Replies

I would assume that a business in the middle of a state where there was a state wide ban would not lose smoking customers because they have no where else to go while at the same time they would have lower staffing costs, more efficient table turnovers and lower equipment and supplies costs.

A business on the border of a ban would lose customers to the competing restaurant accross the border.

a business in the middle of a state where there was a state wide ban would not lose smoking customers because they have no where else to go

An incorrect assumption. There are some who would simply not go out at all. The art of home cooking could make a comeback.
What about the smaller states where it's not more than an hour to anywhere outside the state?

"while at the same time they would have lower staffing costs" "lower equipment and supplies costs."

Well, wouldn't THAT be nice.
There go jobs, both directly and indirectly, simply from the government interfering where it shouldn't.
IMO, the government should be trying to get businesses to make MORE jobs, not less. But of course the demoncRATS wouldn't mind. That would just put more people on the welfare rolls.