July 15, 2005From A Newsletter Reader:
Stop Houston from enforcing the 9-9-2005 smoking ban!!!
Have you heard that a smoking ban has passed the city council?
Did you know that the ban PROHIBITS SMOKING AT METRO PUBLIC TRANSIT BUS STOPS!!!!
Guess who smokes at METRO BUS SHELTER STOPS?
AFRICAN AMERICANS.
Contact your ACLU, and NAACP NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is discrimination and is unconstitional.
Class C misdemanors carry up to a $500 fine not a $2000 one.
Hopefully a class action lawsuit will be filled against the City of Houston, after I have informed you of this,
PEOPLE HELP DEFEAT THE ANTIS YOU ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME IN HOUSTON!!!!!!!!!!
In Austin Texas there is a lawsuit pending against them and the smoking ban so I have heard at http://www.keepaustinfree2005.com
John Daly: smoke ‘em if you got ‘em
Monday April 25, 2005, | 12:37 pm
Tim McDonald
National Golf Editor
So I’m watching John Daly warm up for his playoff with Vijay Singh at the Houston Open by chain-smoking and joshing with buddies and officials, whoever happens to pass by. He finally warms up when he gets to the first tee, cigarette dangling from his mouth, ashes dropping on his shirt.
A politically correct person I’m watching with is horrified. “Why doesn’t he take that thing out of his mouth? Do they have to show that? What kind of role model is he being?”
I’ll bet if he had been taking sips off a cool one, you’d never hear such remarks. That’s why people like Daly. He smokes, he drinks – or used to – and he obviously over-eats. You hear these self-righteous blowhards like Jim Nantz blasting Daly because he didn’t warm up. He warmed up – he had a smoke and a joke.
THE FACTS ABOUT SECOND HAND SMOKE
(what non-smokers and big business don’t want you to know!)
I am terribly disappointed that the City of Houston Council has failed to uphold Houstonians freedoms, (they have now banned smoking in Houston Restaurants).
I realize that the hype of second hand smoke has caused undo pressure on your individual offices. The city council folks have fell to the majority without the consideration of the current minority (smokers) I had to look outside to make sure I still had an American flag waving - yes you council members know it, you've read the facts - or at the least sent someone else to read them. Yes, I am a smoker. Yes, I feel that MY personal freedom to corrupt my own lungs has been infringed upon.
OH BUT WAIT, before all of you "smoking protesters" start throwing organic tomatoes at me because you believe my smoking is infringing on your rights; let me give you some things to consider. I'm no scientist but I've done my homework. First, it might be helpful if I explain how scientists come up with their data.
One is called "relative risk". Relative risk or RR is defined as "Ratio of the risk of disease or death among the exposed to the risk among the unexposed: this usage is synonymous with "risk ratio"" The EPA and many other organizations spend tons of time, energy and money studying the RR of many different things. One being "second hand smoke" also referred to as SHS or ETS. According to the EPA a dangerous RR is considered to be at least 3.0 or higher. Can you guess what the RR of SHS is? Well, let me inform you: According to the EPA and the WHO it's approximately 1.19, about half the amount of what is considered dangerous.
This amount is about equal to cooking on a barbeque grill outside, so I suggest that all you folks who called for the smoking ban run out and toss your grills! HURRY!
I do have to give kudos to the Houston Civil Servants for passing this unnecessary bill so quickly, as it seems that our state officials aren't planning on cleaning up the Houston air pollution until the year 2020. I mean why rush? We are already protecting Houstonians from the (oh my goodness) dangerous SHS, I believe the number of deaths from SHS is 3,000 people a year according to studies. We have nothing to worry about because by 2020 the 60,000 people that die each year from air pollutants, according to the National Resources Defense Council, won't be around to vote especially since recent studies show that chemical plants and factories in Houston (the number one polluted city in America) are releasing six to fifteen times more of pollutants than they report. An article published by Aaron J. Cohnen, D.Sc and Assoc. showed that the RR for "Residents of areas with high ambient air pollution" is between 1.0-1.6 and that the RR for "Non-smokers around family members or co-workers is between 1.0-1.5. Interested in more eye opening news??
The EPA gives chlorinated water a RR of 1.5, more than is given to SHS. Best not drink the City water either! Not to mention that the pollutants released are depleting the ozone layer and that the U.N. Environment program has discovered that skin cancer will increase by 26% for each 10% drop in ozone. Hope you protesters were wearing sunscreen!
