Hopefully that will meet the standard of enough senators,” Johnson said. “We’re very close to that being the case.”