• Home
• News
• Local News
• Atlantic City

ATLANTIC CITY - The city official who was among the most vocal supporters of a resort-wide smoking ban now wants it off the table.

Calling it a restriction is really more accurate. No matter what local lawmakers decide, certain casino lounges likely could continue to allow smoking, Councilman Bruce Ward said Wednesday.

"Smoking is outlawed in every workplace in New Jersey except casinos," he said.

City Council likely will vote next week on exactly how to limit lighting up on casino floors, according to Councilman Dennis Mason.

Local laws prohibited smoking at gaming halls for one month in 2008 before council relaxed them to allow it on 25 percent of casino floors since last November.

Health advocates have stepped up the pressure on public officials during the past few weeks. They sling statistics: some quantify well-documented links between health problems and cigarettes and others present more surprising estimates, for example, of health and social costs approaching $10 million.

Meanwhile, executive and labor leaders in the casino industry have fought against cutting out tobacco-dependent customers so close to smoke-friendly gambling halls in Pennsylvania.

Contact Emily Previti:

609-272-7221

EPreviti@pressofac.com

22 comments:

• anthcaruso8 (15) posts 5:59 am

  there are those who get lung cancer from secondhand smoke and those who have many other respiratory infections from it too......so, why must you try to justify someones idiotic choice to poison themselves and others by taking up cigarette smoking when it is banned in many states and countries around the world and 99% of NEW JERSEY it is banned? For crying out loud,....nobody is saying you can't smoke and kill yourself with those 4,000 chemicals...just take it outside or in the smoking lounges, you bunch of losers!!!

• nortongaming (3) posts 6:42 pm

  The no smoking ban may make sense for commercial businesses or government offices, but is very intrusive for customers of restaurants, bars and casinos. Employees have a right to be concerned, but a casino floor is large enough to have a smoking and a non smoking section, and the smoking section should be staffed by employees who smoke. This would be a slight imposition on those executives who schedule casino floor employees. But my guess is there are plenty of dealers, cocktail servers, security and management, who are smokers, to staff all needed positions in the smoking section. I wonder what kind of success a smoking employee would have in suing their casino, as is currently happening in Las Vegas at Wynn Resorts and Caesars.

• Maxrep (5) posts 4:52 pm

  If smoking is not dangerous then why do they put filters on them? The smokers are inhaling the filtered smoke and the dealers are inhaling the unfiltered smoke. You harleyrider probably believe everything politicians say too. You tell me I believe the "hypsters" no I don't have to listen to anybody on this issue because I live it everyday when I go to work on the casino floor. Don't try to push your B.S. on me I know the truth. If you haven't lived it you have no idea what it is like or what you are talking about. Secondhand smoke is much more then just an irritant. Once again I will say if it is not dangerous then let the nurses that smoke smoke while taking care of patients, after all it won't harm them it might just bother them a little. The problem is that there are a lot of uneducated people out there like harleyrider and they will believe his lies.

• harleyrider1978 (3) posts 1:17 pm

  [[As for the burning of leaves, a ridiculous analogy, those leaves do not have the chemicals in them that the tobacco companies put in there cigarettes, it is more then just tobacco leaves.]] These readings were taken by the surgeon general in 1989 and osha took the same readings for over 40 years........all from the coal end of a cigarette and from enclosed spaces with no ventilation....your the one that is believing the hypesters propaganda.......I suggets you not donate to the non-profits any longer.they are all lying to you.or are you on their payroll...please take a bath I assume your afraif of water since your scared of tobacco smoke........

• Maxrep (5) posts 11:49 am

  I guess Harleyrider is one of those people that believes everything he reads. You are a smoker so you are biased. You have never dealt on a BJ game with 7 people 2 feet from your face smoking and blowing it right at you. Those levels of secondhand smoke are more concentrated then your report. I will say that it may never cause cancer in most but there is no doubt in my mind that it does cause a number of other health related issues. If it isn't as bad as you are saying then why not let everyone smoke where they want to including hospitals. It would be no problem according to you to be in a hospital bed and have a nurse taking care of you with a cigarette hanging out of her mouth. As for the burning of leaves, a ridiculous analogy, those leaves do not have the chemicals in them that the tobacco companies put in there cigarettes, it is more then just tobacco leaves. I suggest you live it instead of reading about it then you will have the information you need to speak on this issue intelligently, after you have experienced it.

• harleyrider1978 (3) posts 8:22 am

  SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor..................thats right water..........you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made......thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons.......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ........they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science......... Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057 concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers..... meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:

• harleyrider1978 (3) posts 7:43 am

  Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent " The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: 'There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.' " And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations. The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.) The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It's not true. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/ As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997 -harleyrider1978

• anthcaruso8 (15) posts 11:37 pm

  Health care costs total over $10 BILLION not million as this novice reporter states. Also, Councilman BRUCE WARD stated it is a smoking RESTRICTION not a total ban and he wants the 100%...but it cannot be a total ban if people still smoke in lounges, as he suggests. This reporter hasn't a clue and was at the mtg last night too. Dennis Mason should recuse himself since he is on the CRDA and in harrahs pocket$$.

• essyma (33) posts 10:03 pm

  what is it the smokers won? lung cancer??

• essyma (33) posts 9:21 pm

  smoking doesn't exist in 99% of nj's workplaces; it doesn't have to exist on the remaining 25% of the casino floors either. Times change; get over living in the past, we all know smoking kills.

