PHOENIX ÷ A bill that would make last call an hour later and keep bars open until 2:30 a.m. gained initial approval yesterday despite attacks from legislators who said the bill puts greed before public safety.

By a vote of 35-25, the state House of Representatives passed the measure on to the Senate. If approved there, Gov. Janet Napolitano, who has said she is open to the measure, could then sign the bill into law.

A handful of legislators spoke out against the bill before entering their votes of disapproval.

Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, called the bill a step backwards in the state's efforts to deter drunken driving.

"The purpose to keep a bar open longer is to consume more alcohol," Pearce said. "When you leave them an hour longer at a bar, to drink an hour longer, they are going to get an hour drunker · and they have to drive home."

Pearce and others that spoke out against the bill, which has been rallied behind by the state's hospitality and tourism industry, said the money a later closing time could bring to Arizona would not merit its potentially negative effects.

"We're duped by the money," Pearce said. "We think this is going to generate revenue and my concern is very simple· that the damage done no money can compensate for."

Other dissenting voters rebuked the argument that Arizona's 1 a.m. last call, one of the earliest in the country, was causing the state to lose tourists to other states.

"One of the arguments for this bill is Îeverybody else has done it'· Well fellow members that's not good enough for me. Just because everybody else has done it doesn't mean that we should do it," said Rep. Doug Quelland, R-Phoenix.

The majority of the legislators said the potential economic gains that longer bar-hours could bring Arizona made the bill worthwhile.

They also pointed to indications that a 2 a.m. last call would allow people out late to make it home before the bars let out, thereby making the roads safer.

"This benefits those of us who don't drink particularly, or when we take in a late movie with our family or we're out near that 12:30 or one o'clock time," said Rep. Gary Pierce, R-Mesa. "This way at least those of us who maybe are out a little bit after midnight · we're more likely not to encounter someone who has just left the bar after closing time by spreading that out a little bit."

Rep. Sylvia Laughter, I-Kayenta, said that logic didn't sell her on the bill.

"There are innocent people who are driving that are driving even at two o'clock in the morning, not just people who drink. That to me spells liability for the state, and I think it's unwise for us to pass something that does not prove that it's safer for us."

House Majority Leader Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, said that there are already laws that punish drunk drivers and that blurring the issue of drunk driving and later bar hours was illogical.

"If you are going to drink it is a legal activity on a legal business," Farnsworth said. "If we don't like the business and we don't like the activity then we ought to do away with it. But to say that we are going to prevent people from drinking, a legal activity that this state has said is legal, because they may go out and drive drunk I think is a faulty argument."

But for many, the bottom-line was that later closing times could boost tourism by attracting business conferences and increase revenue for the state bars and restaurants.

"This is a bill that basically deals with the commerce of the state. We have industries that are basically asking us to remain open, and I look at it as an extension of jobs for people," said Rep. Bob Robson, R-Chandler.