Posted on 02/09/2005 6:22:08 AM PST by kahoutek
HARTFORD -- A proposal to roll back Connecticut’s ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and bowling alleys barely a year after it took full effect encountered fierce opposition at a legislative hearing Tuesday.
But the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Leonard C. Greene, R-Beacon Falls, and a several owners of bars and bowling alleys insisted that many establishments are losing business to private clubs and casinos where smoking remains legal.
"Why not allow a smoker a place to go if a business wants to cater to him?" Greene repeatedly asked witnesses at the hearing conducted by the legislature’s General Law Committee. "If the restaurant or bowling alley or bar wants to allow (smoking in a designated room or area), who are we hurting?"
Walter Williams, pastor of the Walk of Faith Church in New Haven and a spokesman for the anti-smoking MATCH Coalition, rejected Greene’s arguments and their exchange turned into a mini-debate.
Williams insisted that filtration systems and designated smoking areas simply don’t work in preventing non-smokers from being harmed by second-hand smoke. "There really is no safety area," Williams said. "We know all too well that some are more concerned with their wealth than with our health."
"I have data that says otherwise," Greene replied. He insisted that his bill also provides protections for employees of bars and restaurants. "Anyone who goes into that (designated) smoking area are putting themselves at risk, and there’s nothing wrong with that," Greene argued.
Nikki Palmieri of North Haven, who won the title of Miss Connecticut last year, cited polls showing that 85 percent of residents in this state support the statewide ban on smoking in public places.
Palmieri, 20, is also a member of the MATCH Coalition board and she said other states have begun to follow Connecticut’s lead by enacting similar bans. She urged lawmakers not to allow this state "to recede back into darkness when those about us are finally seeing the light."
To complaints that the current ban creates "an uneven playing field" because it doesn’t cover casinos and private clubs, Palmieri replied: "I think it should be universal across the board. ..Make the casinos go smoke free, make the private clubs go smoke free."
But Bill Dedomaincis, owner of a Torrington bowling center and a spokesman for the Connecticut Bowling Proprietors’ Association, said the smoking ban is "the most detrimental and destructive thing I’ve witnessed in my 35 years in this business."
Dedomaincis said that 47 percent of league bowlers, which he said are the core patrons of his industry, are smokers. "Our league bowling, which is 70 percent of our revenue, is down by 3 percent" since the ban took effect, he said.
However, smoking opponents cited studies in New York City and elsewhere showing that restaurants and bars were actually doing more business after smoking bans took effect.
Connecticut’s ban on smoking took effect for restaurants in October 2003 and for bars and bowling alleys in April 2004. Private clubs and Connecticut’s tribal casinos are not covered by the law.
©The Bristol Press 2005
When Vermont went non-smoking the first time, the same thing happened with NH.
St Johnsbury, one of the biggest truck stops on the east coast lost so much business, the state backed off to a smoking/non-smoking arrangement.
BTW, I draw out most non-smoking investors and can usually get them to admit that cigarette stock dividends are usually pretty good.
Politics/business.
Yes, they have been put forth as a vote. However, until the general public (non-smokers) realize what is happening to the private business owner and when only 25-30% of the people in a state smoke, we lose elections all the time.
I am sure many non-smokers have their favorite restaurants and bars that they wouldn't want to see closed. But until the day where everyone can agree that smoking bans ARE bad for business, we will see more closing their doors.
I don't think anyone is that selfish to demand smoke free at the expense of the business owner. I wish people would wake up.
If what you're saying is true, that these businesses aren't being hurt and that, in some instances, they are actually prospering under the bans, then why would the business owners invest all the time and expense into fighting the bans? That just makes no sense.
That's because the studies are based upon "sales tax receipts" for all bars and restaurants. including fast food joints and other places that didn't allow smoking even before the ban. Also, the studies focus upon gross receipts and not net profits. A bar/restaurant may be selling more food at the tables, but less alcohol at the bar. Revenues are up, but profits are down because the profit on alcohol is hugh compared to the profit on prepared foods.
I don't either. Maine forced the smoking ban a year ago January. In 2000, they forced all restaurants in Maine to go smoke-free. Then they took the fun out of bars, taverns and sports inns. No smoking anywhere.
That was my recreation. Going out once a week for a meal. But I won't spend my money in a place that can't accommodate me. I feel sorry for the business owner and the tips that the waitress's lose, but it's time for the rest of the states to wake up!
The private business owner had better start fighting now before their state lawmakers forces a ban on them. Because it WILL happen to them if they aren't careful.
A little correction is in order:
"...but I am a CINO in CT...."
A better case can be made (and it will be) for a ban on alcohol in bars and retaurants than was for smoking.
One can hear the murmuring in the sacred halls of MADD about how much more funding will be needed to 'protect the children'.
And expand their influence on lawmakers to pass even more stupid laws.
I can just SHAKE them. "I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " "ME ME ME ME ME ME ME"
I am going to sue you just on general principles. :^)
(The private business owner had better start fighting now before their state lawmakers forces a ban on them.)
That's exactly what this woman wants to do.
"Palmieri replied: "I think it should be universal across the board. ..Make the casinos go smoke free, make the private clubs go smoke free."
Air is clear, patrons scarce after smoking ban
Oct 8 2003 - Glowach says some non-smokers have started coming to the bar, but not enough to compensate
article here
Point taken.
The slicks in my former home city (NY) took that poll on St Patrick's Day, probably the heaviest day for bars in any metropolitan area.
the anti-gun people insist they will all *feel liberated* when they don't have to worry about someone owning a gun. you help to give that argument fuel. you are no conservative. people who pass these laws against the rights of private property owners are enemies of what makes this country free. the Writers weren't concerned about people smelling good.. they were concerned about the RIGHTS of individuals not being infringed on by the gvt. get a clue..
They do sound like an opera lesson, don't they?
This immoral slob shouldn't be confused with the honorable Dr. Walter Williams from George Mason University.
Yes, it's too bad. I used to enjoy going up to my usual pub once a week for supper and a few pints, but it's very annoying to have to keep going outside to have a smoke, while someone steals my barstool and/or table inside. I still go up occasionally, but not as often, because it's just not as enjoyable as it used to be. If they had a separately ventilated smoking room with service I wouldn't mind using it, but that won't be happening, both because of the cost and because the provincial gov't has already announced its intention to bring in a new anti-smoking law with no provision for separately ventilated areas, just to discourage smoking, not out of any actual health concern due to second-hand smoke.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.