Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: About the automated news feeds
Next Post: STOP COALITION MISLEADS. EXELON PROFITS. ILLINOIS PAYS.
Posted in:
* The Sun-Times editorialized against lifting or modifying the state’s smoking ban for Illinois casinos…
The poor national economy gets most of the blame, but the commission also concluded that Illinois’ revenue losses were greater than those of neighboring states — in part because of the smoking ban.
All the same, we can’t see granting an exception to the smoking ban for casinos when all other establishments that also could make a hardship case, such as bars and restaurants, must abide by it.
And having a designated smoking area inside a casino still would endanger employees exposed to secondhand smoke. Even a high-quality ventilation system can’t filter out all of the harmful chemicals from cigarette smoke.
State lawmakers who have resisted efforts to ease the ban in the past may be swayed this time by the state’s increasingly dire fiscal situation.
No one wants to stem the flow of badly needed revenue.
But a smoking ban in public places that begins granting exceptions is, soon enough, no smoking ban at all.
* The Question: Should the smoking ban be lifted or altered for the state’s casinos? Explain.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:08 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: About the automated news feeds
Next Post: STOP COALITION MISLEADS. EXELON PROFITS. ILLINOIS PAYS.
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
No exemptions, and I don’t say that as a nonsmoker. I just think it’s the kind of law where exemptions shouldn’t be granted.
That said, I’m all for semi-enclosed heated outdoor areas for people to smoke. If part of the reason for a ban is to help people live healthier lives, forcing them to stand in freezing temps while lighting up is counterproductive, and may actually raise health care costs for an already-vulnerable population.
Comment by Thoughts... Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:20 pm
The Illinois casinos are cheap and lazy; the casinos that are doing better do so because they have better payouts and nicer accommodations. Smoking is just the excuse. Yes, many gamblers smoke. But gamblers go to a casino first and most to gamble, and they go where they believe they have better chances to win. Secondarily, they go to places that look good. Smoking would rate down around the same as the abundance of free shrimp cocktails at the buffet.
Comment by Gregor Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:23 pm
No. If you allow smoking at casinos, you will shorten each gamblers life and thereby shorten each gamblers revenue stream to the house. Allowing smoking at casinos would therfore be counterproductive to the intent to create more revenue.
Comment by one of the 35 Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:28 pm
Absolutely not. No way should casinos get even more special treatment to boost their already near monopoly profits.
Why not just bar the exits while we’re at it.
Comment by just sayin' Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:29 pm
No, the smoking ban should be left in place, without modification. In general, casinos such as Elgin, Joliet and Aurora do not directly compete with out of state gaming due to their location and distance from casinos that do allow smoking. One only needs to go to an Iowa or Wisconsin casino to appreciate the smoking ban in Illinois.More importantly, if the smoking ban is lifted for casinos, then it should be lifted for racetracks, OTB facilities and other industries that allege to have been harmed by the ban. The commissions conclusions that revenue is down in part by the smoking ban is largely anecdotal and without strong evidence.
Comment by WRMNpolitics Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:35 pm
Smoking has largely become a class issue (as in social class) which explains why a smoking ban disproportionately affects casinos i.e. the same people who can’t figure out that the odds are against them.
Comment by wishbone Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:40 pm
No. The Illinois casino owners all got rich , largely from insider deals to get the licenses. They offer rigged games to their customers, and even use those unethical continuous-shuffling machines so their customers can’t keep track of the cards at blackjack. Now they want to kill their customers and employees with deadly nicotine smoke! Bars and restaurants, which were hurt by the casino invasion, have adjusted to the smoke-free-Illinois law, and Illinois casinos could adjust if they just became more customer-friendly, like their competitors in Missouri and Iowa!
Comment by formerpolitico Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:40 pm
Have the smokers pay more for a special room - they will.
Comment by MJ Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 12:50 pm
No. What else are you going to give the River Boats? They have killed horse racing in the state by not allowing slot at the tracks. To heck with them.
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:01 pm
I like MJ’s idea. I think that would work. It could also be employee free–you want a drink, you will have to snuff it out and walk out of the smokers’ room to get it.
Comment by Cheryl44 Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:01 pm
If you want the gamblers in your casinos then exempt them from the smoking ban. Or keep it in place and lose money. I quit going to Illinois casinos the day the smoking ban was put in place. I now travel across state lines - a lot.