Or maybe you should spend more time inside with the formaldehyde, bleaches and other toxic cleaners thinking about protesting more important issues like world hunger or maybe even, if your brave, the giant industrial factories that have much more money and power than we mere smokers will ever have.
Research it yourself / sources:
April 2, 2005
Michelle Holland
Porter, Texas (28 miles NE of Houston)
Houston approves partial smoking ban
Associated Press
03/09/2005
Houston on Wednesday joined a growing list of cities to ban smoking in restaurants.
The City Council rejected a ban on all public smoking but voted 9-4 to prohibit smoking in restaurants and covered bus shelters. The measure, effective in September, still permits smoking in some restaurant bars and in stand-alone bars. Taxis also can ban smoking under the ordinance.
"Council acted decisively to make Houston more smoke-free. It's progress," said Mayor Bill White, who proposed the partial ban.
Opponents argued the ban still endangers public health, while smokers' rights and restaurant groups worry the plan will infringe on civil liberties and hurt revenues.
The council also agreed to revisit the issue in 18 months after studying the effects on public health and restaurants' bottom lines.
Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, a physician who proposed the full ban, voted for the less prohibitive measure. But she added, "I'll continue to push for a full ban on smoking in all workplaces."
Elaine Jefferson of the American Cancer Society in Houston also pushed for the full ban.
"The smoker comprises 25 percent or less of our population," she said last week. "When they choose to smoke, that choice becomes the choice of everybody in that establishment."
The Cancer Society says secondhand smoke is the third-leading preventable cause of death in the United States, causing about 53,000 deaths a year.
Dave Pickrell, president and founder of Smokers Fighting Discrimination Inc., said the secondhand smoke threat is exaggerated.
"When you cook, a lot of ingredients go together to make a meal. It's the same with disease. To say smoking causes cancer is like saying sticking a potato in boiling water makes potato soup," said Pickrell, whose group is based in the Houston suburb of Katy.
Richie Jackson, head of the Texas Restaurant Association, said the group supports smoke-free dining areas but worries businesses will be hurt.
A study done for the Greater Dallas Restaurant Association showed that sales of alcohol at eating and drinking establishments in Dallas fell $11.8 million in 2003. The city's smoking ban took effect in March 2003.
But Dr. Andrew Hyland, a research scientist at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y., said his review of 100 studies from eight countries showed no reputable studies concluded smoke-free regulations were bad for business.
At least 13 Texas cities have smoke-free restaurants, according to the American Cancer Society and the Texas Department of State Health Services. The strongest ordinance is in El Paso, which bans smoking in all public places.
Debate continues in other Texas cities.
In Corpus Christi, several business owners have sued the city in federal court for its ban on smoking in restaurants, which took affect last month.
Residents in Austin and Amarillo will vote May 7 on whether to ban smoking in most public places.
Seven states prohibit smoking in most indoor public places, though the effects of the bans are still debated.
In New York, the number of jobs in restaurants and bars, as well as the number of restaurant permits requested, have climbed since that city's ban took affect two years ago. But some New York businesses say the ban has hurt their revenues.
http://www.mywesttexas.com/
If Houston must pass a smoking ban, make it this one
Restaurant group explains why it backs a compromise
March 8, 2005
By RUSSELL YBARRA
The Greater Houston Restaurant Association believes current regulations regarding smoking in restaurants are adequate. However, it is willing to support Mayor Bill White's amendment to the ordinance to ban smoking in the dining areas of restaurants only.
The most salient items relevant to the question of a ban can be summarized in a few key points:
• The proposal to end smoking in restaurant dining rooms is a bold move. Every dining room in every Houston restaurant will be smoke-free under the mayor's proposal. This is a huge fundamental change in Houston's restaurant industry. Never again will a maitre d' at a restaurant ask, "Smoking or nonsmoking?"
• There is no government-recognized study that shows secondhand smoke is hazardous in a restaurant to its patrons or its employees. In fact, the only recognized government study (Oak Ridge National Laboratory) demonstrates otherwise.
• A ban in Houston will be detrimental economically, particularly to small mom-and-pop restaurants, which are 50 percent of the industry. Virtually all adjacent communities still allow smoking and smokers will simply cross the line to the unincorporated areas of counties — Bellaire, Pearland, Webster, The Woodlands, Sugar Land — or one of the many other options sometimes directly across the street. This has been the case in other cities such as Dallas.
• Most Houstonians prefer that the business make the choice of smoking policies, 61 percent, according to a poll of 500 Houstonians conducted for KPRC-TV on Feb. 15 by Survey USA.
