Smoking Ban July 3 09[1]

CALPOT-Y ""0'31**6;1il:BT'nYrH'*'" Orfalea College of Business (805\ 756-2704 'Fax (805\ 756-1473 http://www.cob.calpoly.edu/

July3,2009 To Whom It May Concern: I have beenaskedto provide input into the discussionof the economiceffectsof a smoking ban in St. Louis Crty. I provide this letter without compensationand haveno stakein whetheror not your community approvesa ban. I am a non-smokingacademiceconomistwho has published eight articles on the economicsof smokingbansin refereedacademicjoumals (listed at end of letter). The table below displaysrough estimatesof how many ownersof bars and restaurantswill be adversely affected by a smoking ban. Estimatesare based on my researchin which I have empirically examinednationaland state-specificdata. of Predicted Ellbcts liom Ban Losers Gainers Z5Yoto54Yo 3Yotol7%o 8l% to 83% Io/oto2Yo

Restaurants Bars

No Effect 37Yoto57Yo

t3%

Theseestimatesare consistentwith economictheory and show that smokingbanswill adversely affect a significant number of owners and that bar owners suffer harm much more frequently than restaurantowners.It is also important to note that it makeslittle economicsenseto argue that all ownerswill either be unaffectedor evengain. This is wishfirl thinking at best. Two reasonsindicatethat economicharm in St. Louis City wilt be on the high-endof the above numbers.One reasonis that relatively few of its residentsfavor bans in restaurantsand bars accordingto the 2007MissouriCounty-LevelStudyconductedby the Office of Epidemioloryof the MissouriDepartment of Healthand SeniorServices.Only half (49.4%)of surveyrespondents believed that smoking should be banned in restaurantsand one-fourth (24.5%) believed in bans in bars. My empirical researchhas demonstratedthat economicharm is greatestin areasin which residentsdo not fully supportbans.Also notice that theseresponsesare consistentwith data aboveindicating that harm would be greaterfor bar owners. The other reasonis that relatively many residentsof St. Louis City smokeand thereforeeconomicharm will be on the high side becausemy researchshowsthat economicharm is directly relatedto numbersof smokers.The chart below clearly showsthat smoking in Missouri remainswell abovethe US average. Given that my researchhas clearly shownthat economicharm is greatestin areaswith relatively many smokers,it is easyto predict that economicharm will be on the high side in St. Louis City. Notice, as well, that the chart reinforcesthe above evidenceshowingthat residentsdo not fully support smoking bans.

The

Catifornia

State Univetsity

MontereyBay.

. Bakerefield.

Northidge.

Pomona.

Chamellslands. Sacnmento.

Chico.

DominguezHills.

SanBemardino.

SanDiego.

Frsno.

Fullerton.

SmFraci*o.

Halvard.

SmJoe.

Humboldt'longBeach'IosAngeles'MaritimeAcademy'

SanluisObispo.

SanMarcm'Sonoma'Stanislaus

Emoking Plsvalance

n

9b I

21

19 1995

19S6

1Sg/

199a

19S

20oo

2001

2W

2003

M

2oO4

m7

',05

from I would b" huppyto conductresearchfor you in whigh I lnore clearly rwiey the evidence be the many studiesof smokingbanswith spicial attentiongiven to St. Louis City- I would also significant a statistically on available to conduct a detailed statistical analysis that is based sampling of your businessesso that you can better understandwhat fraction of your business be owners would be harmed by a smoicingban. Estimatesof extent of damagecould also assessed. Sincerely,

/51MichaelL. Marlow, Ph.D. Professorof EconomicsandDistinguishedScholar Califomia PolytechnicStateUniversity SanLuis Obispo,CA93407 [email protected]

3 RefereedPublicatignsby Michael L. Marlow on SmokineBanS "Eptd".tt"t.gic and Economic Research,and the Question of Smoking Bars," Journal of AmericanPhysicignsand Surgeons,Summer2049o'TheEconomic Effects of Smoking Bans on Restaurantsand Pubs in the UK," (with Barrie Craven)EconomicAffairs December2008. '

ooHonestly, Who Else Would Fund Such Research?Reflectionsof a Non-smoking Scholat," EconJournalWatch,5(z),pp.24A-268,2008. "The Private Market for Accommodation,"Easjern Economic Journal (with John Dunham) 3A377-91,Summer2A04. "The Economic Incidenceof SmokingRestrictions,"Applied Economics(with John Dunham), 35: 1935-1942,Decertber2003. Baf,sand Tavernso"18: 326-333' "The Differential Effects of SmokingLaws on Restaurants, (with Dunham). John ContemporaryEconomiqPolicY,July 2000 o'smokingLaws and the Allocation of Restaurantand Bar Seating,"EcqnomicInguiry January 2000:38:l5l-157. (with JohnDunham). "smoking Bans and the Coase Theorem," B4efine Notes in Economics, May 1997, (with William J. Boyes).