Comment by Belle Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:02 pm
Absolutely not! What about the workers in the casinos, forced to breathe secondhand smoke all day long as the gamblers chain smoke at the gaming tables and slot machines. It is ridiculous to claim that any air purifying system can clean air that is as smoke filled as the air in a casino where smoking is permitted. Isn’t that one of the main reasons that we passed the smoking ban in the first place, to protect the captive employees? Why would casino workers not be entitled to the same protections as other workers? And MJ, the special rooms don’t do anything to address the employee issue….
Comment by Oh, please.... Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:07 pm
I think in general, this is America and people are free to work in a smoking environment or a non-smoking environment. I believe the smoking filters work very well; as a non-smoker who visited the boat after they installed the filters — I barely noticed the smoke. In fact, the car exhaust when I went outside to leave was more dangerous than the smoke inside — why don’t we ban cars too? They pollute a lot more than a few smokers.
If you continue to regulate morality rather than true policy; then we are going down a slippery slope with irresponsible behavior. Now I have government telling me what my kids should eat, etc.
I was against the smoking ban in the first place; I was in favor of a tax break for those establishments that went non-smoking on their own accord.
I say that Illinois needs to be business friendly; and should lift the ban.
Comment by Paul S. Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:18 pm
Wishbone hit the nail on the head. However the truth is the smoking ban is killing Illinois casinos. The drop in AGR isn’t just te economy, the smoking ban plays a big role. But at the same time, there aren’t a lot of Rhodes Scholars hanging out the craps tables.
Comment by Blackjack Sam Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:19 pm
Either you ban smoking in public places or you don’t. It’s as simple as that - no exemptions. The casinos may have seen a drop in total revenue but I haven’t seen them close their doors because they are going broke!
Comment by Fed-Up Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:21 pm
Considering that we’re at a point where Indiana may soon break down (http://www.nwitimes.com/news/state-and-regional/indiana/article_11601177-2b53-5f7a-a048-f5ada90da22b.html) and adopt a smoking ban, I can’t help but think that Illinois would wind up looking ridiculous for now deciding to create exemptions to our state’s law. For once, we seem to have led in something. Why retreat now?
-30-
Comment by Gregory Tejeda Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:21 pm
I see, as a matter of fundamental fairness, if they’re gonna ban smoking almost everywhere, they should also lift the cigarette tax in its entirety.
Comment by John Bambenek Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:26 pm
Why is this still an issue? A ban is a ban and the best efforts of the tobacco industry hiding under the skirts of the gambling industry is nothing but a stalking horse to do the same thing for bars, etc. Let’s move on to the next red herring.
Comment by D.P. Gumby Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:33 pm
Meh. I’m a smoker, and I dearly miss being able to belly up to the bar and light up, but I could care less.
The Illinois casinos are lousy carpet joints. No entertainment, no glitz, no good food, no nothing. What a missed opportunity.
They’re not destination drivers bringing in tourists, they just draw off the locals. As someone mentioned before, the biggest winners were those who got the original, cheap, private licenses, then took them public and cashed in. Mr. Cellini, your table is ready.
If you can’t make money in a rigged game, your business model is messed up.
Michael Corleone: “Your casino loses money.”
Moe Green: “What do you think, Mike, I’m skimming?”
Michael Corleone: “No, you’re unlucky.”
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:39 pm
Yes, you should allow smoking. However Illinois should charge for a “smoking license”. It would raise money and make people pay a premium for their habit.
Comment by Jacketpotato Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 1:49 pm
A “smoking license” so people have to pay for their habit? Ok, as long as you pass a players-with-yourself license too. Might as well make money off that habit and I bet we could not only pay off our deficit, but probably fund the pensions in no time.
/snark
Comment by John Bambenek Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 2:04 pm
No exemptions. I want gambling money in the Metro East to continue to flow towards the Lumiere in downtown St. Louis. That place is alright
Comment by ANON Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 2:22 pm
“Have the smokers pay more for a special room - they will. ”
Great idea. Can we do that with bars and restaurants, too?
Comment by Leroy Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 2:28 pm
No, the state need not be in the business of exploiting people’s weaknesses. As an occasional smoker I understand the desire - but my advice is to suck it up and understand there is a greater hurt to people by smoking in a closed environment, then a smoke free setting.
Doug Dobmeyer
Comment by Doug Dobmeyer Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 3:14 pm
I say lift it, but I’m for lifting the smoking ban period and I’m a non-smoker. I think if something like smoking is legal then there should be places where you can perform that legal behavior.
Comment by The Captain Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 3:14 pm
Hmmmm I decided to visit my first casino… After the smoking ban was implemented. I won’t go back if the ban is lifted. I do not smoke… But I believe the health and safety of folks should be a priority…. Over Money.
