Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LAS VEGAS! Casino profits could go up in (no) smoke
PressAtlanticCity.com ^ | 24 September 2002 | JOE WEINERT

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


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Culture/Society; Government; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: antismokers; butts; cigarettes; individualliberty; michaeldobbs; niconazis; prohibitionists; pufflist; smokingbans; taxes; tobacco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 301-309 next last
To: cinFLA
Your post #132 is a succinct presentation of the arguments made here in Canada by the outright socialists and left-liberals to exert 'societal', 'democratic' control over the activities of citizens. Tobacco has become a 'loss-leader' for totalitarianism, imo.

I didn't know that Canadian Socialism was so directly equivalent to Republicanism, if indeed that is your politics.

These comments probably seem contentious to you, so I would appreciate some indication of what distinguishes your views on this issue from those of the social-engineering leftists.

161 posted on 09/25/2002 1:15:35 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: *all
One lady on another forum just wrote about Las Vegas:

I just got back from a five-day visit to Las Vegas, and I haven't seen so many smokers in one place since the 1970s. Judging by my own vissual survey, the majority of people in the casino sections are smokers, sitting with their ashtrays at their elbows (and ashtrays are EVERYWHERE).

And apparently the liberal smoking policies are not hurting Las Vegas as a tourist destination, since huge new hotels are going up everywhere and the crowds are thick even on weekdays in late September.

In fact, on Friday and Saturday night, the huge (more than 2500 guest rooms) hotel where I stayed was sold out. There were lines even for breakfast at the hotel's restaurants (all of which permit smoking). In fact, the restaurants and hotels along the Strip no longer even offer unbelievably low-priced hotel rooms on weekends or incredibly low-priced meals anytime as an inducement to travelers, as they did some years ago when I visited. Our ordinary breakfasts of bacon, eggs, oj, toast and coffee at the hotel's coffee shop ran close to $10 apiece, and steaks at the hotel's steakhouse were $25 to $40 a la carte. And this was by no means one of the really expensive hotels! Las Vegas is booming, both with tourists, and with new residents moving in at the rate of more than 6000 a MONTH. Guess all the tobacco smoke hasn't hurt LV one bit.

162 posted on 09/25/2002 1:22:25 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
I didn't know that Canadian Socialism was so directly equivalent to Republicanism, if indeed that is your politics. These comments probably seem contentious to you, so I would appreciate some indication of what distinguishes your views on this issue from those of the social-engineering leftists.

First, you are confused. Socialism favors OWNERSHIP by the community. Regulations are entirely consistent with good old capitalism. If fact, regulations are required as they enhance the structure of capitalism and make commerce more consistent and profitable.

163 posted on 09/25/2002 1:22:58 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
"When you fight fire with fire, all you get is a bigger blaze".

He didn't have the right to violate that person just because he was smoking a cigarette. If anyone grabbed at me, I, too, would have the notion of striking back. Must have been some wimp to let this person do this and get away with it.

164 posted on 09/25/2002 1:24:22 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
...regulations are required as they enhance the structure of capitalism and make commerce more consistent and profitable...

Paging Mister Smith, Mister Adam Smith, please pick up a white courtesy telephone.

165 posted on 09/25/2002 1:25:02 PM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
"Socialism favors OWNERSHIP by the community."

Wheras your favored plan is usually styled 'corporatism', although the plain-spoken might prefer to call it Fascism, in honor of its most famous incarnation.

Or maybe 'neo-capitalism'...yeah, that's it; no one will suspect a thing!
166 posted on 09/25/2002 1:36:33 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
We are the government

Please remember you said that when the envir-nuts hit your state, and suddenly your SUV is the "auto of Satan" in their eyes, and you start having to pay extra for choosing to own one.

167 posted on 09/25/2002 1:50:06 PM PDT by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
Paging Mister Smith, Mister Adam Smith, please pick up a white courtesy telephone.

Logic error! In AS days, there were no pagers, no phones, no manufacturing as we know it. Steam engines were almost unknown.

168 posted on 09/25/2002 1:51:59 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Bella_Bru
Please remember you said that when the envir-nuts hit your state, and suddenly your SUV is the "auto of Satan" in their eyes, and you start having to pay extra for choosing to own one.

