Study shows smoking ban has improved the health of hospitably employees

Sunday will mark the one year anniversary of the day Michigan’s popular workplace smoking ban went into effect, and a study just released by Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH) shows the law did what it was supposed to do: protect bar and restaurant employees from deadly secondhand smoke.

The added bonus is that the smoking ban has not hurt business in bars and restaurants, but it has improved it. These facts, however, will not stop critics - especially the ban's biggest critic, the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) - from pushing the lie that it is harming business. The bottom line is that the law is a public health issue, and the MDCH air monitoring proves that.

The MDCH study measured the cotinine levels of 40 bar and restaurant employees working in the same bars four to six weeks before the ban went into effect on May 1, 2010 and then and 6- 10 weeks after the smoke-free law, and the results showed the level of secondhand smoke exposure decreased significantly among bar employees after the law went into effect.

"The law was passed to protect Michigan residents, employees, and visitors from the dangerous health effects secondhand smoke and our studies show that the law is doing its job," said Dr. Greg Holzman, State Chief Medical Executive. "The Surgeon General's Report released in December warned that even short-term exposure to secondhand smoke can have serious health implications for those who suffer from heart disease and respiratory conditions."

Researchers measured the levels of cotinine and NNAL - chemicals found in urine that indicates a person's level of exposure to secondhand smoke – in the 40 employees in 13 counties, and each participant also completed a respiratory and general health questionnaire. The results found cotinine levels went from an average of 35.92 nanograms per milliliters before the law to zero after. Bar employees also reported improvement in reported general health status and respiratory health, including wheezing, allergy symptoms and coughing after the law took effect.

Air monitoring studies were also conducted before and after the smoke-free law went into effect in the state's six major regions including the Southeast, West, Upper Peninsula, Northern Lower Peninsula, Thumb, and Central, and results of the air monitoring studies demonstrate a significant decrease in exposure to secondhand smoke in restaurants of all participating areas to date.

In December the Department of Treasury found that overall sales tax collections in restaurants and bars were up 2.84 percent over last year, verifying that there has never been a credible study that shows a drop in business from a smoking ban. But that has not stopped pro-smoking groups like the MLBA from pushing the lie that it has, and the MLBA has a history of pushing debunked studies to try and prove that lie.

In fact, Lance Binoniemi, executive director of the MLBA, continues to push that lie, and he was quoted in the Detroit Free Press claiming that “the state is losing $1.5 million a week” without an ounce of proof. He is still pushing the effort to weaken the law to amend the law to permit so-called “smoking rooms” and smoking patios. In fact, there are three bills pending to weaken the law.

Instead of weakening the law we should strengthen the law, and it’s time smoking was banned in the casinos.

Indoor smoking will soon be dead in all 50 states

The dirty dozen has shrank to the smoky seven, but a new report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says all 50 states could have smoke-free worksites, restaurants and bars by 2020 if current trends continue.

As Michigan approaches the first anniversary of May 1 when the popular workplace smoking ban went into effect, only Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia and Wyoming have no restrictions in place.

The CDC projection is based on the rate at which states have been passing laws to protect people from second-hand smoke over the past decade. Over that time period, 25 states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws banning smoking in all three of those venues.

According to the report, secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure causes lung cancer and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases in nonsmoking adults and children, resulting in an estimated 46,000 heart disease deaths and 3,400 lung cancer deaths among U.S. nonsmoking adults each year.

In December of last year, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Regina M. Benjamin issued the strongest report ever on smoking and secondhand smoke: “A Report of the Surgeon General: How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease - The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease.” The 30th Surgeon General Report on smoking since the landmark 1964 Surgeon General's report that first linked smoking to lung cancer confirmed what many other peer revived studies have shown; that as little as one cigarette a day, or even just inhaling smoke from someone else's cigarette, could be enough to cause a heart attack and even death.

