anti-smoker media have cold-bloodedly murdered democracy, in order to
their health fascist agenda of a tobacco-free universe down the world's
throat. This transcript of Joy Cardin's call-in program on Wisconsin
Public Radio is the fraudulent, staged "discussion" of a totalitarian
dictatorship, not a free society!
Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center Poll is as
illegitimate as a Communist election, because they
achieved their phony "approval" by the same means, namely ruthless
censorship of dissent. For
six decades, WPR (and all the rest of the media) have presented only
one side of the issue: The anti-smokers' side, and the
anti-smoker-approved misrepresentation of their opponents' point of
view. Only trivial "criticisms" are permitted. Informed critics are not
allowed to speak. Exposing the anti-smokers' systematic scientific
fraud of deliberately using defective studies in order to falsely blame
secondhand smoke for diseases caused by infection is forbidden. This is
how the anti-smokers achieve their glorious victories!
You're listening to the Ideas Network of Wisconsin Public Radio.
Good morning, I'm Joy Cardin. It's coming up on ten minutes past six
o'clock on this Thursday, April the 26th.
This hour, we'll talk more about the latest results from the Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center poll. Today, whether or not we support a statewide smoking ban in all workplaces, including bars and restaurants. A bill modeled after the smoking bans in Madison and Appleton was unveiled in the State Legislature last week, and supporters said they would not accept an exemption for taverns as the Tavern League wants, and Governor Doyle indicated he might accept, if that's what the legislature passed. We'll talk about our poll results and how they fit into this debate, and then we will welcome in guests from all sides of this issue, including one of the state legislators who is sponsoring this bill; a spokesperson for the Restaurant Association, which doesn't want an exemption for taverns; and we'll also hear from a guest from the Tavern League. All this hour, and we will welcome your questions for all of our guests. 1-800-642-1234, in Madison 263-1890. Do you think Wisconsin should ban smoking in all workplaces, including restaurants and bars? Or do you think there ought to be an exemption for bars, or maybe restaurants? What are your views? We welcome your thoughts on this issue. Let us start with Wendy Scattergood. She is an assistant professor of political science at St. Norbert College in De Pere, and she is our analyst for the Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center poll. Good morning.
Scattergood: Good morning.
Cardin: So the- we asked what?
Scattergood: We asked the Governor's Intiative, which is is as part
of a broader smoking initiative, Governor Doyle has proposed a
statewide smoking ban in public buildings, workplaces, restaurants, and
taverns. And we asked, do you support or oppose such a ban? And we
found that 63% said that they support this overall ban, 35% opposed,
and 2% were not sure.
Cardin: Yeah. Uh, I - I'm trying to remember, did we uh ask this before?
Scattergood: No, we haven't.
Cardin: Mm hmm. What it - does the - do those results surprise you in any way?
Scattergood: Well, it is fairly high. Um, there was another study
done but it was sponsored by the um, American Lung Association and some
of the other groups that are anti-smoking, so you always, you know,
have to, to wonder about those. But the the numbers actually came out
fairly similar to that study that was done a couple of months ago.
Public Radio is, for all intents and purposes, just as much an
anti-smoking group as the American Lung Association or the American
Cancer Society. WPR has never attempted to be anything other than the
slavish propaganda organ of
It has neither engaged in any critical investigation of their health
lies, nor permitted replies by anyone who has. (Particularly including
the Restaurant Association and the Tavern League!)
Cardin: Yeah. Then, uh, then though, you broke it down a little bit and uh, it looks like... I don't know, that the support is less clear for perhaps uh, uh, banning smoking in taverns.
Scattergood: Um hmm. Well, we just asked of the people who opposed
that overall ban, [oh] where maybe some of the areas that they actually
support it. So, of the people who opposed banning in all of those
places, about 35% of those people, actually 70% said that they uh, that
they support a ban in public buildings. And then, 51% also support a
ban in workplaces. Then it's for those, again, of just those who oppose
the overall ban, whereas they oppose a ban in restaurants, and 90% of
those who oppose the overall ban oppose a- a ban in taverns. So that's
really what they're looking at for those who actually oppose this
blanket ban, it's really about restaurants and taverns for them. But
still, 63% support bans for- for all of those places.
