back to news

 Detroit News

A year later, Michigan's smoking ban has mixed impact



 Lansing — On May 1, 2010, Ray Basham took two granddaughters to a Taylor bowling alley. He doesn't recall his score, but sniffing the air, he knew he'd won.

"I could breathe easier," said Basham, who'd fought for years in the Michigan Legislature to ban smoking in public places.

That same day, Boyd Cottrell arrived early at the Warren bar he'd bought five months earlier. He put away ashtrays as the first customer of the day walked in and lit up a cigarette.

"I told him he couldn't smoke in here and he (cursed)," Cottrell said. "I've been losing money ever since."

A year after Michigan's bar and restaurant smoking ban went into effect, there's less smoke in the air, but also less money in the till.

Michigan's tough smoking ban has limited exposure to secondhand smoke in bars, restaurants and bowling alleys across the state, which will likely reduce the rates of cancer and other illnesses.

But the ban has also hurt business in bars and drained about $50 million from the state's cash-strapped budget in lost cigarette taxes and Michigan Lottery Keno sales.

"There are winners and losers," said Basham, who was term-limited out of office in 2010. "My goal as a legislator was never to hurt business, but ... to protect public health."

Advocates of the ban predicted it will reduce smoking by 5 percent to 20 percent over time and that the state would save $6.4 million for every percentage point in Medicaid costs that are reduced through a dropoff in smoking and illnesses caused by secondhand smoke.

The health benefits of the smoking ban are difficult to quantify. Lowered exposure to secondhand smoke likely will decrease illnesses such as cancer, asthma, diabetes and heart disease over time, but it will take longer to measure those drops.

Air monitoring before and after the ban found the level of smoke in bars has decreased.

A separate study of 40 bar employees in 14 counties found lower levels of secondhand smoke and fewer complaints about coughing and allergy symptoms. Both studies were conducted by the Michigan Department of Community Health.

Liquor sales fall almost 4%

It's easier to quantify the economic damage the ban has done to Michigan bars.

Through the first nine months of the ban, on-premise liquor sales dropped 3.7 percent, according to data from the Michigan Liquor Control Commission. Liquor sales were up at grocery stores and party stores, which some suggest shows more people were opting to drink at home.

A report by the Michigan Department of Treasury examining the first six months of the ban concluded it had "reduced the activity at taverns that serve liquor."

Lottery Keno game sales, a game played primarily in bars, restaurants and bowling alleys, dropped 15 percent through the first 11 months of the ban after years of increased sales, according to Michigan Lottery data.

The $67.9 million decline in Keno sales translates to a $17.3 million decline in cash the lottery could pass along to Michigan schools — a far greater loss than the $4 million predicted by the House Fiscal Agency when the smoking ban was being debated.

"We can definitely attribute that to the smoking ban," said Andi Brancato, director of public relations for the Michigan state lottery. "Once that went into effect, the sales dropped."

Businesses keep 6 percent of the money spent on Keno sales. "My (gross) Keno money has gone down," Cottrell said. "I was doing about $7,000-$8,000 a week, and I'm down to about $4,000."

The state will lose an estimated $33 million in cigarette tax revenue because of decreased cigarette sales, according to January projections by the House Fiscal Agency.

"There are massive losses (to the state)," said Steve Mace, president of Protect Private Property Rights in Michigan, a group that has held protests across the state against the ban. "And it's hurting the mom-and-pop corner bars that rely on a beer, a shot and a cigarette to survive."

Bar work force expands

Lance Binoniemi, executive director of the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association, said during the legislative debate that the ban would cost the state 7,500 jobs.

The bar work force actually increased by 1.45 percent during the first four months of the ban, according to a study conducted by the tax analysis division of the Michigan Department of Treasury. No newer data is available.

Binoniemi said the biggest impact can be seen in bars that cater to working-class clientele.

One example is Flood's Bar & Grill, a family-owned Detroit bar. Co-owner Christina Byrd said in December 2009 a third of the bar's patrons smoked. Since the ban, the bar's wait staff has had to decrease their work hours.

"It's hurt sales," Byrd said. "People are going in and out all night long trying to smoke. Some of them don't come back in."

Cottrell bought Sporty O'Toole's in Warren in December 2009, a few weeks before the Legislature passed the smoking ban.

"I would have never bought the bar if I'd known about the ban," said Cottrell, a retired Detroit police officer.

Cottrell cooks and washes dishes at his bar because he had to lay off the cook. "I'm not trying to be a millionaire, but I put my retirement money in this bar.

"This is a factory bar. People breathe toxins all day at work and come in here, and the state says they can't light a cigarette? This is inherently wrong."

Compliance with ban high

While bar owners have grumbled, compliance with the law has been high. Spot checks across the state by the Department of Community Health found about 95 percent of bars were smoke-free. Oakland County hasn't issued any citations for violations of the smoking ban, while Macomb has issued 40. Wayne County data was not available.

Cottrell challenged the law in court. He had a fine for violating the smoking ban tossed out earlier this month, but Macomb County Circuit Judge Edward Servitto denied Cottrell's bid to declare the law unconstitutional. Cottrell plans an appeal.

The ban is less an economic issue than a health issue, said James McCurtis, spokesman for the Michigan Department of Health.

"There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke," McCurtis said. "It exacerbates asthma, diabetes, cancer and causes problems for women who are pregnant. We're trying to help protect the patrons and employees of restaurants and bars."

Bill Russell of Springport said he's happy with the ban, adding he has visited restaurants he'd never been in since the ban took effect. "There were places we wouldn't go because of the smoke," Russell said. "Now if we're out for a ride and we see a small place, we'll try it out because we know there's no smoke."

Former Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, is a nonsmoker, but fought the ban because he felt it was an infringement on the rights of private business. He still feels that way, but doubts the ban will be lifted. Even pro-business Gov. Rick Snyder is a staunch supporter.

By the time the ban finally passed, "it was no longer a political issue," Bishop said. "It was being driven by the populace, and that's really democracy in action."