The CDC report confirms that, saying “Smoke-free laws substantially improve indoor air quality, reduce SHS exposure and related health problems among nonsmokers, help smokers quit, change social norms regarding the acceptability of smoking, and reduce heart attack and asthma hospitalizations.”

The smoking ban in Michigan has been a success, despite the hysterical cries of pro-smoking groups like the Michigan Restaurant Association and the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association that it would harm business, and the fact is it has done the opposite. It’s now time to take the next step and ban smoking in casinos.

The problem is that bill has not yet been introduced. It’s really sad that the only bills currently pending in the Michigan Legislature addressing smoking just carve out more exceptions and attempts to weaken the law.

Overall sales tax collections in restaurants and bars are up after smoking ban

Workplace smoking bans have never hurt business, and a report released Monday from the state Department of Treasury proves that, and it found that overall sales tax collections in restaurants and bars were up 2.84 percent over last year.

The workplace smoking ban that includes bars and restaurants went into effect on May 1, and despite the down economy in the country, tax receipts are up. This reflects the results from the 38 other states that have bans, and there has never been a credible study that shows a drop in business from a smoking ban. There has never been a reliable, peer-reviewed study or results that can show how less than 25 percent of the population who still smoke can have such an effect on business.

The simple fact is that this report is evidence that concerns about an alleged adverse economic impact from the popular smoking ban were exaggerated.

Now, critics of the ban that have used debunked studies in the past, like the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association, and the MLBA has seized on the fact that, according to the Free Press, "sales tax collections also declined in neighborhood taverns, by 1.57 percent in 2010. “

In an economy that is just coming out of a recession with one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, a 1.57 percent decrease in a small segment of the bar and restaurant industry isn’t bad. It certainly can’t, but will, be blamed on the smoking ban. However, the simple fact is that business is up in the bar and restaurant industry.

Even if bars and restaurants did not show an increase in sales because of the smoking ban, the U.S. Surgeon General report issued earlier this month that found that as little as one cigarette a day, or even just inhaling smoke from someone else's cigarette, could be enough to cause a heart attack and even death is more than enough to justify the smoking ban.

Pro-smokers hope to kill popular smoking ban in new Legislative session

The most credit you can give this shrill of the tobacco industry is that they are persistent.

Lance Binoniemi, the lobbyist for the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) , is hoping that a new Republican Governor and Republican control of the Michigan House and Senate can win exceptions of the popular, bipartisan workplace smoking ban passed last December, according to a story in subscription only Gongwer.

That seems unlikely because a new study by the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH) found more than 70 percent of Michigan residents were in support of the smokefree air law, but bar owners who think a drop in business because of the Bush recession is the fault of the ban refuse to quit.

One Democratic State Representative tried to stealthy get a bill through that would basically kill the ban, but supporters of the ban found out and flooded the lawmakers on the committee considering the bill with calls and letters. The MLBA has used debunked studies in the past that say smoking bans hurt business and cost jobs, but that is simply not true.

House Bill 4377 passed overwhelmingly and with bipartisan support, but the MLBA is hoping the new leadership that voted against the bill last December will be friendly to amending the bill next session that begins on Jan. 4. Not likely.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, was one of the 13 Senators voting no against 24 yes votes. It passed overwhelmingly in the House with a 75-30 vote, but incoming Speaker of the House, Rep. James Bolger, R-Marshall, voted with the losers.

It is very unlikely something that passed with 70 percent of the vote will be revisited, and the fact is as time goes on the bans already in place in 37 other states become more popular and accepted.

In fact, Gongwer cited the example of South Dakota as proof. The state has had a ban since 2002, but in 2009 they extended the ban to bars, restaurants and casinos. Pro-smokers fought back and placed it on the ballot on Nov. 2. Voters there overwhelmingly approved the full ban, 64 percent to 36 percent.

Just in case, contact Richardville and Bolger to let them know there is a reason the ban is so popular.

