Governor Tim Kaine was in Virginia Beach Monday to announce his push for a statewide smoking ban. The funny thing?
Flanked by lawmakers who said they will sponsor smoking-ban bills this year, Kaine made the announcement at Hot Tuna Bar & Grill, a smoke-free restaurant on Shore Drive.
Yep. He was in a restaurant that has already gone smoke-free, without any such statewide ban on the books. Ah, but it gets worse:
About 560 Virginia Beach restaurants have voluntarily gone smoke-free, according to Virginia Beach Restaurant Association officials who support a statewide ban.
OK, so 560 restaurants have taken it upon themselves to run their businesses the way they see fit and now they want the government to impose a restriction on others that choose to operate differently. Got it.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Ah, a point upon which we can agree. Couldn’t have said it better myself, Viv.
I love it when we agree, Vivian! As much as I don’t like being surrounded by smoke when I’m out at a bar or restaurant, I stand by an owner’s right to allow smoking in his establishment. As you rightly pointed out, many Virginia restaurant owners have freely gone smoke-free, so there are places available to accomodate both smokers and non-smokers. With freedom, everybody wins!
Grow a pair and stop relying on government to help you out. – This is the last sentence of your post in April.
That sentence could be used for a lot of what the government currently provides or what others want the government to provide.
How ironic!
Take a look at that list of 560 VB restaurants. Other than the “Ma and Pa” small owner restaurants, it has 20 McDonalds, 7 Arby’s, 12 bagel/coffee shops/bakeries, 1 Chuckie Cheese, Purple Cow, the Food Court in Lynnhaven Mall, 15 Burger Kings, 15 gas stations that also make sandwiches, 9 Chick-fil-a’s, 9 Tropical Fruit Smoothies, 11 Pizza Huts, the Tidewater Volleyball and Princess Anne Country Club snack bars, 3 Harris Teeters and other grocery stores, dozens of sub/pizza joints… I think you get my point. What you have here is a VB Restaurant Association that is very good at making something out of nothing. A small group of restaurants in what I have found to be a health conscience community got together and rather than stick their necks out as a small group rounded up any and everything that remotely resembled a restaurant, with a job made all the easier by the fact that these “restaurants” would never in a million years think to allow smoking. They did so to pad out their bargaining power. And remember too they were doing this at a time when Gov. Kaine was opposed to the ban. Not on that list of 560 are all Kelly’s Taverns, Ruby Tuesdays, Applebys, Outbacks, Starbucks (with the exception of 2 near me), all Sports bars, Hooters, all the larger chains that the otherwise Ma and Pa owners compete with. So they not only had to trump up their numbers, they also had the no small task of educating Gov. Kaine and slowly getting him to see the light, which also helps level the playing field with their bigger chain competition.
I’m with you on not supporting the smoking ban in favor of giving business owners the choice of going smoke-free, or not.
Maybe the legislators and restaurant association think they are helping the small business owners, but I know of a number of individual restaurant owners here in Richmond that have gone smoke-free. They have done fine, as have the owners that have decided to allow smoking.
As for competing with the franchises and corporate restaurants, whatever happened to embracing the niche markets as a way of competing. The franchises tend to cater to the lowest common denominator in trying to pull in customers. Go the other way emphasize that you allow smoking, or that you don’t. Use the market in your favor rather than trying to strap everyone down with legislation.
Poll after poll after poll shows supermajority approval for smoking bans in restaurants. Don’t be shocked when politicians pay attention.
Brian,
Supermajorities in the Old South also approved of slavery and Jim Crow laws. Politicians pandered to them too.
Being the majority is not the same thing as being in the right. We live in a representative republic largely to protect us from the tyranny of the majority.
If you are merely making a prediction of what politicians will do, OK, but if you think that is an excuse for doing it, you need a course in remedial Constitution.
Vivian, I love you, Please give up the cigarettes. You are a treasure and I want you around for a long time.
In the interest of full disclosure, how many of the commenters here are smokers — vjp included?
Telling a business how to operate DOES bother me, but . . . .
As Kaine pointed out at the news conference — this is also for employees of the restaurants. And don’t say “they can go work elsewhere.” Can you name another place of employment that would allow smoking and then, when an employee complained, would be told: “If you don’t like it, go work somewhere else?” Not to mention the fact that there are many times when smokers don’t respect non-smokers and you are enveloped by the smoke anyway.
What is the deal about banning smoking anyway? We need to allow this for others for what reason? It’s not like we are banning oxygen or rest rooms; the ban is for spewing poisonous smoke into the air where it can affect others.
In the interest of full disclosure, I am not a smoker. I just think that if there is a demand for smoke-free establishments (and I think there is), then some enterprising people will open smoke-free bars and restaurants. Since it should be easy to attract both staff and patrons who are demanding such establishments, they should be profitable ventures. Then, all of us non-smokers will be able to enjoy pleasant eating and drinking experiences and leave the smokers to do their thing in their place.
The deal about banning smoking is that people with different habits, practices, and interests should be able to do their thing in their own space without interference from the nanny state. Smoking is unhealthy, smelly, and generally unattractive in my opinion, but I would prefer to protect the right of smokers to smoke in the interest of protecting my own right to do what I do with what is mine.
Don, amazing…what a shift from your feelings about the transportation referendum
Brian,
Please point to where I said the HRTA was bad because the majority opposed it. You’re thinking of someone else. I oppose the HRTA because it is bad policy in numerous ways.
My political positions are rarely linked to my feelings, in any case. I rely on reason. I don’t smoke, second hand smoke riggers asthma attacks for me. I have to take antihistamines and inhaled steroids just to make a brief visit at Vivian’s Drinking Liberally gatherings. If I were guided by self interest or emotion, I would be on the other side.
The unfettered rule of the majority is one of the worst dangers we face. The framers of our Constitution recognized that and provided for republican forms of government for the nation and the States (See Article one section 9) That is why I oppose trampling anyone’s rights based on the convenience of the mob.
Even when I’m part of the mob.
Don, you should read your own website more often.
http://taborvasenate.com/Transportation.html
“Elected representatives have a duty to carry out the will of their constituency. In November of 2002, the citizens of Hampton Rotes voted by nearly a two to one margin to reject raising the region’s sales tax to pay for the same “package” of highway projects that HB 3202 is created to fund. The will of the people as expressed at the ballot box should never be ignored by their elected representatives. The voters said “NO!” loud and clear and Senator Blevins joined with other RINOs in our General Assembly to ignore the will of the people and to create new taxes, new fees, and add new tolls to pay for the same poorly planned “packet” of new highways his constituency already rejected – with good reason.”