• Lew Carroll (410) posts 7:31 pm

  obiter dicta: 1) if you don't like abortion, don't have one 2) if you don't like the program, change the channel 3) if you don't like the heat, stay out of the kitchen 4) if you go to a casino, or work in a casino, smoke is the eau du jour, it's de rigeur, it's sultry and sexy and sung by a chanteuse, it's Betty Bacall fastening her lips to the cigarette for Bogie to light. Yes yes, it's harmful, like about 101 other daily behaviors all around you. But why let the tail wag the dog? Did you go to a casino expecting to find alpine meadows? hmmmm. "Frailty, thy name is non-smoker."

• RandomX856 (158) posts 6:47 pm

  I can't wait until this issue is resolved once and for all. I'm so tired of hearing about it. A 100% smoking ban is going to hurt A.C. I don't promote risking the health of the workers however. But seriously, how much time do the workers hang around the smoking slots area? Require employees to sit in the ventilation booth if its really that much of a concern. When needed, they can come out and assist the customers before returning to the booth.

• SmokersParadise (12) posts 3:38 pm

  The smokers have won. It's over ladies and gentleman. If you don't like smoke go find another source of recreation.

• SmokersParadise (12) posts 3:38 pm

  The smokers have won. It's over ladies and gentleman. If you don't like smoke go find another source of recreation.

• Maxrep (5) posts 3:21 pm

  Anyone who says the smoke is part of your job and you knew that when you took the job so deal with it is an idiot. Would you say sexual harassment is part of working with men to a woman so deal with it or get another job? no, S.H. is now illegal. Would you tell police officers that we are not going to buy you bullet proof vests because the possibility of getting shot is part of the job so deal with it and you knew that when you took the job?, no you wouldn't. So why is it so wrong for us to want to make our workplace safer and better for all? Please samurai explain that to me. And don't give me that smoking, drinking and gambling go together because there are plenty of smokers that i see play for hours in on a non-smoking game. FYI we have a lot of dealers that are smokers and they can't stand to work on the smoking games either. We want our civil rights like every other employee in NJ. Question: When AC City Council reversed the ordinance last year after we were smoke free for 4-6 weeks, wasn't that illegal? I mean they knowingly put public health at risk by once again allowing smoking in casinos, how can they do that? Any lawyers out there?

• snowbird (3) posts 2:55 pm

  A sign in the archway. "You are now entering a smoke-free environment" "You are now entering a smoking environment"

• essyma (33) posts 1:12 pm

  To Samurai: Oh, where is it written that SMOKING BELONGS IN CASINOS?? Is that the same as it belonged in every other workplace in NJ, UNTIL the smokefree air act of 2006 banned it everywhere except casinos?? Where is it someones right to kill others with secondhand smoke?? You whine about your rights, so give us our right to clean air. Go outside or in the lounge if you want to smoke and kill yourself!

• essyma (33) posts 1:09 pm

  No wonder nobody reads the PRESS....only found this as a coworker told me how wrong it was. Ward did NOT indicate anything about taking it off the table and you should RETRACT THIS STORY IMMEDIATELY! What he said was "SMOKING RESTRICTION" not "SMOKING BAN"....where did you graduate high school??

• ericdagreat (23) posts 10:52 am

  INACCURATE INFO IN THIS REPORT BY EMILY PREVITI..RETRACTION URGENTLY NEEDED ASAP: HEALTH CARE COSTS WERE $10 BILLION, NOT $10 MILLION AS PER TESTIMONY GIVEN BY AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION AT COUNCIL MTG LAST NIGHT. SECONDLY, COUNCILMAN BRUCE WARD DID NOT STATE ANYTHING CLOSE TO WHAT YOU WROTE ABOUT TAKING ANYTHING OFF THE TABLE...HE MADE A SUGGESTION TO COUNCILMAN MOORE AND THE REVENUE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE THAT THE WORDING OF "SMOKING BAN" BE CHANGED/AMENDED TO "SMOKING RESTRICTION". IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING OR FOLLOWED THIS ISSUE, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE REPORTED THIS AS YOU DID. PLEASE CORRECT SO YOU DO NOT CONTINUE TO REPORT WRONG INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC. THERE IS ALSO NO SCHEDULED MEETING NEXT WEEK BY CITY COUNCIL AS YET, THE NEXT MTG IS NOV 10TH. DO YOU HAVE A CLUE???

• Samurai Warrior (187) posts 10:05 am

  gambling, itself, is injurious to public health, just like drinking, and smoking, and gay bathhouses. the casino differs from a brothel in degree and size only, not in kind. which is why so many localities shun gambling, even in times of recession. Too many bottom-feeders and camp-followers. Smoking BELONGS in a casino, it's part of the devil-may-care, go-for-broke illusion. If you don't like it, stay in the non-smoking areas or gamble at non-smoking casinos, if they exist. You took your job there knowing the conditions - deal with it and stop the finger-pointing and whining.

• topdown (13) posts 10:05 am

  EMILY PREVITI....No offense intended my dear but as far as this article that you have written is concerned you are totaly clueless. T

• topdown (13) posts 10:05 am

  EMILY PREVITI....No offense intended my dear but as far as this article that you have written is concerned you are totaly clueless. T

PressofAtlanticCity.com offers everyone the opportunity to comment on published stories. However, it is impractical for editors to screen all comments.
If you believe a comment is offensive, please click on the abuse-reporting link and your objection will be considered by an editor. We encourage participants to use their real names, but inoffensive screen names are acceptable. Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them.
Please post responsibly. Do not post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy.
Be polite. Don’t hate. Users who don’t play by the rules may be blocked from participating.

View our full terms of service and privacy agreement

Click here to report a comment as abusive.

You must login to post a new comment