Senator Randy Richardville
P.O. Box 30036
Lansing, MI 48909-7536
Phone: (517) 373-3543
Fax: (517) 373-0927
Email: senrichardville@senate.michigan.gov


Rep. James Bolger
P.O. Box 30014
Lansing, MI 48933
Phone: (517) 373-1787
Toll Free: 877-BOLGER-1
JamesBolger@house.mi.gov

However, those phone numbers and are only good through the end of the year.

Majority of restaurants doing fine with smoking ban

According a survey trumpeted and conducted by the less than honest Michigan Restaurant Association (MRA), 42.4 percent of its members say their business has decreased since the workplace smoking ban went into effect on May 1.

The MRA and the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) have in the past floated debunked studies to make a point, so I would take this with a grain of salt. But what has been missed is that a majority, 57.4 percent, have shown an increase in sales or no change in sales since the ban went into effect three months ago.

The survey found 14.8 percent reported an increase in sales since the ban went into effect while 43 percent of restaurant operators reported no change in sales since the ban was implemented. With only 20.4 percent of the Michigan population, it’s hard to impossible to see how they can have much of an effect on any business, other than the tobacco industry.

The real bonus is that the public and employees have been protected from deadly secondhand smoke and this has always been a public health issue. Even though the media buried the lead on this one, they have been doing an excellent job in reporting how poplar the ban is with 75 percent of Michigan residents supporting it and how well bars and restaurant are doing.

Emily Palsrok, spokeswoman for Campaign for Smokefree Air, summed it up nicely.

"Michigan residents have been overwhelming supportive and pleased with the new smoke-free air law,” she said. “We stand firmly behind our research and data that smoke-free air is good for business and good for our health."

Smoking ban has increased business in Michigan bars and restaurants

It’s been less than three weeks since the workplace smoking ban that includes Michigan’s bars and restaurants went into effect on May 1, but dire predictions of people staying away and bars and restaurants going out of business are proving to be untrue, as expected.

Lobbyists against the ban, like the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) and the Michigan Restaurant Association (MRA), predicted disaster, despite results and studies that showed business was not hurt. It appears that the predictions of a drop in business were not only false, but many bars and restaurants are actually reporting an increase in business.

The Advisor and Source Newspaper serving Macomb County is reporting bars are seeing an increase in business.

Bobby Walker, the night manager at Snooker’s in Utica, said he’s had former smoking customers return to his bar, after disappearing years ago. Often when a smoking customer quits cigarettes, they tend to avoid places of temptation. Since the ban, a few faces have returned.
“It was nice to see,” Walker said. “Our business hasn’t changed and I don’t smoke so it doesn’t affect me. The biggest change is the air doesn’t smell. The smokers, so far, don’t seem to mind much going outside. But it hasn’t been too cold out.”

As predicted, smoke and smoking has kept more people home than the ban has kept smokers home. Since only 22 percent of Michigan residents smoke, they have little effect on the economy. As a former smoker, I can verify Mr. Walker’s statement that when I quit smoking, I stayed away from bars because of the temptation to smoke when I drank, and the amount I drank did not change; my smoking input doubled, at least.

Now you know why the tobacco industry was financing the MRA and the MLBA to carry on the fight against the smoking ban for them.

At Gator Jake’s in Sterling Heights, General Manager Mike Brooks said he noticed an immediate increase in patronage at the restaurant that’s been in business for more than a decade.
“The very next day we had more families coming in,” Brooks said. “When you have kids, you might avoid places if you think it’s going to be smoky. People were making (positive) comments instantly.”

Now that it has been proven, again, that a smoking ban does not hurt business, it’s time to go after the Detroit casinos that have an exception. Watch for that push to begin next month.

Special interest group still trying to kill workplace smoking ban with lies

In less than five months, Michigan’s bars and restaurants will be safe and smoke free after the workplace smoking bill that was signed into law last month, and people all over the state are looking forward to it with baited breath.

