E-mail:
Password:

Smoking Ban in New York Essay

smoking / law / new york / bar / economy / business / customer

Essay Topic:

Has The Smoking Ban in NY Affected Economy?

Essay Questions:

when did the smoke free air act passed.
what does the law state exactly
what parties supported the smoke free air act and why.
who was against the smoke free air act and why.
has the smoke free air act effected our economy, how.
who benefits from the smok free air act.
was the smoke free air act a good move for NYC

Thesis Statement:

smoking ban would have rather negative effect on New york City area. The most sensitive businesses are restaurant and bar business who threat to lose a great number of its customers.

 

                                 Has The Smoking Ban in NY Affected our Economy?

The recent years were marked by a groundswell of support for smoke-free restaurant and bar laws. The initiative has been developed from states and localities across the country.The main tendency of the present day is the growth in smoke-free laws nationwide. The process is accompanied by the false allegations against smoking laws. The basis for the allegations is the idea that smoke-free laws will hurt local economies and businesses. In this paper I will try to investigate the major effect of smoking laws of US economy and restaurant business. Particular attention will be paid to the benefits from the smoke free air act. The studied area is the area of New York City.

March 26, 2003 signified the date of ban on smoking. During this time, a number of New York State legislators approved a state-wide smoking ban. The initiative has been taken by Governor Pataki, who immediately signed the documents. The ban on smoking took place on July 24, 2003.

The ban suggested many innovations many of which superseded all other local laws. The country that delayed was Suffolk County. The ban on smoking in the county was delayed till 2006.

However, ban on smoking is concerned with a big controversy that pertain a whole issue. The research shows that the state has seen fit to take care of all other states. Under the circumstances like these, all other states are exposed to make a choice between the following: either to abide their local laws or to abide the law that has been suggested by a state.

Ban on smoking in bars and restaurants was accompanied by the tough new law. The law was projected to diminish the number of customers who are visiting cafes and restaurants. Supporters of the bill are mentioning the idea that New Yorkers would be able to quickly adjust to the changes. According to the bill, smoking in a bar is separated from the dining roomby a wall or at least six feet of space. That is the only space that would be allowed for smokers.  The law states that smoking for diners would be permitted only in a special, enclosed dining room with its own ventilation system. (Borland, 2003, p.23)

Even now the impact of the ban on smoking is difficult to define. An examination of government data, public polls, private surveys and interviews with customers, employees helped to reveal the additional data that pertains to the ban on smoking in a number of bars and restaurants that are located around the city. The law is reported to have a strong impact on some businesses. However, not all the businesses are effected by the law.

Many bar owners and managers are reported to mention the idea that smoking ban may hurt business, thus eroding profits in some of the areas. A number of restaurants and bars owners were reported to mention the idea the ban on smoking has not affected the activities of the business. In addition, the major part of the New York inhabitants voiced an idea that they are happy with the results of the recent polls. The review of the survey shows that quite a big number of regular restaurant goers are reported to view a smoke-free environment as an attraction.

The same can be told about the main city night spots. Most of the people are reported to be hurt by the ban. However, the evidence shows just the opposite: happy-hour sales on Friday nights at the Whiskey Ward on the Lower East Side “have dropped to barely $100, from $600” (The Smoking Ban: Clear Air, Murky Economics) Such information is gathered on the basis of information provided by co-owners. Many co owners also mention the idea that ban on smoking will negatively effect the average bar attendance. As a result, many of the co owners were considering the idea of laying off some of their employees.

Ban on smoking can make it even harder for bartenders to continue with their business. The complaints about the smoking ban also threaten to turn into the growing pains. Also, the city prides itself on the ability to adjust to the far-reaching new law. The latest evidence shows that many of the businesses are left unharmed. A whole thing is concerned with a number of rumors that swirl in an environment.

The city's antismoking law can be regarded as a new health initiative that is subjected to protect restaurant and bar workers from being exposed to secondhand smoke. The measure has been followed by an even tougher smoking ban.The city is known for repealing its ban. Repealing the ban will remain the main issue for quite a long time. A whole thing seemed not to make much difference to the smokers and businesses who continue to blame the authorities for the acceptance of the law.

A number of establishments are licensed to serve alcohol, thus receiving 127 applications from city businesses. The number of licenses that have been granted by the authority is reported to rise up to 106 during the last month. The number of the previous month was about 75.