Cardin: And and I'm, I, I suppose uh the the majority of people in this state are not smokers.
Scattergood: That's correct. Some of those studies that have been
done by the CDC, um, estimate about 21% of adults uh in the state smoke.
Cardin: And any uh demographic uh, notes, something to note?
Scattergood: Yes well, we found that women are much more supportive
of the ban than men. 68% of women support the ban whereas only 56% of
men do. Uh, younger people much more likely to support the ban. 18 to
25-year olds, 86% said that they support the ban; uh, 70% of 25 to
34-year olds, and then it kinda goes down from there a little bit. So,
really, among younger people, this ban is, is very popular. And the
other thing is uh, education based. Those with graduate degrees, 74%
say they op- that they support a ban and then it kinda - support goes
down from there. And so those with a high school degrees, 55% support
the ban. So still all, in all - educational categories, there is a
majority that support the ban.
women and children are weaker-minded. Shouldn't that make feminists
proud! And rich people are evil. What else is new?
Cardin: So Governor Doyle and the legislators who are proposing this statewide smoking ban have uh uh have some good uh ammunition here with our survey results.
Scattergood: Yeah, absolutely. I mean including for the overall ban,
and not necessarily an exemption for restaurants and taverns.
Cardin: Wendy, all right, thanks very much. We'll uh we'll we'll talk to you in the next hour when we talk about global warming, climate change issues, and whether or not we want to uh reduce greenhouse gases.
Scattergood: Uh huh.
Cardin: Thanks a lot. Wendy Scattergood, assistant professor of political science at St. Norbert College in De Pere, our analyst for the Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center Poll. We'll check weather, and then we're going to welcome in Steve Wieckert, Republican State Representative from Appleton, and co-author of the Breathe Free Wisconsin Act. And we'll welcome your thoughts and questions for him on whether or not you like the idea of this statewide ban on smoking in all workplaces, including bars and restaurants. 1-800-642-1234, in Madison 263-1890. I'm Joy Cardin, this is the Ideas Network of Wisconsin Public Radio.
Cardin: You're listening to the Ideas Network. I'm Joy Cardin. Happy to have you along, and hope you stay tuned. It's At Issue with Ben Merens this afternoon between 4 and 6. Then also, we'll be examining some of the results of our Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center poll for the spring of 2007. At 4 o'clock this afternoon, what is the most important problem facing the state of Wisconsin? What do you think it is? We'll uh release the results, and uh Ben will welcome your thoughts on the most pressing issues facing the state coming up this afternoon after 4 o'clock. Well, one of the issues facing the state - one of the issues before the State Legislature - is whether or not to ban smoking in all workplaces in Wisconsin, including bars and restaurants. As uh we just uh talked with Wendy Scattergood about, our Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center Poll found that the majority of Wisconsinites support this effort. 63% of those we asked said they would support this statewide ban, no exemptions for uh restaurants or taverns. 63% in support, 35% opposed. Of those who were opposed, uh much of the opposition, most of the opposition came when, uh to taverns. 1-800-642-1234, in Madison 263-1890. We welcome in now Steve Wieckert, a Republican state representative from Appleton and co-author of the Breathe Free Wisconsin Act. Good morning.
Wieckert: Good morning, good morning. Thanks for having me on.
the radio, every morning is a good and happy morning for anti-smokers,
because they know that it will be a safe and easy
experience for them. The media will never challenge their lies, and
will warmly approve of them for blowing off any attempt to criticize
the anti-smokers' scientific frauds. They are permitted to simply rush
on to the next caller, and the subject will never receive the serious
consideration that it deserves. Furthermore, an informed critic is
NEVER given a forum from which to answer the anti-smokers' numerous
Cardin: Yeah, so uh, probably not a huge surprise to you that uh the majority of uh th- the residents according to this poll, support uh a statewide smoking ban?
