Smoking Bans

Note: the poll is for anyone regardless of the state you live in.

I guess we are joining the rest of the crowd with a ban on smoking in most public places like restaurants and bars. It's not quite as restrictive as many States as it exempts bars with net sales of food of less than 20% and a few others sucha as 25% of casino floor space.

My argument has always been that this decision should be left to the business owner, there is no law preventing the owner of an establishment from making it completely smoke free. The non-smoker has the choice of not entering such a place and taking his/her business elsewhere. This is IMO the fairest system we can have, everyone has a choice.

In their infinite wisdom our legislators have decided that being able to make a choice is not in the best of interests of everyone, that's the way I see it.

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/index.cf ... 6361&rfi=8

Gov. Ed Rendell (D) Friday signed a long-anticipated ban on smoking in restaurants, most bars and nearly all other workplaces.

Philadelphia already has enacted a more comprehensive law which the statewide law would not water down. All other indoor commercial facilities in Pennsylvania are subject to the new ban, except taverns earning one-fifth of their revenue or less from food sales, senior care establishments, cigar bars and private clubs. Smoking can continue only in 25 percent of hotels' sleeping quarters and on 25 percent of casino floor space.

The measure does not apply to private residences, except for day-care facilities. It will go into effect 90 days after Mr. Rendell signed it.

What's interesting to note is the 9 dissenters in the Senate were all Republicans who voiced the same concerns as me.

Probably going to be a lot of local taverns curtailing their food sales to get under the 20%.... makes a lot of sense.

Rendell is such a shyster! He just looks dirty and slimy. I can't wait until he leaves office. My luck he will run for president and win. Of course you will be allowed to smoke in his gov. run casino. He would not have it any other way.

I truly hate hitting "yes" to this vote but I honestly have to admit I will enjoy my favorite eating places a whole lot more. It's basically a bit selfish on my part the way I see it, but I like to eat in smoke free establishments.

I have nothing against smokers. I use to smoke but decided to quit a long time ago. I just never did like smoke filled rooms (including bars) even when I did smoke. I always enjoyed smoking outdoors back then.

Probably going to be a lot of local taverns curtailing their food sales to get under the 20%.... makes a lot of sense.

I don't know how true it is but I heard that if they have a Sunday license they can't drop below the 20% mark in food sales. In other words...for Sunday NFL they have to be a Bar/Grill meaning...no smoking.

I voted 'yes'. I used to smoke and like BugsyR said, I would rather have smoked outside. I never felt comfortable smoking indoors and adding to the cloud that hung in the air. I even smoked outside at my house. I've been free of cigs for almost 2 years now and I don't miss them one bit.

I also work at a small diner sometimes during the week and weekends and it's nice to not have smoke billowing through the place. My clothes now only smell like french fries after work and not smoked fries.

There were talks here in NJ about loopholes in the law. For instance a bar could become a "members only" establishment and therefore could allow smoking. The only place that I thought that might happen was a joint called Ray's Inn on 206 near Andover. Perhaps another Jerseyian up near me knows about that place.

It should be up the owner of the establishment to decide and up to the customers to vote with their feet.

The air handling systems are usually good enough that you don't fall over from smoke, unless you're my wife, who can smell a cigarette at the other end of town.

BULL CRAP, if you own a place it's up to you what goes on in your establishment. Gov Ed knows his crap and how to play in it. Too bad I voted for the stinkey crap eater form Phila. Just look at him what a crap face. Fat tub of lard needs to EAT some PIG, PORK, if you know what I mean.

Don't smoke, never did. I don't agree with these type of bans. I think it's all politics. They think there is more to gain by voting for the ban than against it.

There was an interesting article in the newspaper about the lifetime healthcare costs of smokers vs. non-smokers. The smokers had the lower total heathcare dollars spent, by quite a bit. So, you can't use dollars to justify the harassment of smokers.

It seems like the biggest argument was with restaurants and since nobody is forced to enter a particular restaurant, it's none of the government's business.

LSMFT. Sound off for chesterfield. 25.000 doctors say that camels smoke best. when we were kids cigarettes were good for you.I know because on sirius 118 they play cigarette ads all day long. Jack Benny had Luckey Strike. Abbot and Costello had Camel. Dragnet and Have gun will Travel had Chesterfield. I remember riding in a car as a kid, with the windows rolled up and three people smoking at once It was absolutely disgusting. I voted yes. As much as I hate govt. involvement in my life, i'm not a total libretarian. P.S. Rendell will be gone in two years and hopefully we will get Lynn Swan.