Not the opponents. Even though a decade-long fight that has overwhelming public support was won, they are not giving up. They have formed a Facebook group called “Amend the Michigan Smoking Ban.” So far, it has a whopping 446 members. That’s in sharp contrast to a group I am a member of called, “Michigan going smoke-free May 1st, 2010.” It has 61,766 members.

Good luck amending that law. I would like to see the lawmaker willing to introduce a bill to overturn something so popular.

Actually, I agree that we should amend the law, and hopefully that will happen soon. Proponents of clean air and public health will go after the exception for casinos.

This pro-smoking group has been floating an email trying to gain support. The first line says it all for me.

“We are not in any way funded, supported, endorsed or affiliated with the MLBA, nor the tobacco industry, any special interest, political group and/or party, whatsoever.”

That means this is just another attempt by the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) to prop up the tobacco industry. This group formed a web site last year to highlight debunked studies that say smoking bans hurt business and cost jobs. That is simply not true, and the results from the 37 other states and numerous foreign countries with smoking bans prove they are lying. No one has explained to me how less than 25 percent of the population can have than much of an effect on the economy.

Here’s another lie, “Michiganders were not asked if we supported this law, nor do we believe the State has the right to dictate to private business owners.”

Poll after poll said the opposite, and many people wanted to start petitions to put in on the ballot because the Legislature refused to act. In fact, it was only constant pressure from constituents that forced lawmakers to do the right thing. The government not only has the right to dictate to private business owners, they have a constitutional obligation to protect the public health.

But they save the best for last, and they just outright lie. Listen to these outrageous false claims:

“Studies show that for every customer gained by smoking bans, five are lost.” Show me that study. Study after study says the opposite, and the latest was from the University of Michigan Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy last May that said it will not hurt business.

“Drunk driving increases, on average, by 13% in areas where smoking bans are introduced. As patrons stay at home longer and consume alcohol, and/or are forced to drive longer distances to seek places where they can smoke while drinking.”

Where the hell did they come up with this BS? Do they think the 22 percent who still smoke only drink to get drunk? Where are they going to drive to seek places where they can smoke while drinking? There are only 12 states that do no ban smoking in bars and retirements. Indiana is the only state in the Midwest, and they are close to doing the right thing.

Opponents of workplace smoking ban rolling out debunked studies again

With news that the workplace smoking ban, that includes bars and restaurants, may move in the Michigan Legislature this week, opponents of the ban are ramping up efforts to put out their false information to kill what 38 other state already have.

The operator’s of Detroit’s three casinos planted a story in the Detroit News on Friday that claims a ban will take away nearly a third of their revenues -- “and tax payments to Detroit and the state” unless they are exempted by the ban. They go on to claim that the “city and state could lose up to $93.1 million a year in taxes.” As proof they offer - well, absolutely nothing.

They claim that. “The effects of a smoking ban on casinos already have been felt across the Detroit River at Caesars Windsor, where business suffered because of a three-year-old ban on smoking, casino officials have said.” But in the only part of the article that even attempts to balance the article, it admits that, “The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. hasn't released direct figures showing the full impact of the ban.” So, they are basing their claim on nothing.

In an unbiased study released by the Indiana University Center for Health Policy in March called “The Economic Impact of Smoke-free Policies on Business and Health” concluded that a smoking ban shows no negative revenue impact on sales and gaming receipts.

Study after study has also shown that smoking bans do not have a negative effect on business in bars and restaurants, and the last one came from another unbiased source, the University of Michigan. In May, the University of Michigan Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy released a study that concluded the state's bars and restaurants would not be hurt by a proposed workplace smoking ban. The study said “in economic terms, most high-quality research finds that smoking bans have not had negative effects on the revenues of restaurants and bars.”

We also have the results from the 38 other states with a ban as well as the numerous other countries with a ban.

What we do know is that the air in Detroit casinos have indoor pollution levels that are at least eight times higher than outdoor air, and that community smoking bans have an immediate and dramatic effect on reducing heart attacks.