Wieckert: Well, no. And I think what's exciting is if we did this
poll uh consecutively over the previous years I think you'd have found
that number - that maybe at one point uh people were not aware of
secondhand smoke and the problems of it - and it would have not - been
maybe even less than 50%, it would have been 50, 55, 60, 63 now, and I
bet as years go on will be even higher. And I think that's really um,
people are really becoming informed and aware of the severity and uh,
the illnesses that secondhand smoke can really create. I give you an
example, uh 50,000 people, uh according to the Center for Disease
Control, are the number of people who pass away every year, not just
because of smoking, uh but because of secondhand smoke, kind of
innocent victims of that - and lung disease, heart disease, you name it.
are lies. ALL of the anti-smokers' ETS studies - every single one - are
based upon worthless lifestyle-questionnaire studies, which ignore the
role of infection in order to falsely blame secondhand smoke. These
studies are deliberate frauds, designed to exploit the fact that
smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to
carcinogenic viruses. The human papillomavirus,
which is known to cause
virtually all cervical cancers, is also involved in more than ten times
as many lung cancers as the anti-smokers pretend have been "caused by
secondhand smoke." The anti-smokers are automatically guilty of
scientific fraud, because it is a fundamental principle of epidemiology
that, until the stronger and more widespread factors have been
accounted for, it is not valid to proclaim conclusions about lesser
ones. Infections are implicated as causes of heart disease as well.
Cardin: Now the, the- statewide ban, the legislation is based on the bans uh that some local communities have, including Appleton?
Wieckert: Including Appleton. And expecially [sic] Appleton. That's,
that's uh you know, uh for me that's where I am, that's 57th Assembly
District. And uh Appleton has uh proved this uh ban uh for a number of
years now. We've had three, uh, "to the people" referendums that passes
- it passed all three times, that proved all three times, and each one,
each time by larger vote margins. So what we're doing, I tell people
simply uh simply what we're taking is the Appleton model, and applying
it statewide. And the benefit to that is um, it's so important, is
we're actually leveling the playing field for small businesses, such as
uh, restaurants and taverns, and bars.
have proven that they think they are entitled to commit any crime they
please, merely because they claim they don't like the smell of a whiff
of cigarette smoke. And they have collaborated in egregious bipartisan
corruption as well, see below. So we are entitled to suspect voting
Cardin: Yeah, because in the Fox Cities somebody could even cross a street and be in a different community and be able to smoke in that tavern.
Wieckert: And often do. And that's, that is actually a serious problem we have here. We're a regional area, and people can go to just uh right across the street like you say and it's a different municipality and they can go ahead and smoke. So it does hurt the smaller restaurants and bars. And applying it statewide, everyone would have the same uh, be operating under the same rules, the same standards, the same standards to apply to and would be, could compete much more fairly.
Cardin: Yeah. Any evidence as to whether the Appleton bar business is suffering? Are bars going out of business because of the ban in Appleton?
Wieckert: Well I think um, people say that there are always bars and
taverns going in business and starting business, and bars going out.
But uh to be accurate I've talked to a number of bar owners and they do
say their business is significantly being hurt. Some of them are, and
not all of them, but some of them are, and I think that's a genuine
concern, and it is happening to some extent but I think a lot of that,
if not all of it will be solved when we go to a statewide standard, and
that's so important. Um, one of the problems we have is defining the
differences between bars, uh taverns, and restaurants and where do you
draw the line because there's - so many are hybrids where you can get a
drink and a hamburger at the same time.
that the financial difficulties of those bars, as well as the phony
"problem" of definitions, are entirely due to the anti-smoker
legislators' own insistence upon passing laws, instead of leaving the
choice up to the business owner.
Cardin: That's why you're saying no exemptions.
Wieckert: No. No exemptions. It's so clear, it's so easy to implement then. And it's, it - you don't have to use judgments and- and decide whether 50% of the sales come from food or from liquor. Uh, you don't have to worry about people charging you know $15 for a hamburger and uh you know, 50 cents for you know three or four beers. Just to get those [inaudible] numbers.
Cardin: We have lots of callers who want to ask about this. Let me
go to the phones. Rebecca in Manitowoc, hi, you're on the air.
