A Draconian smoking ban enacted in Washington state last year, which not only prohibits smoking inside buildings but within 25 feet of building entrances, has devastated restaurants and nightclubs, and led some state legislators to call for the ban to be scaled back.
But under state law, the ban, which was passed by ballot initiative last November, requires a two-thirds majority in the state legislature to amend the act during the first two years, so legislators are pessimistic about how far the ban can be scaled back.
“My business is down 30 percent,” says Rimrock [Steakhouse] owner Connie Dunn. “I cannot survive.”
Meanwhile, smoking ban advocates claim that the ban is a success.
“That’s bullshit,” says Dunn, who recently put her Lake City institution up for sale. “That is total bullshit.”
Enter Speaker of the House Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, and state Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-Seattle. Both are nonsmokers and powerful members of the state Legislature — and both say that the Clean Indoor Air Act, as the ban is officially known, has screwed up business and civic life so badly that they favor changing the law.
“I think there’s room to amend the new law,” Kohl-Welles says.
It will come too late for Dunn — ditto some local bartenders who’ve seen their tip income plummet hundreds of dollars a month. Dunn says she’s had to close her restaurant during the day and already has lost three employees, who saw their tips go from $90 to $10 a shift. — Seattle Weekly
The usual suspects all supported the smoking ban, and still do, claiming they’re “protecting” people . . . from themselves.
“Everyone thought they were protecting employees, but no one asked the employees,” bartender Aaron Marshall told theSeattle Weekly.
If that were so, why have narcs been going around looking for smokers less than 25 feet from a building and issuing citations to the bar they happened to be standing too close to?
The legislators said it was likely they would only be able to achieve the two-thirds supermajority for an exemption for religious purposes, but they would try to eliminate the 25-foot rule and the prohibition on smoking in bars, private clubs, and cigar lounges. After two years, an amendment would require only a simple majority, which would be much more likely to pass.
Who would have ever thought that a smoking ban on businesses which cater to smokers would have had such a negative impact on those businesses? And who would have thought that the employees who were supposed to be “protected” by the smoking ban would be such ungrateful bastards? So what if you lose your money, your job, your business that you worked for years to build. At least you don’t have to breathe any smoke while you collect unemployment!
(Hat tip)
(1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ...
Karl Marx would love the popular moves among politicians in various state governments and the federal government to ban so-called "junk" food in schools, and to "put healthy food in" convenience stores and on the tables of those they define as poor. It's a very elitist and arrogant mindset that promotes this ideology, and it needs to be addressed.
Ultimately, the war supporters in Congress prevailed in the vote on the resolution. Still, the vote was significant because it places every member of Congress on the record as supporting or not supporting the unconstitutional, costly, violent occupation of a country that never attacked us. This vote should serve as an important reminder to the American people of where their representatives really stand when it comes to policing the world, empire building, and war.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Dana Hanley
Sep 29, 2006
We have similar legislation here in Lincoln. There was one little ray of sanity…a local shop owner thought he was going to be forced out of business because of his unique little coffee shop in which the main attraction was smoking. Luckily, he ended up being able to apply for an exemption.
http://hookahshisha.com/hookah_ban.htm
The worst place to walk for us nonsmokers is now down in front of the state capitol buildings. Everyone is standing out on the steps smoking. I actually never noticed so much smoking or had to walk through so much second hand smoke until it all had to move outdoors. I find the whole thing rather ironic.
Actually someone in the state legislature introduced a bill that would take away Lincoln’s benefit from the cigarette tax…some $1.5 million. That didn’t pass, but it does seem logical.
Allan
Sep 29, 2006
As much as I greatly, greatly disagree with smoking bans in adult establishments, I second Dana’s comment. Where I live, save for a handful of Chicagoland suburbs that passed unnecessarily strict smoking bans(Lake Forest, Highland Park, Lindenhurst), at least bans in the Chicagoland area have largely allowed exemptions for tobacco shops, such as hookah bars.
I still think though that its very stupid that councilmen in these suburbs have ignored the legit concerns of bars when it comes to banning smoking, since there’s tons of well established evidence that smoking bans have especially hurt bars more than other types of businesses. All you have to do is travel to any small neighborhood bar in the USA where a ban has been imposed, and talk to owners of these bars and see how angry they are. Heck, it still greatly depresses me that Ireland has lost over 200 pubs because of their countrywide ban. And as for Dana’s example about the state capitol buildings, that’s a great example that just goes to show that the extremist anti-smokers need to learn they can’t have the smoking ban both ways(i.e. applying to both all indoor and outdoor areas, such as what many hospitals have stupidly implimented in recent years).