A press conference with business groups opposed to the workplace smoking ban is set for 9 a.m. Tuesday at the Rrossman Group in Lansing, and I can bet two of those groups will be the Michigan Restaurant Association (MRA) and the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) that has been using debunked studies to make the false claim that a smoking ban will hurt business and cost jobs.

U of M study concludes a workplace smoking ban will not hurt business

Another study was just released that puts to rest the myth that a workplace smoking ban, including bars and restaurants, will result in a drop in business and a loss of jobs.

The University of Michigan Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy released a study on Thursday that concluded the state's bars and restaurants would not be hurt by a proposed workplace smoking ban. The study said “in economic terms, most high-quality research finds that smoking bans have not had negative effects on the revenues of restaurants and bars.”

The most opposition to the workplace smoking ban has come from industry groups like the Michigan Restaurant Association (MRA) and the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) who make the false claim that a ban will cost jobs to their members.

The MLBA has been very vocal about their opposition, citing debunked studies to make their claim. But the U of M study concluded that “many of the studies finding negative effects were either conducted by organizations with links to the tobacco industry or funded by the tobacco industry or industry groups supported by the tobacco industry.”

But most surprising was that Andy Deloney, vice president of public affairs for the Michigan Restaurant Association, was quoted in subscription only Gongwer as saying agreed there would be increases in statewide restaurant sales after a smoking ban was implemented. He has been one of the most vocal critics of the ban, testifying in committees and widely quoted in news reports.

"Almost every single year in every single state total statewide restaurant sales go up," he was quoted as saying.

Other studies have also concluded the ban will not hurt business, such as the Indiana University Center for Health Policy, Grand Valley State University and Public Sector Consultants Inc. report “Smokefree workplaces: The Impact of House Bill 4163 on the Restaurant and Bar Industry in Michigan.”

The effects on casinos are a little more mixed, and part of that problem is because there is little data available. Delaware is one of the few states that have data available. The report concluded “two of the three studies found that the Delaware smoking ban negatively affected revenue at Delaware’s three racinos.”

“On the other hand, a study analyzing the impact of smoke-free ordinances in Massachusetts on gambling sponsored by charitable organizations, such as bingo, found that such ordinances did not affect gambling revenue.”

The fact is no one can explain how just 22 percent of the population who still smoke can have such an economic effect. Most gamblers who are bothered by smoke go across the Detroit River to the Windsor casinos where smoking is banned.

The health effects of deadly secondhand smoke are undisputed, and the study concluded “Secondhand smoke causes premature death and disease in children and in adults who do not smoke. The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.”

The Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP), housed at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, conducts and supports applied policy research designed to inform state, local, and urban policy issues. Through integrated research, teaching, and outreach involving academic researchers, students, policymakers and practitioners, CLOSUP seeks to foster understanding of today’s state and local policy problems, and to find effective solutions to those problems.

Is the MLBA director selling booze, smokes or BS?

LANSING -- Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) executive director Lance Binoniemi appears to be selling cigarettes instead of booze, based on his press release Wednesday after the House Regulatory Reform Committee reported out House Bill 4377 that bans smoking in some workplaces, including bars and restaurants.

“Lawmakers just took the first step toward handing pink slips to nearly 7,500 Michigan workers,” he said “Last time I checked, picking and choosing what businesses will fail in Michigan is not in our lawmakers’ job description.”

No, but what is in their job description is protecting the public health, and that’s what this issue is about. Secondhand smoke kills and causes countless health problems, and that’s the primary mover behind this: protecting the health of the 80 percent of the population who do not smoke. In fact, Article IV Section 51 of the Michigan Constitution says about the duties of the Legislature, “The public health and general welfare of the people of the state are herby declared to be matters of primary public concern.”

The MLBA has been using debunked studies to make the false claim that bars and restaurants will lose business when the smoking is enacted. That defies logic and the facts. Michigan is one of only 13 states without a smoking ban, and just this week the Tobacco Road states of North Carolina and Virginia enacted a smoking ban.

Binoniemi makes the false claim that in addition to costing jobs, the bill will reduce tobacco tax revenue by $27.5 million on a full-year basis. So once again, Mr. Binoniemi, are you selling booze or tobacco? I’m still waiting for the answer to how 20 percent of the population can have such a huge impact on the economy?

There is no creditable study that says there will be a job loss with a smoking ban.
The money saved by the state will more than make up for the loss of sales lost by s drop in the sale of cigarettes. Smoking is literally sucking the air out of Michigan’s economy. Smoking directly results in $2.65 billion in annual health care costs in Michigan, of which $881 million is born by the state Medicaid program. In fact, each household spends $597 annually in state and federal taxes due to smoking-caused government expenditures. Smoke-free worksites would eliminate these extra health care costs and would do so with virtually no implementation costs.

“It’s outrageous that our lawmakers turned their backs on Michigan’s small businesses at a time when they need it the most,” Binoniemi said. “House Bill 4377 is a job killer, plain and simple. I just hope other members of the House will be willing to protect the hundreds of businesses and thousands of Michigan workers that were forgotten today.”

No, Mr. Binoniemi, secondhand smoke is a killer and you re turning your back on employees who have to make a choice between their health and a paycheck.

Bishop again blocks popular public health measure

The House Regulatory Reform Committee is set to vote out a workplace smoking ban on Wednesday that exempts so-called cigar bars, tobacco specialty retail stores and casinos, but subscription only Gongwer is reporting that once again Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop is blocking any realistic chance of getting any ban in place by refusing to compromise.

According to Gongwer, the only version that would be entertained by Bishop is a ban with no exceptions. Last session the Senate approved a version with no exceptions and the House approved a version with exceptions. The two versions then went to the conference committee, whose sole function is to work out a compromise to present to their respective bodies. But Bishop managed to sabotage something the majority of people want by assigning two people to the conference committee who don’t want the smoking ban and refused to compromise.

Michigan is one of only 13 states with no smoking ban.

If Bishop wants a bill with no exceptions, then act on it and get it to a conference committee that will actually try and work out a compromise. Senate Bill 114 is in the committee he chairs. Why not hold a committee hearing and pass it to the floor, or just discharge it to the floor?

The Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) is continuing to push the false claim that a workplace smoking ban will hurt business, and they are asking for an “exemption for restaurants and bars that serve alcohol because of the projected loss of business from smokers who would stop patronizing the establishments.”

"In addition to killing jobs, this bill will reduce the state's revenue at a time when there's a $2 billion deficit projected for 2010," said Lance Binoniemi, MLBA executive director, in a press release, according to Gongwer.

There is no study that supports that claim, and, in fact, every study from every state and entire foreign countries that have already enacted a ban shows the exact opposite.

I would like Mr. Binoniemi to explain how less than the 25 percent of people who still smoke can have such an effect on the business of a bar and restaurant.

It seems that the MLBA is more interested in selling cigarettes than anything else.

The House Regulatory Reform Committee will take up the ban at noon Wednesday in Room 326 in the House Office Building, 124. N. Capitol. The meeting is open to the public.

Misinformation against workplace smoking ban goes online

The Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) is taking its misinformation and false claim that a workplace smoking ban in Michigan will cost jobs online with a new website.

They are continuing to make the false claim that “750 small businesses and 7,500 Michigan jobs are at serious risk.” They are also making the claim that that has been the case in the other states that have enacted the ban. Then they offer the usual cherry-picked studies to prove it.

One study the MLBA continues to use to prove its false is an Oct. 1, 2004 study of a smoking ban in Dallas, Texas that has been debunked. The debunked study claimed that restaurants saw a 9 to 50 percent drop in sales. But when researchers from the Texas Department of State Health Services reviewed the study, they concluded that the methodology was flawed, the data used from the state was either misunderstood or misapplied, and the conclusions were simply wrong.

