Print
E-mail
Share
del.icio.us
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
In a move that could reverberate across the casino industry, the Atlantic City Council voted unanimously Wednesday night to ban smoking in the nation’s No. 2 gaming market.
Following the example of non-tribal casinos in states such as California, Colorado and Delaware that already prohibit smoking, Atlantic City casinos must go smoke-free by Oct. 15. They have the option, however, of building enclosed smoking lounges with no gaming machines or cocktail service, like those used in airports.
Under a local ordinance that took effect April 15, 2007, Atlantic City casinos, exempt from a statewide smoking ban passed the previous year, were allowed to permit smoking on up to 25 percent of their gaming floors.
Casinos had planned to build enclosed smoking lounges, some staffed with casino workers and offering gambling.
The effort to ban smoking in Atlantic City casinos began years ago with a handful of casino workers and snowballed with the help of a nonprofit support group, a 2006 lawsuit filed by a nonsmoking casino worker with lung cancer and the involvement of the United Auto Workers, a union that took up the issue as part of its campaign to unionize casino dealers.
The president of the City Council opened Wednesday’s meeting with a prayer that focused on the importance of the smoking ban, said Karen Blumenfeld, policy director of New Jersey Group Against Smoking Pollution.
“That really set the tone” for the vote, Blumenfeld said.
The Atlantic City ban will put pressure on Nevada casinos to follow suit, said Stephanie Steinberg, Chair of Smoke-Free Gaming, a group pressing for smoking bans in casinos nationwide.
Steinberg said a “silent majority” of Nevada residents, casino bosses and rank-and-file workers support a smoking ban but only a small minority are willing to risk their jobs by challenging the status quo. She plans to lobby the Culinary Union, which represents a majority of casino workers on the Strip.
“This is a workplace health issue and unions have an obligation to advocate for policies and laws protecting their workers,” she said.
Gaming companies have opposed smoking bans, fearing that customers who smoke will go elsewhere. In the face of such threats, some have upgraded ventilation systems that have drawn critics who say they don’t do enough to remove carcinogens from the air.
Whether smoking bans hurt casino revenue over the long term is hotly debated. While there is some evidence that gamblers don’t play as long if they can’t smoke, there also is evidence that some casinos increased revenue even after smoking bans were implemented.
AC...You should have bought the commissioners…haven’t you learned anything from Las Vegas?
Well gee whiz, if you cant smoke while your gambling, whats the use in gambling? Whats next, no drinking alcohol while gambling? What a joke.
JJ
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com
When the tax revenues start dropping because of this they will have second thoughts. Betting they start talking about raising the taxes to make up for the loss.
Once again people trying to tell business owners what they are allowed to do with their own business.
correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't cigarettes
a "legal" product still in America?
And this is where the Country tries to convince its' citizens of all the freedoms they have - what is up with a government that interferes with a business owners rights to run their own business as they see fit - if a non-smoker doesn't like the smoke they don't have to patronize the business - and if someone in the Country wants to gamble online with their own hard-earned money that is their business not the goverments as long as the person understands the government isn't going to send them a welfare if they go broke!
Why would someone put a business owner in control of their health buy saying that they the business should run it any way they see fit and that if you dont like the smoke filled rooms then you should go some where else or the employee knew what the enviroment was when they accepted the job.
Well it seems that the business owner accepeted that the city government would change rules and regulations for the publics interest from time to time, and if they dont like maybe they should not renew there lic. and give that piece of the market to someone else that is willing to comply.
Las Vegas Health Department recently proved this need, with the doctors oredering the reuse of items that have infected others.
No owners should not run it as they see fit because they see profits not your health.
My wife and I fly to LV twice a year to visit my daughter and her family. Guess we will not be taking any sojourning into LV casino's if they follow AC example. We don't smoke but we are getting real tired of people pushing their views, habits and mannerisms on others.
I actually can't stand fat people.
I get really nauseous when they are stuffing their mouths with food as their jowls flab over their collars.
They are, to me, grotesque.
Fat people cause tremendous costs and demands on an already over-burdened health care system.
Fat people should probably have to pay a minimum 50% tax on food .... but why should I impose my bigotry on them.
That would be so un-American!
Shortsightedness is what this great state is built on. Sure it's legal to smoke until one draws thier last premature dying breath. However, why should I breath the same poison and be sikened by someone else's addiction? Furthermore sick smokers are likely to wind up unproductive and requiring public assistance. Did that get your attention? Finally no one attempting to maintain meaningful employment should be required to breath toxins just to earn a paycheck.
I live a couple of states over from Nevada. I would not fly to Las Vegas if I'm not allowed to smoke in the casinos. I can drive over to the nearest Indian casino that operates under the laws of the Indian nation. (There is one in Louisiana.) I may have to elbow my way to a machine but at least my dollars would go to the tribe. Thank God for the sovereign Indian nations.
I think American Indians ought to take another look at Las Vegas and maybe buy some land as part of their reservation and put up casinos to compete with the future non-smoking casinos.
Good way to get rid of tourists and people who smoke. Hey why not pass a law making it illegal for people who smoke to be caught anywhere in New Jersey? Oh, and is that the roaring sound of people cancelling their vacation plans? They had better rethink this one or just remove Atlantic City from the maps! How bigotted and assinine can they be?
What next? They Should worry more about the people that drink and drive .That will Kill you faster then smoking.If you do not want to be around smoke do not go.I thought USA was a free Country.Taking are rights away.There is other Casnio besides Atlantic CITY.You should worry about the cars on the streets and polution from cars.Worry about the drugs.That seems more to worry about then picking on smokers.
Prohibiting smoking on airplanes has not stopped people from flying. Prohibiting smoking in restaurants has not stopped people from eating out. Whenever I talk to people about trips we've taken to LV, the consensus is that the biggest drawback from going there is the smoke. We now all go to casinos in OTHER states that have separate non-smoking sections.
Though the word smoke is used, cancer is the issue. The costs associated with maintaining a smoking environment are well documented both in providing clean air and health care. Casinos realize the battle will be lost and no longer fight legislation, and that their future and profits lay in appealing to non-smokers.
"some have upgraded ventilation systems that have drawn critics who say they don’t do enough to remove carcinogens from the air"
I think the real issue here is the forcing of morality down peoples' throats. Whether or not you smoke (and especially for the vocal section that supports such bans), think about what's next.
Say the anti-smoking regime triumphs, and it has been doing pretty well so far, because it's a trendy team to be on, and policymakers aren't going to oppose a so called "health issue," what's next? There's no more smoking, but people still need to run for office and look as if they're "looking out for the rest of us" (saving us from ourselves), there will be another moral witch hunt down the pike.
There are already the beginnings of a ban on "unhealthy food" in the forms of fast food taxes. I may lose some people with the reference here, but in the movie "Demolition Man," it was deemed that anything unhealthy is considered bad ergo, illegal. There was one restaurant left, and people would be punished for using bad language. Even physical contact between humans was banned as it led to diseases and what not.
I'm all about people living full and good lives, but I don't know that the people currently making the decisions are the people I necessarily want telling me what's good and bad for me.
The casino industry is actually a pretty important "front line" of the fight between personal freedoms vs. the "moral" opposition, but how many times to "moral leaders" end up being arrested for less than moral acts?.
Yippeee! It's about time. Sorry smokers, but I think designated smoking areas are a great idea...kinda like penalty boxes for you to sit, inhale and contemplate for a while. Well done AC!