I’ll just end this comment by saying I feel really sorry for the mess that anti-smoking groups brainwashed your state into voting for, since I’m sure at least some of the non-smokers who voted for the ban have seen the harmful effects of the ban, and wouldn’t dream of voting for it if a new vote was done on it today.
JOSH
Sep 29, 2006
What does this article have to do with homeland security?
Anyways, the smoking ban hurting bars is a myth. Ever state I have lived in has enacted a ban while I lived there and it goes through the same cycle every time. First there are big scary stories and then oddly all the bars stay open. [Except the ones that were failing anyways and want an excuse so they don't feel like failures for having their business fail despite the insanly high profit margins of selling beer.]
Michael Hampton
Sep 29, 2006
We cover any stupid government policy here, and smoking bans are easily one of the dumbest.
As for it being a myth, you obviously haven’t spoken to any bar owners or bartenders, all of whom will tell you it’s much more difficult to do business with a smoking ban in effect.
Sure, most of the bars stay open, despite the loss of customers and revenue, but what’s the alternative? Collect unemployment?
Besides, you completely miss the point: smoking bans aren’t about public health. They’re about property rights, or rather, lack thereof.
guy menge
Sep 29, 2006
Actually 600 bars have closed in Ireland since the smoking ban came into effect. 24 have closed in the last month. Smoking bans are about shutting down businesses that allow smoking, not about health.
gm
Sep 29, 2006
We’ve had smoking bans up here for about 5 plus years now.
Smoking bans are the best to happen to places in ages. It’s so nice to go out the pub and not come home reaking of smoke. Suposedly business was down for the first year, but as far as I could tell, every place I went was just a busy if not busier. I only wish that would enforce the with 25m of the entrance rule so I don’t have walk through a cloud of smoke to get in or out of a building.
We’ve just recently had a leasing company ban smoking in all its apartment buildings. I’m sure mainly for the cheaper insurance.
John
Sep 29, 2006
I am a non-smoker, but an advocate for personal and property rights.
I live in one of the last free states, Michigan, which by state law does
not allow local governments to override state law. This means that any
restaurant, bar, bowling alley, casino, or bingo hall has the right to
allow smoking. It will be a sad day when the self-righteous ANTIs finally
get their heels into our state legislature and force a ban.
There have been thousands of establishements that have gone smoke-free
voluntarily, and that’s great for them. Free market forces are working.
Why shouldn’t a business be allowed to cater to it’s smoking customers,
and allow them to indulge in a still LEGAL activity that the states
themselves makes MILLIONS of dollars on each year? It reeks of sheer
hypocrisy.
Power to the individual!!!
eyesofgrey
Sep 30, 2006
Wouldn’t you know that some “anti’s” would comment about how wonderful smoking bans are and that they can now breathe fresh air when they go to businesses. There were tons of businesses that CHOSE to go non-smoking before the ban so I’m sure no one had to sit at home because they didn’t like the smell of smoke.
The whole issue is about some businesses that wanted to go non-smoking but were afraid they’d lose customers so they wanted ALL businesses to do it their way and the anti’s were right there ready to jump on the band wagon. Do we ban places that sell hamburgers just because some businesses want to sell only chicken and don’t want to lose customers?
People invest their money, their sweat and their lives to run businesses and they are now told how to run them. What ever happened to “free enterprise”? As for businesses not losing revenue because of the smoking ban, well, they are losing OUR revenue. We have chosen to NOT patronize any bar, restaurant or entertainment facility where smoking is not allowed. We would rather cross the state line or go to tribal facilities that welcome us and appreciate our business. We will NOT stand on a street corner to have a cigarette while people inside are getting sloppy drunk and then getting behind the wheel of a car. Where are our priorities?
Greg
Oct 01, 2006
Whatever happened to the right of free association? If I want to smoke and a restuarant owner wants to serve me, how does the state get to disallow it? I’m traveling to Seattle for a meeting tomorrow and all the hotels are now forced to be non-smoking. This is the last time I will ever take a business trip to Washington state.
Sean O'Doherty
Oct 02, 2006
“What does this article have to do with homeland security?”
Um, ‘nanny state mentality’ ring a bell? Just like HLS…
Greg
Oct 06, 2006
I agree with Sean,
This is about breaking up the “sinners” who smoke cigarettes and it ends up hurting us all. This would have never flown in a 1960’s-70’s era where freedom ruled. Support Freedom!
Matt canada
Oct 16, 2006
You are mistaken, smoking bans are about toxic pollution by individuals, your smoke kills, we ban it from public places.
I have just returned from Ireland and UK, Ireland already has a smoking ban and business has done so well in the pubs that over in the UK many pubs are adopting no smoking for “better” business prior to laws coming in.
In Victoria, canada we also have gone no smoking in public places, and its great. want to pollute and kill yourself go outside.
