SENATE HEARING ON BAR SMOKING BAN

DESPITE DISCONTENT among bar owners and a tobacco industry-funded lobbying
campaign, a bill that would repeal a controversial ban on smoking in bars
faces an uphill battle in the state Senate.

The measure, AB297, which passed the Assembly in January, is slated to get
its first hearing in the Senate on Wednesday, but observers say the bill
lacks support on the committee that will consider it.

The bill is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Health Committee. But
Assemblyman Ed Vincent, D-Inglewood, said through a staff member that he
was not planning on presenting his bill to the committee.

Vincent could not be reached for comment. It was unclear Monday if or when
Vincent planned to present the bill to the committee.

John Miller, chief of staff for Sen. Diane Watson, D-Los Angeles,
chairwoman of the health committee, said even if Vincent does not present
the bill, the committee will hold an informational hearing on the issue.

Miller said Watson, a supporter of the smoking ban, is eager to see the
repeal bill get a prompt and full hearing.

"The possibility that the ban would be lifted has been exploited by its
opponents," he said. "They have argued you don't need to comply because
we're going to change the law. The existence of this bill has tended to
undermine the effectiveness of the law."

He said an informational hearing would give the anti-smoking lobby a chance
to make its case to the public.

"Much of the contest has been carried out in the media, and supporters (of
the repeal) have employed a very successful company to make their case," he
said. "The tobacco control people don't have that access or level of
sophistication to counter it. This will be their first chance to speak on
an equal footing."

Gary Auxier, senior vice president of the National Smokers' Alliance, a
tobacco lobbying group based in Virginia, said he hoped that "some sort of
relief measure" for smokers and bar owners would go to a floor vote in the
Senate.

"We have a lot of people out there that need some relief, want some relief,
wherever they can get it," he said.

The alliance, in conjunction with Burson-Marsteller, the world's largest
public relations firm, has been organizing bar owners and patrons to voice
their opposition to the smoking ban.

The ban, which went into effect in January, is the final component of
California's smoke-free workplace law, which eliminated smoking in most
indoor workplaces beginning in 1995. Bars, taverns and gaming clubs --
which employ 850,000 people in the state -- were exempted until 1998.

The law is designed to protect employees from the dangers of secondhand smoke.

Mert Mehmet, owner of Beck's Farmhouse in Newark, said business at his bar
dropped by 35 percent since the year started. He's been writing his state
senator and has been asking customers to sign repeal petitions.

"All the local bars around here, they're deader than doornails," he
complained. "Smoking in a bar goes hand in hand. People like to smoke and
they like to drink. What are you going to do, play with your thumbs?
Government control has got to stop somewhere."

What makes Mehmet especially angry is that just last year he installed an
expensive smoke filtration system that he says removes most of the smoke --
and its health hazards -- from the air. He believes that system is the real
solution to the problem of secondhand smoke, and he's frustrated that it's
not good enough for state legislators.

In San Francisco, Gary McGowan, proprietor of The Swallow on Polk Street,
said he, too, has joined the repeal campaign.

He hasn't seen a measurable drop-off in business, he said, but he said his
main complaint is one of principle.

"Our government keeps chopping away at our civil liberties," said McGowan.
"This is a legal product. I own the bar. I should be the one to be able to
say, "This is a no-smoking bar or a smoking bar.' "

The real issue is not civil liberties, but worker safety, insists Ann
Wright, a spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society, which is
spearheading a coalition of repeal opponents that includes the American
Heart Association, the American Lung Association, the California Medical
Association, the California Nurses Association and the state Labor
Federation.

Wright acknowledged that the law creates a big change for bars, but said
she didn't think it was a catastrophic one.

"When the (initial portion of the workplace smoking) law first went into
effect in 1995, the tobacco industry said the same thing: Everybody will go
out of business; nobody will go out to eat. That didn't happen."

In fact, she said, she believes almost 90 percent of bars and cardrooms are
complying with the law, including many in San Francisco.

Though it seems unlikely, she added that she hopes the matter will go to a
vote in the Senate Health Committee Wednesday, and meet its final defeat.
"There needs to be some resolution to this," she said. "The public and
people in business need to know this is a done deal."

)1998 San Francisco Examiner