For most nonsmoking asthmatics, the question of whether to support the smoking ban for St. Paul would be a no-brainer. On the contrary, I, a nonsmoker with a long history of asthma, strongly oppose this infringement on the rights of business owners.
Restaurants and bars are not public places, but privately owned establishments that we as customers are invited to visit. The government should not interfere with a business owner's right to make decisions regarding his or her private property. If I as a nonsmoker wish to visit a bar, I should merely go to one that has chosen to be a smoke-free establishment, not force an owner who supports smoking in his or her facility to accommodate my needs.
It would be the same to say that I can trek over to my friend Lindsey's house and demand that she and her friends abstain from their habit just because I am on the premises. I am not their parent. They are adults and they pay the bills. Therefore, they should be able to do whatever they please regardless of my opinion that their smoking is a "risk to my health."
Likewise, business owners are not children needing parental supervision. Owners do not need the consensus of a committee to make wise business decisions. Customers will vote with their feet.
If nonsmoking bars gain more business than smoking bars, then owners of smoking establishments will make the necessary changes to compete. It is the natural selection of the business world; establishments that cannot fulfill customer needs will ultimately close down.
According to a nationwide Gallup pole in August of 2003, only 23% of Americans think that there should be a ban on smoking in bars. Right now, owners who choose to allow smoking on their property are merely catering to the public interest. Those that are forced to oblige to the government's restrictions will suffer, and understandably so.
It is too early to know the particular affects of the smoking ban in Minneapolis and Bloomington. However, according to an economic impact study done by the New York Night Life Association, New York City is seeing a 30 percent decline in business among 76 percent of its bars and nightclubs since the ban was enacted in March of 2003.
Even though St. Paul’s mayor, Randy Kelly, has vetoed the ban, the committee still managed to enact a ban for bars and restaurants that draw less than 50 percent of their sales from liquor. Looking at the statistics of New York City, bars here in the Twin Cities might soon be suffering the same fate. After all, what bar will be able to obtain 50 percent or more of their sales from liquor when a good majority of their customers who are smokers will no longer be visiting?
I've been a server for three years at an establishment that is all nonsmoking with the exception of the bar area. We are a "family oriented” restaurant that doesn't stay open past 11 p.m. on weekends. Surprisingly, on many occasions I have witnessed people walk in, realize that we do not have a smoking section and promptly walk out. I couldn't imagine what the ban would do for late night bars in Twin Cities.
Because of government infringement on basic property rights, St. Paul and Minneapolis may face a loss in jobs and small business bankruptcy. Moreover, the next time I go to a bar I may have a smaller selection to choose from because the government has chosen to regulate what businesses can do with a legal substance.
I understand the good intentions of the interest groups campaigning for a better public health. However, I think our local neighborhoods can regulate public health without government involvement. For, I believe that if we give the government an inch they will take a yard. What is next? A law against Big Macs because they could promote obesity, another national public health risk?
I, a nonsmoking asthmatic waitress, conclude with a quote from 19th century American statesman, Daniel Webster: "Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was to guard the people against the danger of good intentions."
Comments
Post new comment