The caller's Noo Yawk accent practically broke the speakers. Once, when I truthfully reported my location in a nearby town, the WPR host accused me of lying and banned me from her program. But Ms. Noo Yawk is an anti-smoker, so it's ok for her to claim that she is from Manitowoc.
Rebecca: Hi, thank you for taking my call. I currently live in New
York City where they have this ban. And I, first of all, I am totally
for the ban. The only issue is whenever you leave any restaurant or
bar, or any, any public facility, anywhere you leave, you step out the
door and you walk into ten people standing outside the door smoking.
And I'm wondering if any provision is made of where outside the bar you
can smoke. You can walk up and down the streets and you're running into
all these smokers. It really affects the beautification of the area, um
and it, and it really does keep me from going certain places because I
know all these people are outside smoking. Whether they're inside
smoking or outside, they're still there.
contrast to how they shun serious criticism, see how the scum in the
media respectfully indulge the most mean-spirited, intolerant, and
vindictive utterances of anti-smokers - without pointing out that is
precisely because of people like her that smokers have been thrown out
in the streets in the first place.
Cardin: Well, Representative Wieckert, are you gonna - are we gonna ban that too?
Wieckert: No, uh not- not in this legislation. That's for someone
else to do, uh if it ever happens. But but I think um, that's a good
point. Um, we are aware that in some- some places, for example in
Appleton it does happen, but not many, and the reason is I think we, we
probably have a little more space than most of you do in Wisconsin than
New York City does, which is fortunate. And what we found out uh, I
think, uh as soon as soon as the smoking ban went into effect, we had a
record number of building applicants - uh permits, building permits, uh
taken out for decks, smoking decks in bars and restaurants, and uh,
that works out quite well. Uh the, the problem with indoor, with
smoking - secondhand smoke - it's primarily an issue of indoor smoke,
not outdoor. So, uh, and that's a very good point, ah in tangent. Ah,
people can still go out, they can still go out to the bars, they can
still go into restaurants and smoke, but not inside. So, uh bars and
restaurants can compete on a more level playing field, but it will be a
race for who has got the best smoking decks for those smokers who want
to go out.
this unctuous slimebag pretend that smokers' concern is over whether
they will be allowed to enter bars, instead of the fact that this evil
persecutor is forcing them to stand outside in the cold just to make
things unpleasant for them.
Cardin: Thanks to Rebecca. Next we go to Bob in Verona. Hi, Bob.
Bob: Good morning. Umm, Steve uh, I'd like to ask this in a very nonpartisan way, but it's sort of a -
Bob: question about uh, who supports this and who doesn't.
Bob: Uh, my feeling is that it is a nonpartisan issue, but on the other hand, I think there's a - maybe some of the Democrats uh, support it because uh you know they're - the influence on them from the Tavern Leagues, you know say like Roger Breske, that type of thing. But, but I guess overall uh I guess my, I'm just curious - is it a partisan issue or is it semi-partisan?
Wieckert: Well, I'll tell you. You know, uh 70% of the votes we pass
in the Assembly and the Senate are almost unanimous, to show you there
is a tremendous amount of bipartisanship going on for any issue.
There's uh sparks that fly on maybe on ten or fifteen percent. Uh, but
on this issue it is, it is actually refreshing to watch the debate,
because it is Democrats and Republicans are - uh, some are on one side
and some are on the other. So that as you said before there's no
distinction for party here on this issue at all. Uh it's just amazing
to hear some people you'd think would be support it be against it and
some people you would think be against it are indeed for it. One of the
things is some people say, well, the governor wants it, he's a Democrat
so some people toe the party line. Maybe that's true for a few. Others
say that some Republicans view this as a personal rights issue, and
therefore they're supporting it because of their philosophical beliefs.
But overall, nope, we've got, it's a big - uh there are Democrats and
Republicans both supporting this and Democrats and Republicans both
that bipartisanship heartwarming. Almost as heartwarming as that crony of George W. Bush and the bigshot Democrat
who were on the board of directors of ICF, the corrupt EPA contracting
firm that funneled the illegal pass-through contracts to the handpicked
anti-smoking activist who admitted to being the true author of the
so-called "EPA" report on ETS- pure
corruption which the anti-smoker media have concealed from the public.