Logic error! You have NO right to a SUV. Right now, SUV's have an economic advantage over cars. That is why we see so many of them rather than vans and station wagons. Station wagons were popular years ago and not that much different from SUV's of today. Vans are much more convenient for most families than SUV's but do not have this economic advantage. The "fight" is to bring equality to those regulations which have given SUV's an unfair advantage.

169 posted on 09/25/2002 1:56:41 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
Maybe I was making a little joke, and I would agree when you say there was no manufacturing "as we know it" since the assembly line was a century away. But there was capitalism.
170 posted on 09/25/2002 1:57:13 PM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Wheras your favored plan is usually styled 'corporatism', although the plain-spoken might prefer to call it Fascism, in honor of its most famous incarnation.

You pulled the above logic out of thin air; or maybe someplace where the sun doesn't shine. You tried to infer that I was touting socialism but I outed you on that one. Now you are trying for fascism. Give me a break. OTOH, give yourself a break and do some research.

171 posted on 09/25/2002 2:00:44 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
It is more than an annoyance.

To the larger portion of the general public it is no more than an annoyance.
If you want to nitpick, which is what you have been doing with almost everyone that has replied to you, we can do that.
Again, should we legislate an annoyance because a small minority is affected?

172 posted on 09/25/2002 2:02:40 PM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
Are you sure you are on the right website? Maybe not. Most Republicans want LESS government regulation, not more. If you are interested in more, DU might be a better choice for you.
173 posted on 09/25/2002 2:05:42 PM PDT by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
Oh, and out here, the "fight" is from the enviro- whackos who say that SUVs are bad for the air (i.e. Bad for you), so they need to make them less desirable for people to own by jacking up the taxes. If this is your idea of conservative, you are wrong.
174 posted on 09/25/2002 2:07:19 PM PDT by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Bella_Bru
If you are interested in more, DU might be a better choice for you.

I think your right. This is getting tiring.

175 posted on 09/25/2002 2:07:59 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
Maybe I was making a little joke, and I would agree when you say there was no manufacturing "as we know it" since the assembly line was a century away. But there was capitalism.

And I was making a play on your little joke to show that AS's writings were influenced by the environment he was in. If one lives in an oppressive environment, one perceives regulation as evil. If one lives in an open society and feels that he is part of that society and government, then he perceives the rules as benefiting society and his ability to partake in commerce. For example, we might perceive that the regulation to drive on the right side of the road should be left up to the individual if he feels that his enterprise capability would be enhanced. I would hate to meet such a situation going 70 mph on the freeway!

176 posted on 09/25/2002 2:08:53 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
You have NO right to a SUV.

With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats? I guess we have no right to own a smoking restaurant, either?

The "fight" is to bring equality to those regulations which have given SUV's an unfair advantage.

While I would agree that federal regulations that treat automobiles and light trucks differently should be changed, we would probably differ on what change to make.

Station wagons were popular years ago and not that much different from SUV's of today. Vans are much more convenient for most families than SUV's but do not have this economic advantage.

Vans are considered light trucks and so they are roughly equivalent to the SUV in terms of mileage requirements and other regulations. Therefore, I would not say that the difference in fuel milage requirements and safety features alone explains the popularity of the sport utility vehicle. SUVs are more popular than vans not because or in spite of Congress but rather because they offer features people want which vans do not, such as more automobile-like handling.

177 posted on 09/25/2002 2:09:49 PM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Bella_Bru
Are you sure you are on the right website? Maybe not. Most Republicans want LESS government regulation, not more. If you are interested in more, DU might be a better choice for you.

Typical liberal strategy. When you can't fight, you start to slander the messenger! This discussion is about the RIGHT of government to regulate. Do you believe that government has NO right to regulate?

178 posted on 09/25/2002 2:11:59 PM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
For example, we might perceive that the regulation to drive on the right side of the road should be left up to the individual if he feels that his enterprise capability would be enhanced.

How did we get from the right of business owners to conduct their business as they see fit, to a total repudiation of traffic law? I think we're getting into apple and orange territory.

179 posted on 09/25/2002 2:14:51 PM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
This discussion is about the RIGHT of government to regulate. Do you believe that government has NO right to regulate?

The government does not have rights. People have rights. Governments are granted the authority to do a limited number of legitimate things by the people.

180 posted on 09/25/2002 2:17:14 PM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 301-309 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson