 |
Michigan Casinos Face Unnecessary Smoking Ban
DETROIT, MICHIGAN --
Debate continues over whether to enact a smoking ban in Michigan. State legislators worked into the night, trying to decide how to enact a ban and whether casinos should be excepted.
House members passed an anti-smoking bill last December, including provisions for allowing smoking to continue at casinos and cigar bars. Six months later, the state Senate approved its own version of the bill, which gave no exemptions to anyone.
Now both sides are fighting to reach a compromise. Meanwhile, state health officials are pushing for any bill to emerge before the legislative session ends.
Greg Holzman, the chief medical executive of the Michigan Department of Community Health says any ban is a good one, although he opposes excepting casinos. Holzman states, "To me, it's disconcerting because it's still putting people at risk who work in the casinos, but to protect the majority of Michigan's population... I'm not going to lose that."
Holzman offered some intriguing figures. He says eighty percent of the Michigan population is for the smoking ban. Where then are all the patrons who abandon bars, restaurants, and certainly casinos when bans are enacted? If such a one-sided section of the populace objected to smoking, entertainment managers would voluntarily make establishments non-smoking, as a means to draw clientele.
Holzman also asserts 2600 people die each year in Michigan from second-hand smoke. Is there medical evidence behind this? Have coroners filled out "second-hand smoke" as the cause of death? Or is the number simple conjecture, and "heart disease" the actual cause of death?
A woman's case is cited because she died from an asthma attack brought on (in theory) by second-hand smoke. That makes one death, not 2600.
Anti-smoking sites are rife with evidence from tainted studies about effects of second-hand smoke. Meanwhile, these same sites say there is no downturn in business at establishments nationwide when smoking was banned. This is simply a lie.
Atlantic City non-smokers gave anecdotal evidence that the few days their smoking ban was enforced did not hurt business. But the actual numbers, when objectively studied, revealed losses double the casinos' already steep decline during the non-smoking period.
The truth is, those who hate smoking will say anything to get their way. But there are plenty of smokers who will not frequent non-smoking establishments, and there is scant evidence that second-hand smoke is the danger it's presented as. Let the casinos decide what is best for business, and let the workers decide if they want to continue working there.
Previous USA Casino News Articles
Recent Comments
| Posted by C. Gatton on 12/04/2008 10:12:37 AM EST |
| You state that there are plenty of smokers who will not frequent non-smoking establishments. You make no mention of the fact that there are even more non-smokers who will not frequent smoking establishments. I am included in the latter group. You have no opportunity for our business. Personally, I go to Illinois when I wish to gamble. |
| Posted by Allan on 12/05/2008 04:59:33 AM EST |
While I see C. Gatton's point, my personal wish is that the free market would determine an even number of both smoking and non-smoking casinos, based on demand. There is NO logical reason that every last casino in this country should go completely smoke-free, as I'm a libertarian and Illinois resident who's seen the negative effects of the Illinois smoking ban on casinos, such as one casino in southern Illinois laying off 30 people, since the smoking ban started. Finally, the free market is already working to push casinos in some areas smoke-free, such as at least one Atlantic City casino choosing to go smoke-free on its own this year, and at least one Indian casino in the Nevada/California area already doing so.
I am a non-smoker who enjoys the ambiance of smoking-allowed casinos so much more than smoke-free casinos, and will NOT patronize another IL casino until Illinois lifts the ban for casinos. |
| Posted by Scott M Williams on 01/24/2009 09:13:07 PM EST |
| That's ok, Allan. Since IL enacted their ban, I've gone to their casinos exclusively, and I've made more casino trips from Indy because of it. C. Gatton is dead on with his points. |
| Posted by Ken123 on 07/29/2009 05:49:10 AM EST |
| Staton Glantz purported that once smoking is banned non-smokers will rush in to fill the void. Well as we have witnessed, this is not the case. Businesses effected by the bans drather to close than continue to lose revenue and ultimate bankruptcy. Just drive around your communities and see the numbers of use-to-be bars and restaurants that had built their clientele around smokers. Ask those waitresses and cooks that lost their jobs how the smoking ban worked out for them. |
| Posted by Cleveland Casino on 12/03/2009 09:04:35 AM EST |
| So, we are curious to know your opinion regarding the OHIO smoking laws and whether or not they will be enforced in OHIO's casinos? |
Post A Comment
|
 |