Cardin: Well, it's not every day that you and Fred Risser are co-sponsoring a piece of legislation.
Wieckert: Well, no, but Fred and I have worked very well together, on, on organ donation legislation and on and on campaign finance legislation, we've got 'em passed is what I pointed out too. So, we are an effective team at getting results.
Cardin: Yeah, the Tavern League is saying that it's going to mount a campaign to try to change your mind, or to try to you know exert some uh, uh pressure on lawmakers to exempt taverns. Uh I, I, do you think there's any chance that, that they'll be successful?
Wieckert: Well, democracy is a wonderful thing, and uh they're going to be trying to change our minds and we're going to be trying to change theirs, and uh we're going to do so with facts and figures and uh just kind of - I just had a man call me yesterday uh in Appleton from, from Hawaii and he mentioned indeed that uh it works well in Hawaii too, and he just wanted me to know that. How nice. And I think when we get examples - a lot of the tavern is, issues are fear of the unknown, and I think when other states come in and tell us how it works there and uh, we realize when we talk to Appleton and Madison rest - residents, uh that some of their fears will be assuaged. And uh, also when you talk to some of the bars and restaurant owners in th- our two cities, that'll be helpful too. So it, it's an awareness level for the taverns too. They, their issue is, you know it's not really a smoking versus nonsmoking issue - they don't want to lose customers. And -
Cardin: I think a, I think a factfinding mission to Hawaii would be -
Wieckert: Ha ha ha, there you go.
Cardin: Mark in New Berlin is on the air. Hi. Go ahead, Mark.
Mark: Hi, thanks for taking my call. Uh, I guess one thing I'd point
out is this wouldn't be a statewide ban, right, it would be a - a
Indian casinos and restaurants and Indian casinos would be exempt. But
I- I wish that - I think it's a personal rights issue but these people
are also severely addicted and can't stop, most of them can't stop
until they're told they've got lung cancer and they're gonna die then
they stop right away. So I would I would say just ban the thing
altogether, don't take these little baby steps, let's just get it over
are surely the real addicts,because of their dysfunctional trait
of simply ignore any fact that's contrary to their point of view
- analogous to political fanatics, whose brain activity "spikes in the
circuits involved in reward, a response similar to what addicts
experience when they get a fix." (Political
bias affects brain activity, study finds Democrats and Republicans
both adept at ignoring facts, brain scans show. LiveScience, Jan 24,
2006). Except that, thanks to media self-censorship, anti-smokers have
the luxury of never having to confront any serious conflicting
Cardin: You just mean the statewide ban, you're not saying ban cigarettes altogether?
Mark: Yes, I am.
Cardin: I don't think - well can you-
Wieckert: I don't know the answer to that precisely. I 'm not sure you can because it's a legal substance. It's not been judged illegal or you know by the FDA or anything else or unapproved. So I think you probably could.
Cardin: Are you- are you - is that right that the Indian reservations would be exempt from this? We only have a minute.
Wieckert: We'll look into that and uh I believe that to some extent they would be, yes, uh-huh, they're a sovereign nation status.
Cardin: Well, good. Do you know the next step for the legislation?
Wieckert: We have a hearing for the public health committee in the Senate. The time has not yet been set, the date has not yet been set but we're looking forward to that and we're gonna pass it in the Senate, we're gonna pass it in- and pass it in the Assembly and the Governor's gonna sign it and Wisconsin will put itself as a nonsmoking state.
Cardin: We'll keep following it. Thanks a lot for being with us.
Wieckert: Thank you.
Cardin: Steve Wieckert, Republican State Representative from Appleton, co-author of the Breathe Free Wisconsin Act, which would ban smoking in all public places, all workplaces in Wisconsin, including bars and restaurants. I'm Joy Cardin.
