Should Michigan clear the air with a smoking ban?

Posted by DominiqueKing | Filed under drinks, food, politics

Should Michigan enact a smoking ban in restaurants and bars?

This is a topic sure to generate heated debate in some quarters, or eminently civil conversation like the discussion on the topic I spotted in my Tweetstream the other day.

But with nearly 80 percent of the adult population in the country made up of non-smokers, you can’t help by wonder when smokers will finally be required to snuff out their smokes in Michigan restaurants and bars.

Royal Oak Photo Walk 1

The Royal Oak Brewery is the latest business to clear the air, going 100 percent non-smoking on November 27. The brewpub was nearly smoke-free since its 1995 opening, only allowing smoking in a small area near the bar, but polling their customers via email and Facebook revealed that the “overwhelming majority” preferred that the pub be entirely non-smoking.

I covered business for a small chain of South Oakland weekly newspapers a few years ago, and I remember receiving a guide to smoke-free restaurants for the several years I wrote a column that often included local restaurant news.

More after the break…


The Michigan Citizens for SmokeFree Air (MCSFA) guide was hardly more than a tri-fold pamphlet during those years. I would be surprised if there were more than a couple hundred listings in those old guides, and almost every one of those entries seemed to be fast-food type eateries.

If you wanted to enjoy a burger and beer in smoke-free bliss, you were pretty much out of luck.

These days, things are slightly different.

The MCSFA now publishes their guide online, updating the listings every few days. The format change from an annual print list to a frequently updated online database isn’t the most striking change I’ve noticed about the listing, though.

The exponential increase in smoke-free dining options in the state to nearly 6,000 says more to me about the desire for smoke-free dining and the increasing number of businesses making the switch to smoke-free in response to customer demand.

Even as Michigan remains one of only 13 states failing to enact any general statewide ban on smoking in any non-government-owned facilities, it is becoming increasingly possible for the non-smoking majority to vote with their wallet and choose to enjoy a nice meal out in a non-smoking restaurant.

Is this enough?

I understand the reluctance to regulate smoking out of concern for personal freedom for smokers, but the proven dangers of second-hand smoke make a compelling argument for banning smoking in most enclosed public places.

It’s true that I can choose to give my business to smoke-free places like the Royal Oak Brewery, Detroit’s Traffic Jam & Snug, Clawson’s Black Lotus Brewing Company, or Buddy’s Pizza in Farmington Hills. Then there are a lot of other places I would enjoy going and spending a few bucks, but I risk coming home smelling like a dirty ashtray and hawking up mucus if I stay there any length of time.

Beyond my personal preferences or comfort, I’m concerned with the health of those folks who work in overly smoky places. It’s increasingly difficult to say workers have the choice to walk away from a job that endangers their health when they face the challenge of feeding themselves and keeping a roof over their head in a state with one of the crappiest economic climates in the nation.

I see enough people walking around with figurative black clouds over their heads these days. I have to ask myself why doesn’t the state legislature get some guts and finally enact a smoking ban, or why don’t we just choose to elect representatives that will?

Related posts:

  1. Let’s Ban Smoking at Urbane!
  2. Royal Oak City Commission: Ban The Booze
  3. Zeitgeist: Guv says to Buy Michigan!
  4. Day Trip: Frankenmuth, Michigan
  5. Liquor License Lockdown in the Royal

Tags: , , ,

Permalink | December 1st, 2009

16 Responses to “Should Michigan clear the air with a smoking ban?”

  1. Brandon Says:
    December 1st, 2009 at 2:34 pm

    It’s time and it’s coming soon anyhow.

    This “debate” raged in cities like Boston and New York City and when the ban came to pass, guess what? The world did not come to an end. People still go to bars. Employees don’t get as sick as often (not to mention long-term effects). Smokers can go outside for a cig, and generally smoke less as a result. And non-smokers who like to go out but hate the smoke go out more.

    I love Pronto!, but don’t go there often, because when I get home my shirt stands in the corner and my hair reeks.

    Glad to hear that R.O. Brewery is listening to its customers — also very interesting that they went about making this decision in such a transparent, social-media-friendly way.

    Nice post!

  2. veriance Says:
    December 1st, 2009 at 7:15 pm

    I’m a social smoker, which means when I’m out drinking, I like to have a smoke too.