The reasons that the smokers had lower lifetime health care costs is that the life time was MUCH shorter than non smokers... And when the smoker got ill, it was usually terminal.. so the costs were lower than a non smoker recieving care for a lot of 'little' ills over many more years..

I'm gonna sound like a Socialist Democrat here.... But I have asthma,, and have had the panic of not being able to breath.. and smoking does set me off and give me bronchial spasms and restrictions.. So I'm for the smoking bans.

The problem with letting the barowners and restaurant owners to make the decision about smoking on the premisis is that they want to appeal to everyone,, and most drinkers are smokers,, and bars are where people go to drink, smoke and socialize... So those who want to eat have to put up with the smoke,, or stay home..

In my state,, before the no smoking sections in restaurants became law,, there was no place to get away from the stink and health problems... I got used to using my inhaler while in a restaurant or bar..

Now I do have an answer... Make truely effective smoking sections.. with dedicated air handlers,and proper airflow and fresh air sources, this way the non smoking section has truely clean air, and the patrons in the cancer section can breath all the smoke they want.

The outright ban is a bit draconian.. but the bars/restaurants in the non smoking states are doing fine,, the smokers just go outside, and enjoy their habit,, then come back inside and make me gag from the smoke in their clothes.

I have the occassional first officer who still smokes.. inspite of the overwhelming evidence against smoking... and I have to turn up the cockpit ventilation system and often use an inhaler to be the least bit comfortable.. just from the smell, stink and particulates he/she brings into the cockpit in their clothes..



Greg L

I thought you couldn't smoke on planes anymore? or is that just the passengers?
I don't have a problem with no smoking bans even though I'm smoking again. I quit a few times just to start back up a year or so later. So where are the states going to make up their tax revenue when enough people quit?

Hi billw,, I guess I should explain that better,, the smell, stink and particulates that bother me are those that the smoker brings into the cockpit in and on his or her clothes... clothing is like a sponge for smoke and odors..

You are correct, smoking is banned on all US Domestic flights..

Greg L

I've never been a smoker and have always avoided the businesses that didn't have non smoking sections. In Maryland the no smoking ban has progressed over the years, first by certain cities and counties, to a complete state wide ban. Effective in January 2008 all smoking in public places is prohibited. There are some provisions for exceptions, but they are processed via the health department, so few are expected to be approved. The ban had wide public support with some support from business owners that were previously subject to locally imposed bans. Many restaurant owners have reported increased business after a ban was imposed. One of the under reported health effects of smoking was to that to the business workers health. They were the ones that didn't have a choice. They had to endure and just keep their mouths shut. When the workplace non-smoking ban when into effect my employer at the time provided help to smokers encouraging them to quit. Those that quit ended up being the Nazi no smoking police enforcers. Nothing like the wrath of an ex-smoker!

LsFarm wrote:The problem with letting the barowners and restaurant owners to make the decision about smoking on the premisis is that they want to appeal to everyone,, and most drinkers are smokers,, and bars are where people go to drink, smoke and socialize... So those who want to eat have to put up with the smoke,, or stay home..

There is nothing preventing someone from opening a smoke free establishment. If they were profitable there would be an abundance of them?

I've done a little research on the economic impacts and this is what I've come up with. The consensus points to family type restaurants getting a slight boost in patronage however small taverns, bars and clubs where the primary profits are alcohol sales suffer quite a bit. I believe smokers are more likely to patronize such places to begin with. Other eating establishments that suffer are local diners that are more of social gathering place. Dependng on the laws others include bingo halls, VFW's... LOL you want to go into a VFW and fine a veteran for smoking???? Give me a break. This Pennsylvanian law fortunately for most of the local bars has an exemption for them if their food sales are less than 20%. There's also exemptions for private clubs like VFW's.

There's a study here done in 2004 by for the Empire State Restaurant and Tavern Association in New York that supports the loss in revenue for small bars and taverns:

http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/pd ... t_2004.pdf

In summary, the enactment of the New York State smoking ban has had a dramatic negative impact on the bar and tavern business and related businesses. The total economic impact is:
• 2650 jobs
• $50 million in worker earnings
• $71.5 million in gross state product (output)

I have no reason to doubt the findings since the best interests of such a group would be whatever is the most profitable for their members.

However that doesn't account for the local bars that have 30, 40 or 50% in food sales and there is a lot of them. If I understand the bill correctly they will have three choices. Either build a wall that completely separates the food area from the bar, sell strictly alcohol or sell strictly food. For those that can't afford option one or don't have the room for option one they will most likely drop food sales because as I understand it alcohol sales are what drive the profits for many of these places.

Just to point out how stupid this law is consider this, if I walk into a bar that has an adjacent restaurant I won't be able to order food inside the bar if they allow smoking.