Cardin: This is the Ideas Network of Wisconsin Public Radio. I'm Joy Cardin. Happy to have you along on this Thursday April the 26th It's 6:36 and we'll continue talking with different guests about whether we want to ban smoking in all workplaces in Wisconsin including bars and restaurants. We heard the results of our Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center Poll on this question. According to the poll, 63% of us, a majority of Wisconsinites, support a ban like this; 35% oppose it. We also heard from one of the co-authors of the Breathe Free Wisconsin Act in our last half hour. Steve Wieckert, a Republican from Appleton, telling us why he supports a statewide ban that includes bars and restaurants. And now we will hear from Ed Lump, president and CEO of the Wisconsin Restaurant Association, to get his take on this legislation, and a little bit on our poll results too. And we continue to welcome your thoughts and questions on this at 1-800-642-1234, 1-800-642-1234, in Madison 263-1890, 263-1890. Do you support a ban on smoking in all public places, all workplaces, including bars and restaurants? We want to hear from you. Let me welcome in now Ed Lump. He is the president and CEO of the Wisconsin Restaurant Association. Good morning.
Lump: Good morning.
Cardin: You support this legislation that would ban smoking in all of the- your members' restaurants.
Lump: Uh yes we do. Uh we, we support it without any exceptions. I think it should be a total ban, because that's the only fair way to do this sort of thing.
Cardin: Uh, what do you mean a total ban?
Lump: Well, ban smoking in every workplace, restaurant and tavern.
Uh the uh the reality of it is if you don't ban smoking in every
establishment then there are winners and losers in the process.
Customers will leave one place and go to another place and that's not
fair to those that see their customers do that or to lose customers so
if you ban it everywhere, nobody loses. And that's our feeling on this
and it's time to do it.
that the term "nobody," as in "nobody loses," means smokers. This is
reminiscent of Mark Twain's cutting satire of the phrase that 'nobody
was hurt, except a nigger.'
Cardin: Why do you say it's time to do it?
Lump: Well, you, first of all you've already got over 30 communities in Wisconsin that have already passed some form of a ban and we've seen the effects of that it uh it's uh, where you see again how the customers shifts occur and the damage is done some places and others benefit from it, we've seen all that. This trend is going to continue, less and less people smoke, I think your survey results pretty well reflect the growing support uh, that is seen in other surveys as well for total workplace bans, uh consumers seem to want this overwhelmingly, uh you do see uh - which is wonderful - more restaurants and even even bar areas going smoke-free uh voluntarily, that's good, uh and that's all a reflection of the- of a trend in the public to not smoke, and to not like smoke when they're out, uh - when they're out uh enjoying themselves.
Cardin: Yeah. If consumers want this, Ed Lump, do you know why the- some taverns are claiming that they're just- that they're really hurting?
Lump: Well, I think it- that does reflect what has happened in some
communities where they've had bans of one kind or another, you do have
a situation - Madison and Appleton would be examples - where
Representative Wieckert is from in Appleton - are examples where you
have seen particularly around the border areas of the municipalities
consumers- customers leave bars or restaurants and go sometimes just
across the street or certainly down the road to another place where
smoking is still allowed. That's plain just not fair. Now within the
cities themselves as you get deeper into the cities themselves of
course sometimes business has gone up but there has been damage done on
the outskirts a lot of times restaurants lose business to taverns just
across the street. And the definition of a tavern in this day is just a
business that sells more alcohol than food. In that kind of a situation
I think the public would be surprised, if taverns were exempt, to see
how many large businesses, large restaurants, actually qualify as
taverns, because they do sell more alcohol than food, yet they serve a
tremendous amount of food. There's a lot of inequities once you start
dealing with exceptions.
what about the inequities of being systematically victimized by
scientific fraud, political corruption, and media censorship, which
smokers experience every day?
Cardin: Yeah, and uh, in the past - the last legislature, the legislative session, there was a bill that was going to be a bill that was going to- it was going to restrict smoking in restaurants but not in taverns and you didn't like that very much.
Lump: No, we didn't, in fact we worked very hard and were successful in getting amendments attached to the bill that made it more fair but it did not uh uh it did not completely address the, address the question.
Cardin: Yeah, what about the question that people really don't want to smell smoke and have people smoking around them while they're eating but, you know the mom and pop bar is a different story?
