[Vision2020] Draft Ordinance Banning Smoking in Bars

Saundra Lund v2020 at ssl.fastmail.fm
Wed Jun 24 11:15:40 PDT 2009

Most striking to me was listening to the two council members become
positively drunk with power!  As suspected, they aren't happy with just
banning smoking in bars, they also want to ban smoking in private clubs to
provide a level playing field.  <snort>  Public events in public parks, and
public parks,  were mentioned, and Lambert actually said he'd like to see
smoking banned everywhere but in private homes.

Of course, their interest in sticking their busy noses into private clubs to
"level the playing field" makes the point no one on the that side of the
issue wants to admit:  that there are enough adults interested in engaging
in LAWFUL adult activities (smoking & drinking) that they fear passing their
ordinance *will* hurt local businesses.  I doubt, though, either of them
thought of that as their comments were stunningly uneducated and uninformed.

That concern also conflicts with Lambert's opinion (an opinion, BTW, that's
been proven wrong with studies time & again) that passing this ordinance
will *increase* business for bars.  One thing I guess we can count on from
them is inconsistency  :-)  Perhaps Lambert should have a chat with Pullman
bar owners to find out the reality rather than trying to convince others of
the validity of his wishful thinking.  It seems that in Pullman, as in other
locales where smoking bans in bars have been passed, those enticing promises
from non-smokers never quite materialize to increase the business lost by
excluding smokers.

Indeed, some studies identify bars and taverns as ***more than twice as
likely*** to suffer adverse revenue effects from smoking bans than other
venues.  Interesting, isn't it, that factoid hasn't been disclosed in the
current discussion?  It's one thing to have an anti-smoking agenda, but it's
a completely different thing to be dishonest about the realistic anticipated
effects on our local businesses, IMHO.  But, perhaps that's another part of
the agenda???  One person during the Admin Committee meeting mentioned how
well the ban has worked in Ireland -- I suspect the owners of the 400+
small-town pubs that went belly-up following the ban might dispute his

So.  What's next?  What other lawful activities that offend their
sensibilities will they want to legislate out of existence?

Let's see . . . obesity is either the #1 or #2 cause of premature death in
the US depending on what study you read.  Perhaps we should move next to
make it illegal to sell or serve high calorie or high fat foods to those who
are obese?

And, let's not forget that red meat consumption can cause/contribute to
heart disease as well as hunger in this nation & around the world.  Perhaps
we should restrict consumption to private homes as well -- think of the
health cost savings!

And, frankly, I think Lambert may be onto something, although not with
respect to smoking but rather to alcohol.  Due to the serious public safety
& health risks of excess alcohol consumption, let's restrict consumption to
private homes.

In any case, I find it incredibly disturbing that the Admin Committee is so
gung-ho about this -- increasing Big Government restrictions on the
hospitality industry.  One might safely interpret their interest as either
not trusting the market *or* wanting to force their social views on the rest
of us to the detriment of local small business owners.  But, I guess that
shouldn't be surprising because that's certainly not the first time we've
see this kind of thing from this particular council, is it?

The "second-hand smoke is bad for employees" red herring is particularly
offensive given that they don't give a rip about making ***meaningful***
changes (you know, inconveniences like living wages, health insurance, etc)
for all local workers.  When it comes to those significant issues, they are
consistently unwilling to put their money where their mouths are . . . but I
guess their interest in this smoking ban just goes to show that their
concerns about the financial implications of laws they want is limited to
only certain kinds of businesses -- they are quite willing jeopardize bar &
tavern owners and retail businesses whole bending over backwards to
accommodate other agendas.

I'm with you, Wayne -- even though I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm
definitely going to remember the punch-drunk power comments that have been
made thus far at the next election, and I'll continue to listen to the
discussion for more red flags about the scary interest of some in the
council to throw some of our local businesses & residents under the bus.

Oh, and to offer rebuttal, I certainly hope bar & tavern owners will take a
look at exactly where banishing smokers to more than 20 feet from the door
will put their customers.  While 20 feet may work very well for some
locations, I think it's going to be problematic for others.  I'd like to see
Lambert get off ***his*** "duff" to figure it out for all of us  :-)  I'd
certainly be happy to donate a stick of chalk or some temporary paint to see
him do the legwork  :-)

And, for the Corner Club, that 20 feet had better NOT include the parking
lot or alley . . . exiling law-abiding smokers to an area where they can --
literally -- be killed with no consequences is highly irresponsible.  In
Memory of Kristian Nelson.

Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
~ Edmund Burke

***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2009 through life plus
70 years, Saundra Lund.  Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside
the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of bear at moscow.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 4:47 PM
To: Tom Hansen
Cc: Moscow Vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Draft Ordinance Banning Smoking in Bars

Well Tom, it looks like John Weber (or I should say, uh, his opposition)
has a great slogan for his campaign as mayor: " Time Out, time out, time
out, we can't have a debate" !  He'll make a great mayor!


> Greetings Visionaires -
> As promised, here it is . . .
> The Administrative Commitee meeting of June 22, 2009 concerning a draft
> ordinance banning smoking in bars..
> http://www.MoscowCares.com/062209_Admin_PropOrdSmokeBan.htm
> For those of you that are simply too eager to know the outcome of this
> agenda item . . . no recommendation has been prepared by this committee.
> You (are you listening, Bear?) will be provided another opportunity to
> voice your pleasure (or lack thereof) concerning this proposed ordinance
> at the Administrative Committee's meeting on July 13, 2009.
> As mentioned earlier, count the utterings, mutterings, and mumbles of the
> word "uh" originating from John Weber, Administrative Committee Chair and
> candidate for Mayor of Moscow.
> Seeya round town, Moscow.
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> "The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
> and the Realist adjusts his sails."
> - Unknown
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================

 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list