The fact is there have been absolutely no credible studies that show a negative economic impact resulting from a state-wide or country-wide smoking ban, and commons sense supports that. Not only that, this is a public health issue, and there is no dispute about the deadly effects of secondhand smoke.

Opponents of the workplace smoking ban steadfastly refuse to tell us how less than 25 percent of the people who still smoke can have such a huge economic effect.

I was a smoker for 20 years, so I may be able to understand this. If bar A is smoke free and bar B allows smoking, and if I’m a smoker I will go bar B. But if they are both smoke free, I will still go to a bar.

I’m sure the folks at the MLBA are good people, and truly believe their cause, but the evidence is simply not on their side, leading them to fudge the evidence. It’s telling that if you look on their list of links on their main web site, you will find a link to Philip Morris/Altria.

It seems every time the ban gets closer to becoming a reality we get this misinformation from the MLBA. The House Regulatory Reform Committee will take up the ban at noon Wednesday in Room 326 in the House Office Building, 124. N. Capitol. The meeting is open to the public, and we simply need to get our supporters out to counter this misinformation.

Michigan Licensed Beverage Association puts out false information on workplace smoking ban

On the day before a committee vote on the workplace smoking ban, the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) is dropping off in lawmaker’s offices a packet of cherry-picked studies that try and claim a smoking ban threatens sales and jobs in Michigan’s’ bars and restaurants.

Most of the studies are old and debunked, and they are conducted by groups like the Empire State Restaurant and Tavern Association. However, an independent study last April by Lansing-based Public Sector Consultants Inc. called “Smoke-Free Workplaces: The Impact of House Bill 4163 on the Restaurant and Bar Industry in Michigan” concludes that “The Michigan restaurant and bar industry will experience no net economic impact from House Bill 4163.”

No one from the tobacco industry, the Michigan Restaurant Association or the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association can explain how less than 23 percent of the population who still smoke can have such a huge effect on business. How is that even possible?

The MLBA claim an Oct. 1, 2004 study of a smoking ban in Dallas, Texas claimed restaurants saw a 9 to 50 percent drop in sales. But when researchers from the Texas Department of State Health Services reviewed the study, they concluded that the methodology was flawed, the data used from the state was either misunderstood or misapplied, and the conclusions were simply wrong.

The Michigan study included a detailed review of 43 published research articles concerning the effects of smoke-free workplace legislation on bars, restaurants, tourism and gaming; seven studies of the public health consequences of environmental tobacco smoke or secondhand smoke, and numerous data related to ETS from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Michigan study examined two Texas studies that relied on 13 years of sales data and found no negative effects of smoke-free ordinances on restaurants. That trumps a one year Dallas study.

In four separate studies of New York City showed an increase in employment and sales tax receipts from these establishments. But the study by the Empire State Restaurant and Tavern Association claims $71.5 million in lost sales. Wow, those smokers have a lot – I mean a lot – of disposable income.

The fact is there have been absolutely no credible studies that show a negative economic impact resulting from a state-wide or country-wide smoking ban, and the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association knows it.

The reality is that secondhand smoke kills. In fact, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen containing 4,000 chemicals, including 43 cancer-causing chemicals. Thousands of people die each year from secondhand smoke.

The absolute bottom line is this is a public health issue, and the false claims of lost sales do not trump the public health aspect.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates the cost savings of eliminating secondhand smoke in the workplace to be between $35 and $66 billion a year. Given the state of Michigan’s economy we really can’t afford not to go smoke-free.

The House Regulatory Reform Committee will meet at noon tomorrow - Wednesday, April 1 - in room 326 of the House Office Building in Lansing. According to the agenda, the committee plans to vote out House Bill 4377 introduced by Representative Lee Gonzales, D-Flint Township. This bill exempts casinos and so-called “cigar bars.”

While most people could live with a ban that has a few exceptions, including me, until people realize business will not be hurt by a ban and we get a total ban, the problem is the Senate will pass a bill with no exceptions, and we will get something like what occurred in December.