IT IS DAWNING on more and more policymakers that allowing poisonous air to permeate public eateries jeopardizes the health of workers as well as patrons. Just as restaurants are not allowed to choose whether to serve safe food, so should they not be allowed to decide whether to provide safe air for their employees and customers. Today in Annapolis, legislative committees are scheduled to consider a bill that would ban smoking in all Maryland indoor workplaces as a matter of public health. This is a sensible, effective measure to curb public exposure to dangerous secondhand smoke.
The main opponent in Annapolis has been the Restaurant Association of Maryland, which says the measure would harm businesses by pushing diners into neighboring states and the District. Montgomery County Council member Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg) says, however, that business in county restaurants increased in the first year of a smoking ban that took effect in October 2003. He cites data showing higher state sales tax receipts and more applications to open restaurants.
_____Today's Post Editorials_____
|
| |
|
The Restaurant Association says Mr. Andrews's numbers are misleading because they include restaurants such as McDonald's that never allowed smoking. The group presented its own data showing that restaurants with liquor licenses have not done well. As reported by The Post's Annys Shin, association officials showed that between April and December 2004, sales tax receipts for restaurants with liquor licenses grew by 7 percent in neighboring Frederick County but only 0.025 percent in Montgomery.
Too much can be made of these dueling numbers. Some establishments may lose business to jurisdictions where smokers can light up and eat; others may gain from customers happy not to breathe smoke. Unrelated factors such as rates of economic growth also come into play. Certainly the economic effects, if any, are not dire enough to justify continuation of a public health menace.