Restaurants are an industry of choice; we try to satisfy the needs of all our customers and do this by offering both smokers and nonsmokers separate smoking sections and installing ventilation systems. The Texas Department of Health has estimated that 22 percent of adult Texans smoke. We do not believe government should make that decision for our customers.
Approximately 60 percent of restaurants nationwide are nonsmoking. When the demand from our customers requires it, more restaurants will make that switch.
Restaurant buildings are ventilated differently and more extensively than other facilities. Unlike airplanes, which are a closed environment, restaurants maintain a negative air pressure, a continuing balance of both recirculated and fresh air. The restaurant kitchen has more smoke and open flames than can ever be produced by cigarette smoking, and yet employees and customers are keep comfortable by ventilation.
Antismoking groups claim that restaurant and bar workers get cancer from secondhand smoke. To the contrary, a study by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, part of the Department of Energy, concluded that bartenders and waiters were exposed to secondhand smoke levels considerably lower than limits established for the workplace by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. In fact, it found numbers significantly lower than those in a study published by the American Medical Association. Oak Ridge attributed that fact to more efficient ventilation systems.
OSHA itself withdrew proposed indoor air quality regulations in 2001 after eight years of study. According to an OSHA news release, that decision was reached with the support of major antismoking groups.
A statistical study recently conducted for the National Restaurant Association by Deloitte and Touche found there is an economic impact of local government nonsmoking ordinances on many table service restaurants. Similar studies on the economic impact of smoking in restaurants have failed to take into account the large number of restaurants, mostly quick service restaurants, that do not allow smoking, thus skewing the numbers and falsely interpreting little or no impact when smoking bans are enacted.
An example of loss of sales occurred with the smoking ban at DFW Airport. The airport experienced a drop in beverage revenues by $200,000 per month after the smoking ban took effect. Simply put, if the choice is between smoking a cigarette outside or having a drink inside, the drink goes down the drain.
The effect can be even greater when customers have the choice of simply driving across a city line for dinner or cocktails. A study of the first year of Dallas' restaurant smoking ban found the ban contributed to a nearly $12 million decline in alcohol sales in Dallas, while sales rose in surrounding cities; negatively impacted revenue at many restaurants in Dallas, including four which closed; and has created a negative perception of Dallas within the hospitality industry. Carrollton found the same effect on its ban imposed in 1995; it rescinded the ban in 1998.
When restaurants lose customers to surrounding communities, the city in which they are located loses tax dollars and jobs. The restaurant industry is one of the largest contributors of sales tax receipts to the city of Houston's budget. It is also the largest employer in Houston, as well as the largest employer of women and minorities. This is one of the few industries that will never outsource jobs; however, as with smoking customers, restaurants may consider moves to suburban locations that do not impose onerous regulations, taking tax revenue and jobs with them.
We agree with City Councilmember Adrian Garcia that an air quality study should be performed by an independent third party, approved and paid for by the stakeholders, and based on standards set by OSHA. We believe such a study will back up the results of previous studies that prove exposure levels of secondhand smoke in restaurants and bars are well within federal guidelines, much like the arsenic and lead levels in city water.
We believe a ban on smoking in restaurant dining rooms only is a fair compromise. Let our customers decide.
http://www.chron.com/
Organizations Threaten To Boycott Houston If Smoking Ban Passes
Proposed Smoking Ban May Affect Other Businesses
March 7, 2005
HOUSTON -- A new, expanded version of the city's proposed smoking ban could affect Houston businesses other than restaurants.
The proposed ordinance, if passed, would mean smokers could no longer smoke inside the dining area of a restaurant. Currently, smokers can light up in designated smoking areas.
The ban could also target bowling alleys, enclosed bus stops and other businesses. Taxi drivers would have the option of making their cabs smoke-free or not.
Sources told Local 2 Monday that if the ban passes, the city could lose convention center business.
Officials with Alcoholics Anonymous, the National Retailer Federation, the National Convenience Store Operators and the National Tobacco Retailers Association threatened to pull their conventions out of Houston.
"I want to be careful that we don't hurt ourselves economically," said Jordy Tollet, with the Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau.
He gave council members copies of a letter from the National Tobacco Retailers Association, which has scheduled a 2007 convention in Houston.
"There's 15,000 hotel room nights for tobacco dealers, so roughly, that's somewhere between $15 and $20 million that would be lost on our community," Tollet said.