Comment by Wonder..... Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 3:15 pm
Yes, the ban should be lifted There are few things as depressing as seeing a room of people playing slots. If we allow them to smoke, they will die faster. Ergo, fewer people in that depressing picture.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 3:19 pm
I never liked the smoking ban as a law. I have enjoyed the cleaner environment that has freed me from the 25 year addiction I had. I always felt that the market should decide whether an establishment of it’s own free will wants to not allow smoking.
If the casinos feel this is a way they can raise revenue, given how dependent some communities are on casino revenue, it is worth a look. They say they can filter the air better than before. Ultimately people will decide if this is that much of an issue in deciding what casino they go to. There are people who go to Indiana just to smoke, and there is no shortage of people who enjoy the cleaner environment of the Illinois Casinos.
Comment by Richard Afflis Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 3:48 pm
The only reason to lift the ban exclusiely for casinos is greed, and it’s a poor one at that. Bars and smaller businesses have also lost money on the cigarette ban, the state doesn’t seem to care about them.
Comment by Wensicia Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 4:35 pm
There are three casinos in the Quad Cities. The two Iowa casinos allow smoking. Jumer’s Casino in Rock Island does not. Jumer’s has outperformed both Iowa casinos since the smoking ban. It’s not the smoke; it’s the product. Jumer’s is beautiful, always spotless, food is awesome and the employees friendly. I’m a smoker, and I hope that if Illinois reverses the casino smoking ban, Jumer’s does NOT allow smoking.
Comment by 3 beers to Springfield Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 4:55 pm
Why not market Illinois Casino’s as a destination for non smoking gamblers?
I know there are a lot of them, and they may not be all that vocal. The bars seem to have adjusted quite well. This movement strikes me as a drive to attract the would be video poker players from the non smoking bars to the full liquor smoking allowed casinos
For the record I do smoke, and do gamble, and would like to see smoking at casinos if the 2nd hand smoke never bothered any other person - but it does and smokers should deal with it.
Comment by mongoose Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 5:27 pm
People need to understand that many ot the Casinos depend on out of State customers more than local ones. Harrahs Metropolis for example gets its biggest money, and number of customers from the Nashville area. This is due in most part to Metropolis being the closest to Nashville, and the Clarksville area. Closer, but not by very much. Smokers from those areas have now found that they can travel just a small bit further to Tunica, and can smoke. A new casino being built in Southeast Mo. is in the middle of a no-smoking law debate, and the competition with Metropolis is heavy on their minds, and knowing they can pull smoking customers to Cape. Indiana allows smoking, as does Mo. Unless you plan to close the borders, you will continue to loose people, and revenue to other states. People are flowing across the state lines in droves due to the over regulation in this state. It is a simple choice: Do you want to face the reality of what is going on, and stop the hemoraging of money to other states, or do you want to keep over regulating and wondering why it isnt working?
One last thing, I really dont remember any business that allowed smoking going out on the street and forcing people into their business. I dont know of any business that goes out, knocks on someones door, drags them out of their house and forces them to work in their business. No casino, bar, restaraunt, or anywhere else that has been affected by this forced non-smokers in their doors.
Comment by So IL M Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 6:05 pm
Personally, I feel it should be left up to the business owner if their establishment; casino, bar, etc. allows smoking. America is all about choice! What if they started on alcohol? Hmm. Alcohol can wipe out a whole family….a cig does not. Allow it then expand it to include bars and private clubs!
Comment by Smoker #1 Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 6:08 pm
I never fail to be amused by the fact that so many smokers apparently want to abolish all work place safety rules and leave it up to the establishment. Apparently, all that smoke is having an impact on the reasoning skills.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 6:18 pm
And can we all work on the following this year?
The word is spelled “LOSE.” Not “LOOSE.”
“Lose” means you have something and then you no longer have it.
“Loose” means that the oppposite of “snug.”
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 6:22 pm
One floor for smokers, another floor for non-smokers. It is a dumb, anti-choice law.
Comment by Wumpus Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 10:11 pm
No. Joe Camel’s nose under the tent.
Comment by Gregor Monday, Jan 3, 11 @ 10:17 pm
The whole smoking ban is an infringement on the rights of people and businesses and based on very loose and not-at-all-disinterested “science.” We shouldn’t have it at all. If we have to have it, as it seems we must, the best argument for an exception is casinos because the ban clearly reduces state revenues by a consequential amount. If you don’t care about the state revenuies, either, then no exceptions.
Comment by Marty Tuesday, Jan 4, 11 @ 3:50 am