Source: The Montana Tavern Times, Jan., 2005, published monthly by Continental Communications, 125 W. Granite St., Suite 102, Butte, MT 59701. By Cole Boehler,
ABL Leader Publisher The public policy battles over tobacco use range over such wide philosophical, political and scientific territories that it is difficult to focus on just one thrust. But let us attempt it, nevertheless.
Foes of tobacco use in any building accessible to the public tend to shy away from the business issues. Why? Because their arguments in this sphere are so full of holes they won't hold a drop of water.
Our economics 100-level classes taught us that what primarily influences business decisions are the effects of those decisions on the business' finances. Yes, we are referring to the "P"-word: profits.
If that is true (and it most certainly is), we must ask why it is that tavern owners so vigorously defend their prerogatives in setting business policy when it comes to smoking issues.
The fact is, they resist these prohibitionist policies because they are bad for business; in fact, very bad for business.
These business owners are not champions of harming themselves, their workers or their patrons. Far from it and to the contrary.
They are instead in favor of protecting their investments and equity; they are in favor of keeping their staff employed; they are in favor of patrons having a hospitable experience while in their establishment, staying longer, spending more; they are in favor of paying their mortgages, their taxes, their staffs, their private investors, providing for their families, educating their kids--that kind of thing.
They are in favor of staying in business and, yes, making that essential P_____.
Obviously and certainly, if their businesses and livelihoods are threatened, you can expect owners to resist the threat.
But smoking ban proponents will flat out lie. They will tell the public, government officials and business owners that a smoking ban is, in fact, good for business; that patrons who had stayed away because smoking was allowed would flock to the now smoke-free business.
If this were in fact true, would tavern owners resist these policies? No. If this were in fact true, no one would have to force or ban or prohibit or outlaw anything. The business owners would adopt these policies en masse if it was "good for business."
So, let's once and for all put that notion to rest: smoking bans are not good for the tavern business.
We have seen the effects first-hand when our own state's capital city enacted a total smoke ban. We know these owners and we know them to not be liars. They told us business declined at precipitous rates. We heard the fear in their voices when they discussed layoffs and pending meetings with their bankers. We saw the tears in their eyes, and they are not good actors.
We talked to their workers, who were looking for different or second jobs; workers who were wondering how to provide the essentials to their children, fix the car, get a cavity taken care of; workers who wondered how so called "do-gooders" could be so callous when it came to the workers' and their families' economic welfare and well being.
We saw the tax collection figures that dropped 15 percent in one quarter and again 16 percent the following; this when the figures were up practically everywhere else in the state. That business was down was indisputable. That businesses and incomes and lives were at stake was also beyond question.
So, please, can we just take that one argument off the table now?