However, the recent research showed that smoking ban did not contributed to the overall job loss in the food service and drinking industry. The recent evidence shows that many establishments are cutting back shifts and absorb revenue losses. Also, quite a big number of restaurants and bars refuse to divulge their finances. A whole thing makes it difficult for such establishments to gauge the validity of their complaints.

Ban on smoking is often concerned with certain state or city. The members of those cities and towns are able to enact their own stronger bans. When combined together, these bans can lead to the state’s restrictions. Some of the states do not allow this innovation. The locality is not always associated with certain state laws. Often it is a matter for certain slate, city, country or even town. Any exemptions that might be applied to a whole case will be negated by the state. The law is one of the strongest in the state. Local jurisdictions are able to bring changes into the whole case making laws more attractive and restrictive.

 

                                            FACTORS THAT LED TO BAN

The NYS Restaurant Association is the association that has helped push for a statewide ban. A whole thing has been taken in order to "level the playing field." The membership of this organization consists of owners of larger restaurants. This group of people has already been affected by bans. Instead of fighting for their right to choose people are choosing to fight for their own bottom dollar at the expense of the mom n pop style restaurants and bars.

The smoking ban is rather controversial issue. The research showed that many of the people, who traditionally visit restaurants do not support smoking ban. According to a recent research, the ban on smoking is apparently not good for business. Ban on smoking is torture for customers. Restaurants have small prospects to benefit from smoking customers. The objective can be achieved by invoking “the level playing field". A whole thing means that everyone suffers the same.  The above mentioned thing implies on the fact that nobody really wants a smoking ban.

Writing to the NYS Restaurant Association will help the association to stop aligning themselves with the enemy.The legislators tend to improve ban on  smoking.  The major statement against the bill is that it has been accepted without the public consent. The bill was “intentionally rammed out of nowhere with no time for fair public comment”. (STATE-WIDE  SMOKING BAN. Retrieved from http://www.nycclash.com/NYSban2003.html)   

                                        

                                          ACTIONS AGAINST THE STATE BAN

Any actions that were directed at NYC can be described as the ones that have been boycotted. The first boycott was reported to take place in Wednesday's March 26th NY. The bill has appeared in Friday's March 28th NY Post.  A whole thing has been followed by a couple of smaller follow up ads that were reported to appear in both papers.

This boycott is a thing that is not intended to ultimately the people representing the hospitality industry. The boycott combines the people that are not working in the hospitality industry. The boycott has been organized by the people that represent the law and that were targeted against the other segment of the population. This boycott can be viewed as a statement that was negatively accepted by the major part of the people.

Bartenders voice against ban on smoking. The situation can be described as largely controversial. The managers of one of the restaurants reported constant loss of the customers of his company. After passing the bill the business has low prospects for the recovery. According to the words of the manager, he is constantly losing its customers.  The business is reported to decrease sharply. The major reason for that is the fact that the city's smoking ordinance went into effect.A whole thing was accompanied by a dramatic drop in sales.

In New York City can be regarded as a partial smoke-free workplace law. The law went into effect in 1995. The situation has undergone some particular changes during 1993-1997.  During those times restaurant employment growth in the city was more than three times that of the rest of the state. New York City is also known for generating smoke-free law. This law has not had any significant impact on dining out patterns among New York City diners. Studies of this earlier New York City smoke-free workplace law brought the following results: they showed that laws did not effect the wide variation in restaurant and hotel industry indicators thus causing seasonal changes in the industry. As for peer-reviewed articles, these have brought the people to the conclusion that the smoke-free law did not harm the city's restaurant industry. The affect on the hotel industry can be described as rather adverse.

To conclude, my idea that smoking ban would have rather negative effect on New York City area. The most sensitive businesses are restaurant and bar business who threat to lose a great number of its customers.

                                                   References:

Borland, R. (2003) A Model for the Effective Regulation of Tobacco Products: A regulated market model, VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control: Victoria

 (NY state-wide smoking ban 2003. Retrieved from http://www.nycclash.com/NYSban2003.html).

The Smoking Ban: Clear Air, Murky Economics By WINNIE HU; Ann Farmer contributed reporting for this article. Published: Sunday, December 28, 2003. Retrieved from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E7DF123EF93BA15751C1A9659C8B63&pagewanted=2.

 

 

Custom Essay

GET YOUR A+ PAPER WRITTEN BY PROFESSIONALS
+ FREE
title page
bibliography page
proofreading
revision
$9.95

Need A+ Argumentative essay?

GET YOUR PAPER WRITTEN
BY EXPERTS
  • – profound analysis
  • – original & auhentic writing
  • – individual approach
$9.95/page
Order Now