Thank you for not smoking

I am sorry that you have such a horrible reaction to smoke.

My guess is that if your kid was allergic to peanuts, that you would crusade against peanuts being used anywhere that your child might go? You know - making sure they are removed from bars, restaurants, ice cream shops, etc.

And then.... because of a nasty reaction to pet dander, making sure that all pets when in public areas, even those on leashes, are kept at least 10 feet from any pedestrian, bicyclist, or vehicle with open window. (20 feet when the pets are upwind)

Like you, I don't get along with smoke. I even had lots of practice with my parents smoking until I was in my teens, and a sister and her husband still smoking. But I would not REQUIRE bars, restaurants, etc. from barring smoking. If a facility wants my business, they will have clear non-smoking areas along with proper circulation to keep the smoke from creeping (it can be done). Same with my employer - give me a smoke-free area to work, or find another employee. Fortunately, my employer provides a convenient smoking area for the few smokers - and the smokers are courteous enough to not light up around non-smokers .

So... good for you. As shown by the last paragraph in your blog entry, you can be as big of a d**khead as the morons who were discourteous to you.

I thought there were some exemptions like you could still smoke where no food was being served? Is that not in the bill that was passed?

I'm not a big fan of this legislation. I am a smoker, but only when I have a cocktail. I can't stand smoking when I eat, after I eat, etc. But a nice, smoky bar has a certain appeal to some people.

I do have to agree with Betsy in some ways. The tables have turned. Used to if you wanted to get a non-smoking hotel room you had to make a special request. Now many hotels are going totally non-smoking. So the gloating is fully justified.

That said, and pardon my Colbertism, I think the market has already spoken here. More and more businesses are going non-smoking, and because of that I would stay home instead of going there for a drink.

I like options. Have a non-smoking place or a fully smoking place. Let the (gulp) market decide.

But support the smoking ban. In fact, the only real period of smoke-free adult life for me was while I was living in DC after the district passed a smoking ban similar to the one that just got through the legislature. I wouldn't say it was the sole reason for my quitting smoking, but it certainly played a part.

...of food and beverage sales receipts in columbia, missouri, before and after a smoking ban was enacted, suggests that "food-only" establishments are not noticibly impacted by a ban.

"adult-only" establishments, however (bars and casinos, in this study), see substantial impact; this study suggesting that an 11% decline in sales was experienced by those businesses in that town during the study period.

the adjusted data suggests an overall loss of 3 1/2 to 4% in total sales for all establishments.

an analysis of employment offered these conclusions:

"Our primary finding is that smoking bans reduce employment in bars. On the other hand, they have a neutral effect or perhaps mildly positive effect on restaurant employment. As the prevalence of smokers in a region increases, negative effects of legislation become more pronounced, especially for bars. In areas with fewer smokers, positive restaurant effects are detected.

This suggests that the presence of outdoor seating allows an option for smokers while providing non-smokers with an inside option."

so there you go.

The final bill prohibits smoking in restaurants and bars generally:
"Part 1C. Smoking Prohibited in Restaurants and Bars.
"§ 130A-496. Smoking prohibited in restaurants and bars.
(a) Notwithstanding Article 64 of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes, smoking is prohibited in all enclosed areas of restaurants and bars, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section.
(b) Smoking may be permitted in the following places:
(1) A designated smoking guest room in a lodging establishment. No greater
than twenty percent (20%) of a lodging establishment's guest rooms may be
designated smoking guest rooms.
(2) A cigar bar if smoke from the cigar bar does not migrate into an enclosed
area where smoking is prohibited pursuant to this Article. A cigar bar that
begins operation after July 1, 2009, may only allow smoking if it is located
in a freestanding structure occupied solely by the cigar bar and smoke from
the cigar bar does not migrate into an enclosed area where smoking is
prohibited pursuant to this Article. To qualify under this subsection, the
cigar bar must satisfactorily report on a quarterly basis to the Department, on
a form prescribed by the Department, the revenue generated from the sale of
alcoholic beverages and cigars as a percentage of quarterly gross revenue.
The Department shall determine whether any additional documentation is
required of the cigar bar to authenticate or verify revenue data submitted by
the cigar bar. This subdivision shall not apply to any business that is
established for the purpose of avoiding compliance with this Article.
(3) A private club."

Here's the definition of a "private club":
"Private club". – A country club or an organization that maintains selective
members, is operated by the membership, does not provide food or lodging
for pay to anyone who is not a member or a member's guest, and is either
incorporated as a nonprofit corporation in accordance with Chapter 55A of
the General Statutes or is exempt from federal income tax under the Internal
Revenue Code as defined in G.S. 105-130.2(1). For the purposes of this
Article, private club includes country club."

That's fairly restrictive. Most bars are not going to be able to turn into "private clubs" to escape the ban.

As for the merits of the ban, I agree that it's first and foremost a public health issue. Secondhand smoke exposure is the point. The victims of secondhand exposure are not just the customers--they're the employees as well. Many food service employees, especially in this economic climate, just don't have the practical option of refusing to work in a smoky environment. They deserve to have their health protected too.

The attempts to pose passing a ban as protecting health at the cost of jobs fails to take into account the net effects. Given the level playing field (no smoking in any of the bars and restaurants), those establishments will generate more net business from people who wouldn't have come out because of the smoke, to offset those who'll stay and drink at home because they can't smoke inside the bars.

The comparison between secondhand smoke (which permeates the indoor environment where smoking is allowed) and peanuts (which I have never once seen leap on their own into a person's mouth) is so specious it's hilarious. Same goes for transfats, etc.

By the way, here's the link to read the bill in full.
http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2009/Bills/House/PDF/H2v9.pdf

First of all, as an athlete and somewhat of a health nut, I think that the legislation is good thing, especially in restaurants. There is absolutely no need to be smoking in a place where there are a lot of young children (and adults for that matter) who do not need or want to be exposed to all the adverse health effects of secondhand smoke.

With that said, I really do not see any problems with smoking being permitted in bars, especially ones that only allow adults over the age of 21. People are at these places mostly to socialize and relax, and if a cigar or cigarette can help them do so, I think they should be allowed to. I do agree that a smoking ban will hurt these types of businesses, however, I have seen businesses find ways to become a "private club" for whatever reason that do not really affect the way they conduct business.

It is really not that hard to seem like a private club. As long as you have a few so-called "members" you can technically call everyone else a guest. I've seen open clubs turn into private clubs overnight for a variety of reasons by forcing everyone who comes in on one particular night to be given a membership card after writing down their names and paying the normal cover, and then, letting everyone else who ever comes sign a "guest list." After that, they have a few hundred members and a guest list that includes everyone else, which to my knowledge pretty much fits the description of a "private club." This loophole seems to be nothing more than a hassle for the clubs and bars that are smart enough to figure it out, but the ones who don't will definitely suffer financially.