    I fully support a ban on smoking in Michigan bars and restaurants. Except in outdoor areas (which Pronto, among other local eateries have)

  3. DominiqueKing Says:
    December 1st, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    Brandon-The concerns about lost business haven’t really proven out in places that have enacted bans. And frankly, it’s a joy to travel in other states and not have the first words out of a restaurant host’s mouth be “smoking or non-smoking?” I don’t see the bars and restaurants in Ohio suffering from lack of business, f’instance.
    We originally learned about the Royal Oak Brewery’s decision making process when Tim got an email from them. It’s always interesting to see more and more places harnessing the power of social media to interact with customers.
    And I hear you abut the reeking clothing and hair…there are times I’ve had to take a shower the moment I hit the door at home ‘coz I just couldn’t stand to be around myself for the smoke smell.

    veriance-Yup, as I said, I think there’s a compelling argument for banning smoking in enclosed places.
    Allowing smoking on an outdoor patio can be workable, as long as customers don’t have to walk through a gauntlet of smokers in order to enter the building–and smokers make sure they snuff their butts in an ashtray, rather than flicking it on the ground or in something like a flower bed.

  4. mikeleja Says:
    December 2nd, 2009 at 12:10 pm

    I’ve never understood this arguement…why would you want your government robbing you of even more freedoms…the decision to go Smoke Free should be ENTIRELY up to the proprietor of the establishment…if the owner feels the demographics to be more Smoke Free, then don’t have a smoking section…it shouldn’t be controlled thru ANY gov’t mandate…if you don’t like going in because its smoky, THEN DON’T GO THERE…i stopped going to Abuelos as they banned smoking, but i didn’t get all up in arms to have them go BACK to Smoking, that’s ridiculous, its the owners choice and if i want an awesome enchilida then i’ll have to grin and bear it, its the price you pay…i don’t understand where these people get the right to tell me what to do, like they have some sort of entitlement…just because you don’t smoke and i do doesn’t mean you can tell where i can and cannot smoke, this is America, a nation steeped in Freedoms and Choices and you all want to wipe even more of them away so you can walk into a BAR and not smell my cigarette? Its a bar for god’s sake…you don’t want to breathe smoke? them shove off and find a new place to drink your Michelob Ultra Lights and talk about how crazy the Kardashians are…boooo to stomping freedoms…

  5. Tim Marks Says:
    December 2nd, 2009 at 12:13 pm

    If the largest tobacco state int eh country, North Carolina, can ban smoking in restaurants and bars it should be a piece of cake here. Virginia also recently enacted a ban, another tobacco growing state,

  6. DominiqueKing Says:
    December 2nd, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    Mike-Thanks for stopping by. Like I said, this is a subject that often inspires heated debate…and hopefully respectful discussion.
    I, for one, would find somewhere else to go if all I could get to drink was a Michelob Ultra Light while the big screen television was showing the Kardashians!

    Tim-Interesting to see that NC and VA have enacted bans. I should look up Kentucky!

  7. mikeleja Says:
    December 2nd, 2009 at 5:11 pm

    np DK, tell Eric i said hello!

  8. best smoking alternative Says:
    December 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 pm

    In public places there is a need for smokers to be aware that other people prefer a healthier lifestyle. When you crave for a smoke in theses places you can use an electronic cigarette like VirtuSmoke. Currently, it is not covered by the Clean Air Act. There are lots of flavors to choose from. Harmful substances in cigarettes are absent in this.

  9. Neil Stelkic Says:
    December 2nd, 2009 at 11:00 pm

    I totally agree with Variance on this “I’m a social smoker, which means when I’m out drinking, I like to have a smoke too. I fully support a ban on smoking in Michigan bars and restaurants.” Mostly because I know I should not be smoking since it is bad for my health. However, like everything else in life, moderation is the key.

    On the contrary, I also think there is something to be said about the freedom of choice and government mandating behavior.

    Yes patrons have choices. Yes employees have choices. Yes business owners have choices. And yes life is all about choices.

    Nonetheless, smoking is habit that is slowly killing us. I don’t know many smokers anymore who would take that first puff were they given the opportunity again. Lets be honest with ourselves and realize this will make society healthier. It will prevent our children from growing up and having the same debate. It makes sense.

