Cincinnati Post Editorial: Second-hand Smoke [04/11-5]

Excerpts from: Second-hand smoke

Cincinnati Post [04/11/05]


The question of whether to regulate exposure to second-hand smoke has proven to be a contentious one for local governments all across the country.

It's even more so in a region such as Greater Cincinnati, where restaurants, bars and other entertainment venues in three states compete for customers.

The Cincinnati Board of Health has long required restaurants to offer no-smoking areas. But because it doesn't carry the full force of law, the health department edict is widely regarded as unenforceable. And in restaurants that lack proper air handling equipment or physical barriers, the no-smoking zones are a bad joke.

In recent months public health advocates have mounted a campaign to convince Cincinnati City Council to enact an ordinance banning smoking in most indoor public places, including entertainment venues. But Cincinnati Mayor Charlie Luken and others have warned that a ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and the like would drive business to Northern Kentucky, where regulation of exposure to smoke is less stringent. (Lexington's metro government has instituted a smoking ban, and Louisville's metro government is debating whether to follow suit, but in Kentucky's northern counties the only smoking bans have been voluntary on the part of businesses.)

Against this backdrop comes a proposal from Cincinnati City Council member David Crowley and the city's hospitality industry. They're backing a municipal ordinance that would essentially require restaurants to segregate smokers and non-smokers, but exempt bars, bowling alleys and bingo halls from the requirement.

The best that can be said about the proposal is that it's better than nothing. Crowley (whose family owns a pub in Mount Adams) calls it "Cincinnati's first citywide proposal to ban smoking in public places.'' But it would really do little more than codify the existing rules, and it doesn't ban smoking so much as protect it in certain areas.

We appreciate the tension between the property rights, public health protection and the workings of a free market where customers vote with their feet. And it bears noting that a growing number of entertainment venues in Greater Cincinnati are going smoke-free and are enjoying a robust business.

Local governments, on a regional basis, should do all they can to encourage this trend. It's not good enough to sit back and hope the non-smokers win. Sooner than later, governments - not just in Cincinnati, but throughout Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana - must take stronger steps to protect the public health of patrons and workers in public entertainment venues.

The ordinance that Crowley proposes would be a step forward if it included an enforcement provision which ensures that designated non-smoking areas do, in fact, protect occupants from exposure to second-hand smoke. (That means, for example, that inspectors check for compliance - and that they have the authority to force restaurant owners to physically separate smokers or install appropriate air-handling equipment.) And there is merit in requiring restaurants and other entertainment venues to explicitly spell out, to patrons and employees alike, their policies regarding smoking.

But we see these as only first steps, and rather timid ones at that.

This information is presented as a public service by:

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
2013 H Street NW / Washington, DC 20006 / (202) 659-4310
A national nonprofit, scientific and educational organization founded in 1967.
All donations are fully tax deductible.

Material on this page may be freely reproduced, distributed, and circulated
with attribution given to Action on Smoking and Health.

Dedicated to Mr. and Mrs. Warren Wells