Others worry that international business would be jeopardized if the total smoking ban is passed.
Representatives with the American Lung Association, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and others have formed an alliance that is pushing for stronger restrictions, such as a complete ban on smoking in public places.
City Council members want to research the plan more before making a decision on which businesses would be affected by the ban.
Proposed smoking ban debate heats up with strong opposition
March 1, 2005
By Miya Shay
ABC13 Eyewitness News
The debate over a proposed smoking ban in Houston heats up, as dozens of demonstrators gathered outside city hall.
More: http://abclocal.go.com/
Council Listens To Citizens' Opinions On Smoking Ban
Proposal Would Outlaw Smoking In Houston Restaurants
March 1, 2005
HOUSTON -- Houstonians voiced their opinions to city council members Tuesday about a proposed smoking ban that has sparked a heated debate about public health in the Bayou City.
The debate over smoking heated up at a rally outside Houston's City Hall held by Houston Communities for Safe Indoor Air as supporters and opponents clashed over the city's proposed ordinance to ban smoking in Houston restaurants.
The anti-smoking group said the rally is to promote safe and clean indoor air while educating the public about the dangers of secondhand smoke. They said they are targeting minority groups -- specifically Hispanics, Asians and African-Americans -- who they say continue to smoke because they might not realize the dangers of smoking.
Houston City Council members spent Tuesday and will spend part of Wednesday discussing the controversial ordinance before voting on the measure. If the council approves it, the ban could go into effect in several weeks.
The ordinance would make it illegal for smokers to smoke inside the dining area of a restaurant. Currently, smokers can light up in designated smoking areas.
But the ordinance would allow smoking in restaurant bars as long as there is good ventilation, which is drawing a mixed reaction from city council members.
"It's not our place to dictate to businesses. The market will dictate what will happen," City Council Member Addie Wiseman said.
"We would like a full ban. Many Houstonians are ready. Four to one, I think Houstonians want smoking eliminated," City Council Member Shelley Sekula-Gibbs said.
Some council members also want the ban to include prohibiting smoking in bars. The current proposal does not target smoking in bars and restaurant bar areas.
The City Council heard from citizens Tuesday afternoon, who said the ordinance is a matter of choosing public health over the rights of smokers.
"I am here on behalf of the thousands of infants and children who have no voice and will be needlessly exposed to these cancer-causing agents and irritants," an ordinance proponent said to city council during pop off.
"I think it's stupid. I've got a right to smoke just like people have the right not to smoke," a citizen opposing the ordinance said.
Some restaurant owners said they are worried that a total smoking ban would hurt their business.
"The smoking ban is only going to antagonize the smokers and the non-smokers," St. Pete's Dancing Marlin spokesman John Zoros said.
The no-smoking ordinance would also include enclosed bus stops. Taxi drivers would have the option of making their cabs smoke-free or not.
http://www.click2houston.com/
Houston City Council
February 15, 2005
In a event today that may well be the high light of my of my smokers rights
activism I testified today before a Houston City Council sub-committee on
health concerning a restaurant smoking ban.
I was the only one there speaking against the ordinance as a smoker, almost
all the antis there spoke against it because it didn't go far enough. It
would allow smoking in the bar part of a restaurant, but bans it in formal
dining rooms. If the restaurant didn't have a bar, smoking is
banned. Stand alone bars are not included.
Many speakers came on before me, and it was a love fest for the council
woman who introduced the proposal, Shelly Sekula-Gibbs. I was care full to
take notes on the points I wanted to cover from the speakers before me.
1. I covered the Helena heart attack study explaining that the study was
only about 60 people and most studies look at 10 to 100 times more people
to rule out random chance.
2. I also covered media bias by explaining that a new health scare on
smoking (and other things as well) come out almost on a weekly basis and
that some one who would like to refute information has always had doors
slammed in their faces, so false information stands as fact.
3. I stated that nothing real backs up the claims that passive smoking
kills, like death certificates or names and faces.
4. I was asked if I support any smoking bans or any restrictions on
smokers and I said no. I then stated that you should not smoke while
pumping gas, but that was it.
5. I stated that different areas for smokers and non smokers was a very
good setup and fair to everyone concerned because we all got to share and
enjoy with equal rights.
