Bloomberg Seeks to Ban Smoking in Every Restaurant and Bar

he Bloomberg administration will ask the City Council to amend New York City's antismoking law to include all restaurants and bars, making it one of the toughest in the nation.

The current law, passed in 1995, forbids smoking in all restaurants with more than 35 seats, and excludes stand-alone bars and the bar areas of all restaurants. The proposed amendment would add roughly 13,000 establishments that would be forced to ban smoking entirely.

A state bill banning smoking in all restaurants passed the Assembly this year and had enough support to pass in the Senate. But under pressure from Gov. George E. Pataki, who insisted on exempting small restaurants, and a heavy lobbying campaign by restaurant groups and the tobacco and liquor industries, the Senate's Republican leaders never put the bill to a vote.

However, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg — who, along with his health commissioner, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, is persistently anti-tobacco — views bars and restaurants as workplaces before social establishments, and has said that employees within them should have the same option of a smoke-free environment as those who work in offices.

"The mayor will push this," one administration official said, "for all the same reasons he pushed the cigarette tax. He makes changes to things that he thinks are important."

Mr. Bloomberg gained approval from Albany this year to raise the taxes on cigarettes, making the cost of a pack about $7.50 in the city. The administration is expected to announce its plans to amend the antismoking law on Monday. Even cigar bars, if they serve alcohol, are likely to be included in the legislation.

In the last month, the mayor has quietly lined up support in the Council, where several members are likely to sponsor a bill at his request forcing all smoking New Yorkers to do their puffing outdoors. (Under the 1995 law, smoking was outlawed in public places like theaters and offices.)

Among those consulted was Councilman James S. Oddo from Staten Island, who came up with his own more modest bill this spring to expand the smoking laws to small restaurants. Hearings were never held on the bill.

"The health commissioner and the mayor make a very compelling argument for legislation that goes well beyond my bill," he said yesterday. "I am seriously considering sponsoring it."

Timothy Filler, the associate director of Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, said the amendment "would be hugely significant."

"New York is a bellwether and a city that many others look toward as a leader," he added. "If New York City were to do something that included restaurants and bars, it would be a great step forward in public health."

The city is bound to meet some resistance from both some restaurants and bars and those that represent them, although the New York State Restaurant Association recently reversed its longstanding opposition to the proposed state law after a survey showed that 76 percent of its 7,000 members favored the law.

"Our position has been that we have some of the strictest rules in the country, and we have learned to live with them, and we think they should be left alone," said E. Charles Hunt, the executive vice president of the restaurant association.

However, he added: "If a total ban is proposed in all public places, I think people are going to say nobody has an advantage over anyone else and would seriously consider whether or not that might work. The whole thing seems to be boiling down to an employee safety issue at this point."

Lawmakers in Nassau and Suffolk Counties are considering similar measures, officials there said.

If such a law were passed, New York City would join two states — California and Delaware — and scores of municipalities that ban smoking in just about every workplace, including bars and restaurants.

Three other states — Maine, Utah and Vermont — have statewide bans on smoking in all restaurants. Municipalities have been more aggressive in seeking tough and broad antismoking laws, largely because local legislatures are less vulnerable to the powerful tobacco industry lobby.

New York State law requires that a restaurant have a nonsmoking area that encompasses at least 70 percent of its seats, but the smoking area can be in the same room.

There are 72 municipalities in America that ban smoking in any restaurant or bar, according to Mr. Filler, and hundreds offer some other variation on a law against public smoking, allowing people to light up in stand-alone bars, or permitting smoking in restaurant bars that have separate ventilation systems.

In California, where the Legislature passed a law in 1994 that banned smoking in all workplaces, including bars and restaurants, many tavern and restaurant owners feared dire economic consequences. Some studies, including one by the state's sales tax collection agency in 1998, actually showed an increase in sales after the law was enacted.

"I don't believe a New Yorker would choose a steakhouse in Weehawken over Ruth's Chris in New York City because of a smoking regulation," Mr. Oddo said yesterday.

Mr. Bloomberg, who has a school of public health named after him, is aggressively antismoking. When he lobbied for his cigarette tax, he insisted that he did not care whether the city made or lost money, but rather that the tax would keep children from smoking. He has been known to chide reporters for their puffing, and has takes slaps at the tobacco industry in speeches.

He has found a kindred spirit in Dr. Frieden, the health commissioner, who said when he was appointed that his main priority would be to combat smoking. Dr. Frieden has even produced a radio advertisement deploring secondhand smoke.

Like that mayor of Friendship Heights, MD who was backing a town ordinance banning out-of-doors smoking, and who was charged with molesting a 14-year-old boy in the men's room of the National Cathedral in D.C. I think he ended up admitting the charge in a plea bargain.

Yes, I remember that. Strange how some want to take away "our" rights, yet think they should just continue on their merry way. I never could understand what gets into people. There was only one perfect man who walked the earth, and he died over 2000 years ago.

The anti's should worry about taking care of their OWN lives today, before working on taking away the rights of others.

Apples and oranges. Mr. Bloomberg does not wish to stop selling cigarettes, he just wants people to stop smoking cigarettes.

The taxes smokers shell out, the city should win and DINE them! heh!

