Tomorrow, the passed-in-February restaurant smoking “ban” goes into effect across Virginia. The new law prohibits smoking in public restaurants, unless separate, and separately ventilated facilities are available for smoking and non-smoking areas. Exceptions are made for outdoor patio areas (where smoking would not be restricted) and “private clubs”. violations are subject to a nominal fine ($25 each for violator and establishment for each infraction).

Personally, I welcome the new law; I’m sure it’ll make the “dining out” experience for myself and my family much more pleasant. While most restaurants in the state (70% as cited here) are already entirely smoke-free, there are a handful of places I really quite enjoy that aren’t. With this law in effect, I’ll be more likely to visit. Also, I’m sure that the new law will, to some degree, improve public health, at least in terms of reducing the harmful effects of second-hand smoke on patrons and restaurant employees.

The law passage is not without controversy, of course. This being Virginia, epicenter of Big Tobacco, there’s some opposition; the article linked in the previous paragraph describes much of it, from the perspective of small business owners, who complain that they’ll be forced to remodel (building separately ventilated smoking and non-smoking areas) or risk losing the lucrative custom of smokers. One restaurant owner in the article cited above leads into this complaint with the familiar “this is the worst economic time…” refrain.

I question this reasoning to some extent; according to the CDC, studies have shown that smoking bans like this one don’t significantly affect bar and restaurant profits. Anecdotally, I can say that I (and I would presume, many non-smokers) would in fact be more likely to patronize a given restaurant had it prohibited smoking; and there are a lot more non-smokers than there are smokers in this country*. I would guess that at least some of the “smoker” revenue would be made up by non-smokers who would consider the restaurant “fair game” once the ban takes effect; and given how much a pack of cigarettes cost, and people’s reluctance to pass on them to save money, non-smokers have more disposable income to spend dining out. I suspect (as it seems, does the state government, which clearly hopes to reduce overall smoking levels) that most businesses are more likely to lose money building separately ventilated facilities than they would by merely banning smoking outright on the premises.

I won’t get into the whole “smoker’s rights” issue, other than to quote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who said “The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins.” That is, no one is disputing the smoker’s personal right to light up (even if it isn’t in the smoker’s best interest), but given that doing so has proven to adversely impact the health and welfare of others, reasonable regulation in certain sitautions is appropriate.

In any case, I look forward to eating out in respiratory comfort in the near future.

__________________

* – Interestingly, during the current economic downturn, smoking rates are actually increasing slightly. I suspect the reasoning for this increase is twofold. First, the stress posed by the recession and depressed incomes result in greater stress; people are self-medicating; their addiction helps them cope. Secondly, despite the increasing cost (anywhere from five to eight dollars a pack these days, it seems), people consider cigarettes small indulgences or luxuries, and continue to “treat” themselves in the face of bigger pressures. People continue to patronize hair and nail salons for the same reason, even if they do it less often.