Next up medical insurance doubles for smokers…
Jay Holzman
Nov 20, 2006
The protests over the ban are predictable, and at an anecdotal level, some bars probably are losing money. But on the whole, the statistics have and will prove otherwise.(The State Dept. of Revenue only has only released the data from early December through late Feburary ).
Everywhere else bans have been implemented, business has not been affected either way or rises , and when it has gone down, it has decreased minimally. Nationally, one year after implementation, the bans’ popularity rises to 77-82%, and bar compliance is between 92-98%.
Using the stock market as an analogy, when economic policy is set and overall stocks rise in a particular industry, there still will be exceptions that don’t share in the benefits. Just because a small minority of stocks can fall (which is normal in any cycle), doesn’t mean that the economic policy set is a bad one. When society progresses, the markets change(CD’s replacing records). Since the Surgeon General’s report earlier in the year, the arguments in favor of indoor smoking bans to protect public health represent more social progress as society changes for the better.
Greg
Nov 20, 2006
If the arguments about the economic benefits were true, you wouldn’t have to mandate a ban. Bar owners would rush to go no-smoking. The very fact that you have to pass a law to make it happen proves the lie.
sharon
Nov 24, 2006
To reverse the damage of I-901
View Current Signatures – Sign the Petition
——————————————————————————–
To: The Washington State Legislature
We the Good people of Washington State do hereby exercise our right under the first amendment and petition for a redress of grievance. We petition to strike the infringement upon our rights by I-901.
You the Duly elected representatives of the people have the authority, the power to rectify a terrible wrong, that would be the changes to the RCW from the demands of I-901. We hold that I-901 was passed under false pretense, that the greater truth was withheld from all, that we were never allowed to present the whole truth before the voters. Further that we represent no grave or deadly danger to anyone or anything and we can prove that fact. Greater yet that we have an inalienable right to choose for ourselves, a right protected by the demands and limits within the Constitution.
We petition now our Representatives in Government to have those sections of the RCW so affected by I-901 that in effect banished us from public, from being served by any business, and infringed upon our inalienable right to choose; that they be forever stricken and that our inalienable right to choose be restored, for our businesses, for the people as individuals.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
View Current Signatures
——————————————————————————–
The To reverse the damage of I-901 Petition to The Washington State Legislature was created by and written by Jon E. Forseth (j6forseth@yahoo.com). This petition is hosted here at www.PetitionOnline.com as a public service. There is no endorsement of this petition, express or implied, by Artifice, Inc. or our sponsors. For technical support please use our simple Petition Help form.
Send this to a friend
Dec 21, 2006
Two years of Homeland Stupidity - Homeland Stupidity
RGray
Jan 10, 2007
Where are the people who care about the right to choose what is best for ourself? This law is unamerican .Who are these people who think we need to be told to wear helments while riding a bike,a seatbelt while driving,that we cant allow smoking in our own business? Where will it stop?We need to stand up for our right to choose whats best for ourself.
mike hunt
Jan 24, 2007
So, I was at McD’s and my car was blowing blue smoke into the window as the cashier got my order. Then I went to 5bucks and did the same thing, more blue smoke. Yes, when will we get it right and ban cars and let the people smoke. Wish I was in Oregon, I could smoke, have a drink and get a stripper to sit on my lap, these are stories of the good old days that I will share with my grandchildren. PS, if you think you smell so nice becasue you don’t smoke, think again Ahole.
McKenzie
Mar 13, 2007
Ok seriously people smoking bans are ruining the ecomony as we speak! everyone is closing becuz they dont have enough business and this whole statement is TOTAL bullshit—Who would have ever thought that a smoking ban on businesses which cater to smokers would have had such a negative impact on those businesses? And who would have thought that the employees who were supposed to be “protected†by the smoking ban would be such ungrateful bastards? So what if you lose your money, your job, your business that you worked for years to build. At least you don’t have to breathe any smoke while you collect unemployment!— umm did you ever think that those workers might have kids to take care of… all of those nonsmoking activists can shove it were the sun dont shine cuz right now they are ruining many ppls lives by putting these bans on… they are all fuckers who just need to shut the hell up!
Jim
Aug 16, 2007
Here’s a possible solution- Let’s position the state misgovernment for reservation land next door to native reservations. It could be argued that smokers are under opression by the general populace which voted this farce into action, and that all smokers should thusly be entitled to land free of such sophomoric minds. By relocating all smokers into a complex where sanity prevails, perhaps bans on smoking in churches, schools, and hospitals will take effect, without disrupting the businesses which are supported by the money spent by the “evil” smokers. Let the rest of Washington be smoke free, but allow at least a pocket of sanity!