6. I was asked if I thought that smoking bans would cause losses in
restaurants and stated I guarantee it! Then I was asked if I has any proof
of this. I opened my presentation "Losses, Layoffs and Lawsuits" to the
section on restaurant and bar losses and as I turned the pages, I named off
another city or state. I read one article I had about the losses in New
Your state from Newsday that ran into the millions of dollars and thousands
of jobs lost and you could hear a pin drop. I also pointed out that in
October 2004 that every member of council was given this presentation. The
attitude in the room before I spoke is that smoking bans would not cause
losses and maybe even improve business.
My comments to the group was that you already have this information and you
have chosen to ignore it. If you don't see it then you don't want to see it.
7. I was asked about children with asthma and their special concerns (the
for the children plea) and I said that children were the concern of their
parents, and that council had no cause for concern. If children have
special needs, then parents work around it.
After I was finished speaking, I was asked out side of council chambers for
an interview by one reporter. Within seconds there were about 6 or 7
reporters around asking me questions. The interest in my message was
good. Although I have yet to see or read any of it, I hope they got my
point across.
My statements to reporters was that I resented the fact that I had to be
here. I am a rather shy and like to keep to my self. But every time you
turn around some one is trying to take my rights away and I will not have
it! I will not go quietly! If and when I win this battle for myself, I
win it for everyone else also.
The chance of this ordinance passing now are questionable. It is not well
written and everyone hates it for many different reasons. This matter came
up at this time to divert away attention from many other problems the mayor
and council are having with their power grabs. The state legislature are
about yank away 2 different ordinances that the mayor wants concerning
traffic and the heat on those are awful. Lets all hope it will become 3
strikes and your out on this mayor and council!
Public smoking ban idea still smoldering
By KRISTEN MACK
December 9, 2004
When Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs said she wanted to push for a citywide public smoking ban, Mayor Bill White told her she was on her own.
"This wasn't his priority," she said.
It still isn't.
Although he is reluctantly seeking a compromise, which he earlier promised to introduce before the year is out, he's running out of weeks.
Here's how we got here:
Sekula-Gibbs, the only physician on City Council — who has pushed for a "Healthy Houston" and sometimes sports a white lab coat at the council table — said she was waiting for the right time to press for a ban, knowing the mayor had to be on board.
The mayor controls the council agenda, so if he doesn't support something, it doesn't happen.
A few weeks after a story appeared in the Chronicle about Sekula-Gibbs' desire for a smoking ban, the mayor announced, unbeknownst to her, that he was going to propose his own plan, incrementally changing existing rules.
He said he would ban smoking in restaurants, but not in bars, and that his proposal would be phased in over two years to try to minimize negative effects on businesses.
"The mayor has his own way of doing things," Sekula-Gibbs said.
White said that under his proposal, restaurants with bars in their establishments would be allowed to maintain smoking areas in the bars, as long as they provided "real separation" from the dining areas.
Sekula-Gibbs called the mayor's plan illusory.
"Unless you can build a wall, it's worthless," she said. "It's more of the same."
Under Houston's current ordinance, restaurants and other public buildings are allowed to have smoking areas if they are properly ventilated. Smoking is banned within 25 feet of entrances to public buildings.
Sekula-Gibbs knows passing a citywide ban will be difficult, but says that if her sampling of the community is accurate — she has received 226 e-mails backing the ban and 40 against it — Houstonians want smoke-free places to enjoy dining and drinking.
She also contends that a full ban on smoking in public facilities would help smokers quit, arguing that a reduction in availability of places to smoke will encourage smokers to stop and others not to start.
White has been known to say that people don't go to bars to get healthy. He is trying to find a middle ground, checking to see how far other council members are willing to go to respond to public sentiment without upsetting the restaurant industry.
Juli Salvagio, executive director of the Greater Houston Restaurant Association, said restaurant owners are not crazy about the plan that's been laid out because they think their businesses will suffer.
"We know something is coming," she said. "We've been told we'll have an opportunity to look at it and make sure it's not completely out of line."
Salvagio said White's plan is a compromise the association can live with, but she is worried that some smokers will take their business to surrounding cities and counties with looser smoking rules.
Sekula-Gibbs said she has contacted mayors in eight surrounding communities, including Sugar Land, Galve-ston, Kemah and Bellaire, about establishing some geographic consistency. They are all interested and waiting to see what Houston does, she said.
The mayor promised to put his plan up for a council vote before the end of the year. His chief of staff, Michael Moore, said Thursday that an ordinance will be written by the end of the year, but probably won't be voted on until the beginning of next year.
Sekula-Gibbs still hopes the smoke clears sooner rather than later.
"I was counting on what the mayor said," Sekula-Gibbs said. "I'm hoping he has the same calendar I do."
