Posted on 09/24/2002 4:22:36 PM PDT by SheLion
LAS VEGAS - Perhaps the biggest threat to growth in the U.S. casino industry comes not from antigambling interests, but from health-conscious public officials.
A group that sets the country's indoor air-quality standards is under "enormous" pressure to make casinos and other hospitality venues smoke-free, an expert warned attendees at the Global Gaming Expo on Thursday.
"With the collapse of the tobacco industry, (?) the hospitality industry is next to come under attack," said Elia Sterling, president of Theodor Sterling Associates, an indoor air-quality firm based in Vancouver, B.C.
If the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers, or ASHRAE, were to adopt a zero-tolerance policy for smoke particles, casinos could lose billions in revenue, according to legislative analyst Wayne Mehl of the American Gaming Association.
Forty percent to 50 percent of casino gamblers are smokers, about double the percentage of the U.S. population as a whole, Mehl said. A 1993 gaming-industry study showed that Nevada casinos alone would have lost $1 billion in revenue if casinos were forced to go smoke-free.
"It's not just the loss of customers, but also the loss of gambling time - 12 percent less time for smokers. They would spend that time going out for a smoke," Mehl said.
Of course the casino industry is concerned about the effects of second-hand smoke on its employees, Mehl said, but Thursday's panel discussion was all about the bottom line.
The industry will get a glimpse of the possible future beginning Nov. 27, when the three Delaware racetracks become the first casino jurisdiction to go smoke-free as part of a broader state law.
"There's a lot of talk about how much (gaming-tax) revenue the state will lose, and not only that, but jobs, too," said Don Johnson, deputy director of the Delaware State Lottery, which controls the racetrack slot-machine operations.
Delaware officials have been in touch with counterparts in Australia, where every gaming establishment was required to provide a smoke-free gaming area by Sept. 1. Johnson said he was told that the Australian smoking ban caused a sharp decrease in casino revenue initially but that business is beginning to recover.
At issue for U.S. casinos is ASHRAE Standard 62-1999, which governs how casinos, restaurants, bars and lounges filter and dilute their air to control tobacco particles, tobacco odor and body odor.
"It's intended to accommodate smoking in buildings," Sterling said. "This ASHRAE standard is a practical standard and is working well in the field."
For example, he said, the lavish Bellagio casino hotel here "provides better air quality indoors than you'll find outdoors."
Special interests, however, are aggressively pushing for standards so tight they "would effectively ban smoking in the hospitality industry," Sterling said.
ASHRAE (which conveniently rhymes with ashtray) is a 108-year-old non-government trade group of indoor-air specialists whose standards governance has been taken over by public funding and public officials, Sterling said. Today, the group's standards committee is chaired by an official from the Environmental Protection Agency and has only two representatives from the hospitality industry, he said.
"They're in the process of adopting a zero-tolerance approach to tobacco smoke. One molecule of tobacco smoke is unacceptable," Sterling said. "The debate is clearly not about health as it is about social engineering to denormalize smoking."
Matthew Iandoli, a Washington-based lobbyist and lawyer, said the Hospitality Coalition on Indoor Air Quality is trying to pre-empt the proposed new rules by adopting its own guidelines for smoke and ventilation. The group's members include the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union, which represents more than 14,000 Atlantic City casino workers, and the Nevada Resort Association, which represents the gaming industry here.
Iandoli warned that any action, or non-action, by the hospitality industry could expose it to substantial legal damages.
"Trial lawyers are trying to find that avenue, trying to find that chink in the armor where they can pursue those class-action lawsuits," he said. "If the ASHRAE standard goes forward, that will be the point at which the lawyers will try to show that the casino industry has harmed its employees."
From the casinos' point of view, Mehl said, the "ideal" solution to shielding employees and customers from smoke is a combination of effective ventilation and smoke-free areas.
To e-mail Joe Weinert at The Press:
JWeinert@pressofac.com
Go!
Please address it.
What kind of BS is this? They can't do that!
Why don't they just hook everybody up at birth (i.e. the Matrix) and just be done with it? Damn!
You have the right to smoke on your property as long as the smoke is diluted before leaving your property. However, society has a right to conduct commerce and enjoy entertainment in a safe and comfortable environment. That includes my right to have hotels and restaurants that provide a safe and comfortable atmosphere; i.e., free of smoke.
So you do suport the right of other hotels and restaurants to cater to those that choose to smoke. In other words, you do support the right of individual businesses to make their own decisions based upon their clientele's preferences.
I am getting your statement correct, aren't I?
IDIOTS!
Yes, as long as society has the ability to conduct business and entertainment in a comfortable atmosphere without the non-smokers having to subsidize the damage and injury caused by smokers. For example, hotels should charge smokers higher rates to cover the increased damage and insurance costs. Non-smokers should not have to pay for the increased ventilation required to clean up the smoke from smokers.
Does this mean that people can only smoke on their own property? Can they allow others to smoke on their property as well? (At least you start out by conceding that property rights exist.)
However, society has a right to conduct commerce and enjoy entertainment in a safe and comfortable environment.
Define society. Does this mean you think property rights can be revoked at the whim of others?
That includes my right to have hotels and restaurants that provide a safe and comfortable atmosphere; i.e., free of smoke.
You claim the right to revoke property rights for businesses after conceding them in the first comment? How does that square and where would such a "right" be found?
Please answer these questions forthrightly so I don't have to start making conclusions about your opinions and be accused of putting words in your mouth. Thank you
So smokers or non smokers could not be excluded by owners of property by their own choice?
If a person decides to open a business to the general public, he has an obligation to the public to provide a safe and comfortable environment. That environment should be safe and comfortable to the standards that society requires. Presently, society in America is requiring that this atmosphere should be free of smoke.
I have answered forthrightly. Unfortunately, you are trying to play word games. I already stated that you have the right to smoke on your property. Why do you rehash this? No rights are absolute. Society (and if you don't know what this is, go look it up) has rights also.
Anal retention smells far worse. Proven fact.
This is the same argument used by the enviro-nuts out here in regards to SUVs. They think "society" has a right to clean air, therefore SUV ownewrs are going to be charged a higher tax rate. Great socialist ideal!
Where would this requirement be found?
That environment should be safe and comfortable to the standards that society requires.
All people should be required to make all other people confortable if they are in business? Where would such a requirement be found?
Presently, society in America is requiring that this atmosphere should be free of smoke.
Hardly. Some places are attempting to usurp property rights.
How do you know they were illegals?
Society doesn't have rights. People have rights.
People have the right to run their business how they see fit. Likewise you have the right to patron business you want. If you want to go to a no-smoking hotel, then take your business to a hotel that bans smoking, and likewise boycott hotels that allows smoking.
Whatever you do, don't have the city step in an outlaw smoking in all hotels and restaurants within city limits. Don't you see the difference? You're now saying that a hotel owner does not have the right to run his business how he wants. You have no right to tell this business how to conduct affairs, since all you have to do is take your business elsewhere.
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.