First of all, I’m quite in favor of the smoking ban in Illinois. I have enjoyed two weeks of smoke-free bowling, we’ve visited at least two bar/restaurant type businesses in the last two weeks (one for the first time ever) and enjoyed a smoke-free meal, and overall, are happy with the ban.
Not everyone likes the ban (to be expected) and there are indeed some businesses around Central Illinois who claim to be suffering – frankly, I’m not buying it yet…I think it’s too early to tell.
However, border towns, the same folks who were affected by the huge spike in cigarette prices a few years back, are feeling the pinch. In East Dubuque, IL, just over the border from Dubuque, IA and less than five miles from Wisconsin on it’s north, a bar owner says the first two weeks of January have seen business off 20-25%. He says prior to January 1st, most of his customers were from Iowa or Wisconsin, and now they’re apparently staying home.
The bar owner spoke with the Telegraph-Herald. I was unable to find the story on their website, but it was the above-the-fold headline on Saturday and is probably available somewhere on the site, I’m just too lazy and I have the printed copy right here in front of me.
I hope this guy hangs in there, because it’s just a matter of time before the same laws apply in those two border states, and then we’ll see the real test of this bar owner’s business. Ironically, accordingly to the story, the East Dubuque bar owners were bracing for another change in the law that they feared even more: hours of operation. For the record, there are an inordinate number of bars in East Dubuque, IL for the population, mostly because they can stay open so much later than their Iowa and Wisconsin counterparts. Starting in May of 2010, the will see their current 3:30 am closing time rolled back to 3am, and in May, 2013, they will have to close at 2am, the same time Dubuque bars close across the river. By that time, there will undoubtedly be some kind of anti-smoking legislation in Iowa.
BTW, another bar owner in E. Dubuque is quoted in the story as saying, “if we were dead set in the middle of Illinois where people had no other choice, they would just have to deal with it.” I’m sure there will be more bars on the border who have to deal with the changed business climate of this new law, and sadly that is one of the unfortunate side-effects of the legislation. Those too close to other states will have to be creative to keep the customers coming in.
14 responses so far ↓
1
jadedgirl
// Jan 15, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Ok…I’m trying to be gentle here so I dont get anyone riled up or pissed off at me.
I think the smoking ban is totally bogus.
Yes…I SHOULD just quit smoking cause its bad for me.
Yes…I agree that people who do not smoke should not have to breathe second hand smoke.
But…alchohol is just as bad for a person…in different ways.
So why don’t we just try prohibition over again…it worked so well before…. ::sigh::
I can’t remember who wrote it earlier this week but I read a comment somehwere that said something to the extent of a persons buiness being public property…when really it isn’t. It’s PRIVATELY owned…therefore…the owner and ONLY the owner should be able to designate if he doesn’t want smoking in his establishment. The public doesn’t have to visit if they dont want to.
Nicotene is a drug.
Alchohol is a drug.
So if they say we can’t smoke in a bar…then I guess the only fair thing to do would be to make drinking illegal in bars as well.
I just think the whole thing is taking another personal right away…period.
How long will it be until they make smoking illegal in your own home????
There are bigger fish to fry in this state…period.
2
Knight in Dragonland
// Jan 15, 2008 at 10:16 pm
What bigger fish is there to fry? Smoking is the #1 cause of preventable death in this country, Jaded. It kills at least five times as many people as alcohol every year, and alcohol may actually have some health benefits in moderation. Also, people can drink without inflicting their habit on everyone else around them. There’s no comparison.
3
jadedgirl
// Jan 16, 2008 at 8:24 am
Ok…I understand what you are saying, Knight. BUT…I know way too many people who have died, or almost died through alchohol abuse…or drunk driving…
Yes…I know that cigarette smoking is bad for me, and for everyone who does it, but it is still a legal drug. Just like alchohol. So…my point would be, why would they say it’s ok to ban one thing and not another in “public” places. And like I also said…businesses are privately owned. Why should the government be able to say what or what not that property owner can do in his place of business? Just because the public goes to that particular place does not make it truly public.