Bloomberg and his croonies talk out of both sides of their mouths. But, thankfully, a lot of New Yorkers are going to the Net, the Reservations to buy cheaper cigarettes. Or, even rolling their own.

My heart really goes out to the small business owners who are just trying to make a way in life. The anti's would have us believe that the bans won't hurt. This is inaccurate and deceitful information.

A LOT of us absolutely refuses to spend one dime in an establishment that does not want us. I feel bad for the owner, but why should we spend our hard earned money to pay for that personal abuse.

Bloomberg, you'd think the typical business man would know better about living and taxes. Man, these people are in the business of sending prostitutes to get deals with banks throating us down with their screwy software, and the average joe can't smoke in his local bar.

I'm a former smoker, and frankly, what I miss the most is the atmosphere where everyone is sitting around, talking, relaxing, enjoying a few smokes and brews.

No doubt. Sounds like good ol' times with some buds. I only smoke cigars maybe once every two or three months, but it's always in good company. Right now our favorite spot is an upgraded pool hall where we have beautiful waitresses who bring us an unlimited variety of single malts scotches to go with our smokes while our pool playing gets worse and worse.

And some idiot wants to end this? Off with their head!

if you want to smoke at a restaurant, don't choose to go to NYC.

You talk like a card-carrying democrat. What gives you the right to speak for all NY'ers? Over 25% of adult NY'ers smoke. Do you think they agree with you?

Perhaps you missed the bit where the primary distinction between a democrat and a Republican is that democrats believe in the ability of the Gubmint and the majority to override the minority, whereas Republicans believe in individuals and their property rights, even if they are in the minority.

Perhaps you missed the distinction between a "republic" and a "democracy". The philosophy doesn't just apply to countries, it applies to interactions between individuals, as well.

Take a loonnggg hard look at yourself and your values. You are not a Republican. I believe SheLion would call you a RINO, and I believe she would be spot on!

So your presumed right to smoke is greater than my right to breathe clean, healthy air? Don't think so.

I really don't see why the argument isn't obvious here (and I'm a former smoker, so I'm not defending my right to smoke; I'm defending a lifestyle).

Let's try it this way. Assume Fred opens a restaurant "Fred's Fried Fish". And all he sells is Fried Fish, French Fries, Fried Bread, you name it...everything you can get at Fred's is at least 95% grease. Well, lets say Wilma thinks greasy food is disgusting, so she can't anything to eat at Fred's even though they have the best darn cavepaintings anywhere.

So what does Wilma do? Does she demand that Fred get rid of the disgusting grease that permeates everything and offers bark and leaf salads? Or does she take her business elsewhere, to a restaurant that has what she likes?

Get it? The owner of the restaurant should make these business decisions...not Wilma. She votes by taking her business elsewhere.

You think it's okay for someone to smoke or drink in the privacy of their own home, but argue tooth and nail against pot. I could understand if you were trying to make the argument JUST against crack or heroin. Again, this seems disingenuous to me.

For the record...a lot of people, (yes, even in the '60s) chose tobacco and alcoholic beverages because they were legal, as opposed to illegal drugs. Since that is their basis for smoking, I see a huge difference.

Back when I was in Junior High and High School, moderation within the law was acceptable. So, I can see how people have a tobacco habit. I can't accept that people took up something they knew was illegal.

As the Nazis, like Kings, et al, viewed people as crop, they were the first to legislate against tobacco. Get this, they wouldn't even send cigs to the eastern front. Bad for the soldiers health don't you know.

The Nazis didn't send cigs to the Eastern front? I didn't know that. I think I remember German soldiers smoking in Eastern front movies like Cross of Iron. Are those movies inaccurate on this point? Or did the soldiers find a way to smuggle cigarettes? I imagine they overran enough Russian positions to be able to smoke papirosy, if that was all they could get, at least in the first couple of years of Barbarossa. Soldiers like stronger smokes anyway. When I was stationed in Berlin, I smoked Gaulloises.

Even the Nazis couln't stop smoking. The German Army had a cigs ration. Hitler forbade it. Thus you had the notion that even though a soldier was being sent to certian death, no smoking. It was in this book

Give me untill tomorrow afternoon and I will find the source.

Let's not forget that tax-loving idiot Koch.

Mr. Affability, himself? Yes, "let's".

Isn't it almost time to pull him out of the closet to go stumping for one of the candidates? Guess we'll be seeing his honor's face, splattered all over the tv, very soon.

If someone is smoking in a restaurant, what choice do I have? Can I choose not to breathe it? No. My choice to breathe clean, smoke-free air is taken away from me.

Most modern "Smoke Eater" air systems in resteraunts these days probably leave the air cleaner than what you'll find outside.

I visit a place that has one and even though there are smokers all around, the smoke isn't there. People sitting in the "non-smoking" section are not bothered even though there is no barrier between the sections.

BTW: The owner of this particular establishment is pretty much anti-smoking due to his father dying from cancer... never-the-less he is a business man and knows a great deal of his patrons are smokers and "chooses" to accomodate them.

One thing about NY they don't have the guts to stand up and fight back. Signs were everywhere for Hillary to get out of NY,yet she holds the NY Senate seat.

There will come a time,when Americans will RUE the day they elected her to that seat.People allow officials to talk the Republican line,when they're just tax and spend liberals.Bloomberg is a classic example of this. Food is next.

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.