  10. DominiqueKing Says:
    December 3rd, 2009 at 10:01 am

    Neil-While the argument that we should ban smoking for the sake of society as a whole is compelling, I suspect the argument that we should ban smoking for the sake of the health of those who must work in overly smoky environments carries more legal weight.
    I’m happy we have more choices these days if we don’t want to inhale others’ smoke, but there are still places I avoid going and spending money because the smoke is overpowering and unpleasant. At this point, at least I can vote with my wallet.

  11. Brandon Says:
    December 3rd, 2009 at 12:19 pm

    The problem, Mike, is that a smoky bar doesn’t just affect someone’s enjoyment. It also affects the health of the employees — employees who are likely to be underinsured. When they develop lung cancer later in life, it becomes everyone’s problem when the bills come due. Smoking is clearly dangerous to people’s health.

  12. mikeleja Says:
    December 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm

    Brandon, i understand where you’re coming from and I completely understand the employee health issue at bars, but then again they don’t HAVE to work there or dine/drink there…its that drive for better working conditions that should push you to advance…if i was a coal miner, i wouldn’t expect them to clean and scrub the coal before i mined it, with the job is a pre-associated amount of risk to health, same with bartending and waitressing…there are plenty other jobs in that skill level that don’t have smoke in the air at work… same thing with smoking outside, if you don’t like it then just move away as last i checked the outdoors is pretty darn big…:) I don’t believe in the ‘I’m paying for your choices’ when it comes to the health care issue…are you saying we should ban high fructose corn syrup, trans fats, and salt as well as they are contributors to the same heart issues as cigarettes…what everyone fails to grasp is yeah, because a bar is smoking they may lose YOUR business, but thats YOUR choice, why should you HAVE to be allowed to go there under YOUR rules, you going to change the menu to because you don’t like the food they offer?? i’m going to walk into Ruth’s Chris next time and be like ‘Ummm, do you mind not selling delicious steak as its bad for everyone’s health in this restaurant’…they’d laugh in my face…lol

  13. Brandon Says:
    December 3rd, 2009 at 5:12 pm

    Unfortunately, in this economy, it’s not always a choice. Nor does the 18 year old server necessarily realize the risk until much later in life. A small minority should not be allowed to negatively affect the health of the majority. I’m not a zealot about it — I think the patio, or outside the door is fine, but Michigan will eventually go where the rest of the country is going — to a smoking ban. Other states have found great health savings following bans. Indeed, I would say that Michigan soon will not be able to afford NOT having a smoking ban.

    High fructose corn syrup — personal choice that isn’t imposed on me. Sure, I might have to pay the health costs, but I won’t get cancer because you’re eating a Snickers.

    Interesting debate — but I think in reality it’s heading in one direction. If we didn’t have some Detroit lawmakers pushing for exemptions for casinos, I think we’d have one already.

  14. Lauren Says:
    December 3rd, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    Great post! It’s refreshing to see so many Michigan businesses take matters into their own hands and CHOOSE to be smoke-free, despite what legislation says. I have no issues with smokers, I just don’t like them stinkin’ up my space!

    Just the other day I went out with a friend from out of town. The bar we were in (a major chain might I add) was so smoky we had to leave. Slightly embarrassing considering she’s from a state where smoking isn’t allowed.

    I can only hope the progress continues…

  15. DominiqueKing Says:
    December 3rd, 2009 at 9:53 pm

    Brandon-I think you’re probably right about the casino/lack of smoking ban link. And it doesn’t surprise me to hear that states banning smoking have seen positive results when it comes to saving money on health costs.

    Mike-As I said in the post, I still believe its increasingly difficult to say that workers have a real choice to walk away from a job (no matter the cost to their health) in this crappy economy.
    I don’t have any real problems with allowing smoking outside, as long as non-smokers aren’t forced to walk through the smoking area to get into a place…and as long as smokers are respectful enough to properly dispose of their ashes and butts in provided ashtrays.

    Lauren-Thanks for stopping by! I’m glad to see more and more businesses responding to the majority of their customers by becoming smoke-free. It is kind of embarrassing that Michigan is so far behind the curve on this issue.

  16. DominiqueKing Says:
    December 7th, 2009 at 11:07 am

    Michigan smoking ban debate in the news again today…check out today’s Free Press http://freep.com/article/20091207/NEWS15/312070002/1318/Smoking-debate-rises-from-ashes

Leave a Reply