And as far as the bigger fish…there are much more important issues in this state to be tackling other than a person who lights up when hes having a drink. i.e…Education, poverty, taxes…
4
Joe Ciera
// Jan 16, 2008 at 11:07 am
Why can’t people understand that a) it’s not government’s responsibility to intrude on my personal freedoms and force me to do what it thinks is good/not good for me, 2) it’s not government’s job to tell private businesses what they can do on their own property. Of course, people like KiD believe it’s their right to go to a private business on private property (despite providing services to anyone who wants to walk in) and have everything their way. I can’t speak for KiD, or anyone else, but I judge a restaraunt and other services by a lot of criteria…including whether it’s smokey or not. If it stinks, that’s just a reason not to go there. And if you like to bowl in a non-smoking environment, open a non-smoking bowling joint, or encourage your local private proprietor to do so. But of course, no one would because there wouldn’t be any money to made. Of course, that’s all moot now…and the bowling alley’s will do fine, I’m sure…because I’d assume that smoking bowlers like to bowl more than smoke. And all will be fine: until government starts governing your thermostat at home because your AC is too much, or putting governors on your engine to slow your car down, or rationing food with trans-fat. As though taxing our income wasn’t bad enough, now you’re thrilled to see private industry coerced by their own government.
5
Diane
// Jan 16, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Joe, it is my right to be able to go to a restaurant or bowling alley, or any public venue for that matter, and not be exposed to second-hand smoke. It is a proven fact that second-hand smoke KILLS! I won’t get drunk if the person in the next booth is drinking, however, I may get lung cancer if I breath their second hand smoke. If a person is not going to be a responsible individual, and care about the effects of that their smoking has on others, then, in this case, I am glad the government has stepped up to protect me.
6
Cory
// Jan 16, 2008 at 12:37 pm
It is also the business owner’s RIGHT to say that smoking will be allowed in their PRIVATE building on their PRIVATE property. Business owners have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Nonsmokers have the right to refuse to patronize a business for any reason (unless the business operates their phones, cable, water, electricity, garbage, or sewage). You don’t like the smoke, stay home. I’m sick of moonbats legislating personal choice, especially for business owners. These are the same people that scream about their rights being infringed when they can’t lay on a sidewalk nude to protest fur coats.
Why don’t we just go full-bore communist and turn all of the private businesses over to the government? We could have a People’s Department of Taverns and Restaurants. We could go to the People’s Cooler, or the People’s Elbo Room, and the air would be OH SO clean! Of course, the alcohol and food would be rationed, and you would have to wait in a line for several days for a beer (not a stretch at some places), but the air! It’s so glorious and sparkling clean!
7
jadedgirl
// Jan 16, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Yep…
8
Knight in Dragonland
// Jan 17, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Nope …
Sorry Cory … this is not a “moonbat” issue. Smokers have been violating the individual liberties of non-smokers for decades by inflicting their habits on others. This is a PUBLIC HEALTH issue. Any venue that’s open to the public also must take on responsibilities to the public. Health Departments inspect restaurants and bars to make sure basic standards of sanitation are met to protect the public health. The air that we breathe is even more vital than the food and beverage that we consume … so why is the air held to a lesser standard? The Smoke Free Illinois Act simply corrects that imbalance.
The only battiness of any sort that I see here is someone comparing this perfectly reasonable public health measure to communism.
9
Knight in Dragonland
// Jan 17, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Besides, Peorians were allowed to vote on a referendum regarding this issue and overwhelmingly supported it. Are you against democracy, Cory?
The tyranny of the minority is at an end, smokers. Deal with it.
10
mortonmalaise
// Jan 21, 2008 at 9:41 am
I don’t live in Peoria, therefore, I had no vote in that referendum.
11
jadedgirl
// Jan 22, 2008 at 8:17 am
Neither do I…
I would have gladly voted on it myself if I lived in Peoria.
Tyranny of the minority? And I thought I was dramatic…
Come on Knight…I love your writing, I love reading your blog. But this is one time we will just have to agree to dissagree.
The world of George Orwell’s book is coming to life with every law passed these days.
12
Knight in Dragonland
// Jan 27, 2008 at 7:51 pm
George Orwell??? Are you friggin’ kidding me??? OMG the hyperbole.
13
Knight in Dragonland
// Jan 27, 2008 at 8:10 pm
And yes … tyranny of the minority. Until this law was passed, non-smokers (the majority) had to pick and choose what establishments they attended, while smokers could go wherever they liked. The minority was dictating the choices of the majority. Sure, smokers might not be able to smoke in certain establishments … but they weren’t forced to avoid certain places because the air was toxic from smokers who can’t keep their dirty habit to themselves. I had to limit my choices because I actually value my lungs and those of my children.
Guess what? After this law, you can STILL go eat or drink wherever you want. The only difference … now I can, too. That’s hardly communist or Orwellian. Big Brother isn’t coming in the middle of the night to drag smokers away for re-education.
14
jadedgirl
// Jan 28, 2008 at 3:01 pm
LOL…I am waiting for that to happen next.
Leave a Comment