Dwell on past or look to future?
When the subject of membership recruitment came up at the June 8 Montana Tavern Association board of directors meeting in Helena, it became frustratingly apparent that too many owners are simply not paying attention to the political environment in which they operate.
MTA members involved in recruiting reported too many prospects complained the "MTA lost smoking," with the implication that the organization is therefore ineffective.
Of course, that is ridiculous, and here's why.
 |
For those who haven't been paying attention, please pay attention now!
One more time: MTA had a bill that would outlaw indoor smoking tabled in committee in the 2005 session. That means it was dead. It was beaten. Got that?
MTA was then approached by a massive and well-heeled coalition of health associations including the Hospital Association, Nurses Association, Cancer Society, Lung Association, Heart Association and on and on who were intent on tipping over Marlboro Country as an example to the rest of the nation and states.
MTA was told point blank the coalition was ready to spend upwards of $3 million to qualify, then pass an initiative to outlaw indoor smoking ... right now.
The handwriting was on the wall. Everywhere else in the country where such initiatives had been run – and have been run since – they passed overwhelmingly, usually by about four to one, even where hospitality business coalitions had managed to raise enough money to wage a credible fight.
Even internationally, nowhere has a smoking ban been defeated, and where tavern exemptions have passed, they have turned out to be short lived.
The Montana Tavern Association, along with its business association allies, had been dealing with, and fighting, the issue for a decade. Every meeting was characterized by detailed and in-depth discussion.
Meanwhile, many owners chose not to join their associations, chose not to attend the meetings to hear the discussion, take part in it, be fully informed or chip in on the cost of the research that was conducted.
The MTA and its allies invested over $20,000 in private, scientifically valid public opinion polling research well prior to the 2005 session. The polling foretold the results that could be expected in Montana: 72 percent of the public would vote to outlaw indoor smoking. (That figure, we'd guess, would be substantially higher today,)
By spending several million dollars, there was a very thin chance public opinion could be changed. A solicitation went out requesting pledges to back such an effort. The response was dismal and far, far short of what would have been required. It was clear that businesses could not – or were not willing to – compete with the $millions that would pour in from the national coffers of the anti-smoking forces.
Two other guillotines hung over the heads of the hospitality business associations.
Had business gained an exemption for taverns, the antis would have immediately launched a court challenge under the Montana Constitution's guarantee to citizens of a "clean and healthful environment." That clause has been tested before and easily upheld. Considered legal analysis concluded business would very likely come out on the losing end of a bruising and expensive court fight.
The other critical factor was a likely class-action lawsuit seeking damages from business owners who "harmed employee health" by allowing smoking in the workplace. Again, considered legal opinions held that such lawsuits were very dangerous and would be massively expensive with dim prospects of winning. Or just imagine the slew of work comp claims.
So: an initiative was deemed a loser; a court challenge on constitutional grounds would not likely go our way either, and successfully litigating against a class action arguing for damages for injured workers was almost certainly a doomed proposition.
There was only one good option: hold the thing off as long as possible to allow businesses a chance to make some adjustments; to get ready for it. And that was done, gaining licensees an unprecedented four years to prepare. Nowhere else has business been allowed this kind of time frame. Credit MTA and its allied associations. And credit the antis who were interested in saving their $millions and avoiding protracted and costly litigation.
(Ironically, the antis, too, were criticized by their more extreme allies for "folding too easily;" for not forcing the issue to the mat right then.)
This was a tidal wave that has, and is still, rolling over every state in the Union, every nation of the world. It was clearly recognized as such. The tsunami – incredibly – was held back four years in Montana.
During those four years, some businesses went smoke free ahead of the deadline; others rode it out, but were prepared for it at the end. Still others did nothing.
There you have it. That's the history. It need not be re-stated here, or anywhere, again.
Has the smoking ban hurt? Sure it has, just as MTA told anyone who would listen, and just as all reasonable people understood it would.
It is so unfortunate that the ban implementation coincided with the worst economic recession to hit the nation, and now Montana. But that can't be helped, either.
Will the hospitality business recover? Certainly. There is no more resilient economic sector anywhere. The great majority of businesses are weathering this storm and some are actually reporting early improvements. There are plenty of signs the economy is now headed in the right direction with some relief in sight.
But is there more trouble ahead? Potentially, yes. Just look at the raft of DUI legislation being prepared (you have looked at it, right?).
Can it be dealt with? You bet.
However, those same folks who weren't paying attention in 1995 and 1999 and 2003 and 2007, are not paying attention now, either. They are not joining their associations and are not attending the meetings and are not hearing and participating in the discussions; they are not paying attention to the newspaper headlines and maybe not even their own industry trade publications. They are likely to get blown over by coming developments, just as they have by past ones.
And, yes, they'll complain that MTA "hasn't done anything for me."
They'll not appreciate that MTA has helped hold Montana's "control state" status together. They'll not understand that an intact license quota system is, first, good social policy and, second, has contributed to stable or increased license values.
They won't credit anyone with holding the line on gaming tax rates and excessive liquor taxes. They won't acknowledge – because they probably don't know – that over 100 bills affecting the beverage business were considered, drafted or introduced in the last legislative session, and that the vast majority of them were potentially harmful to business owners, and that not one – not one! – bill opposed by MTA was passed.
They won't even acknowledge the industry in Montana has just come off the best 20-year run in its history.
No, they'll be stuck in the past and in the dark, lamenting "the way things used to be." And they won't lift a finger or spend a dime to make any difference in their future. They'll sit around complaining about the smoking ban and MTA and then they'll complain about the new DUI laws.
Look, smoking is over; it's the past. Time to get beyond it and look to the future.
Time to stop complaining and instead start paying attention, reading the papers, joining associations, participating in the decision making and legislative process.
It's time to take personal responsibility for your industry, your business and yourself.