Lump: Well again, it's a question of what the consumers likely
to do in a situation like that the mom and pop bar I have great
sympathy for that type off situation, a situation like that, but they,
I think their fear of losing customers is based, is not, is not reality
uh they- the customers may leave for a short period of time but people
go to taverns to be social, and they go restaurants to be social as
well uh, and they want to be with their friends and realistically, if
they can't smoke in the- in the establishment, they're not going to
just retreat to their home and spend all their time there. Uh they will
continue to go to the places that they used to go to and they'll,
they'll just smoke outside like a lot of people do a lot of times now
where smoking is banned. I really think that the they have a right to
be fearful if you continue with these local bans because in that case
you- if your community happens to do the ban, you may see your
customers go somewhere where they can still, still smoke.
principled person would boil their shoe before they'd eat at an
anti-smoker beanery! Particularly anything owned by a supporter of the
Wisconsin Restaurant Association! The Wisconsin Restaurant Association
deserves to be boycotted for their vile and despicable behavior!
Cardin: And you think that this is inevitable,this is going to happen?
Lump: Yes, it is definitely going to happen, this is the trend of history on this subject, frankly. Uh, you see many more states, I don't know the exact number off the top of my head here, that have banned smoking totally, uh uh you see New York being one, California being another one there's also been quite a number of other states, foreign countries, uh this is something that uhhh it's it's it's time, time to do it.
Cardin: Yeah, hmm, what about those restaurants in New York and California any- are they doing ok with the smoking ban?
Lump: Well, it appears to be so, uhhh, there was a lot of furor at
first but I think that uh I think that people seem to be pretty happy
with the bans at this point in time, both consumers and operators, and
I think employees generally are, happy with it as well. I mean that is
another concern in terms of having a safe workplace for your employees,
the evidence has kind of piled up over the years that there is some
essential harm done from secondhand smoke and I think that our industry
is becoming more aware of that.
pile of manure is still a pile of manure, no matter how high it is
piled. See above.
Cardin: And you don't give any weight to the argument that
government shouldn't be telling a private business what it should and
shouldn't do when it comes to this?
Lump: Let me say this, that argument is something I would give
weight to but in this issue, the train is out of the station, it has
gone down the road a long, long, long way and it's not coming back.
We're just going to see a contimued amount of bans passed and we're
going to see a continued amount of evidence of the harms of secondhand
smoke and this train is gone in that case there's only one way to
create a sense of fairness, that is for government to act. There is a
role for government in this kind of a situation. There are many issues
where government interference isn't [inaudible] the workplace the
marketplace will take care of the situation. But in this case there
needs to be some order put to this.
Concerning the supposed "continued amount of evidence of the harms of secondhand smoke," a pile of manure is still a pile of manure, no matter how high you pile it. And the only people who would wish to pile up manure are the disciples of Joseph Goebbels and his Big Lie technique, who want to deceive the weak-minded.
Cardin: I have one caller for you before we let you go. Warren in Delavan. Hi, you're on the air.
Warren: Thank you, Joy, for taking my call. My question - first of
all I'm not a smoker and I don't smoke - But I don't understand why
there is a desire to inflict a nonsmoking ethic on those that don't
want to smoke. Now if they - or who want to smoke. Why can't a mom and
pop bar choose if they want to be smoking or nonsmoking, hang a
picture of a cigarette outside their establishment or a cigarette with
a line through it advertising what they want to be and let the consumer
choose whether they want to go in there or not?
should have dawned on him by now that the anti-smokers are not
interested in solutions of any kind. They are purely out to persecute
and oppress tobacco users, particularly smokers.
Lump: Well I think that- I'm not going to totally refute your
argument here, but I think that our position on this is that there-
that particular mom and pop bar, once they have a smoking ban passed in
their area, and it will happen, in other words our issue is the
municipality or the municipal ordinances, at some point in time in when
their community passes a smoking ban, they're likely to be hurt because
their customers will go somewhere else. I can almost guarantee it that
once a smoking ban passes in whatever community that this mom and pop
bar is in, they will want a statewide smoking ban that doesn't have any
exceptions. That's happened in Appleton, in Madison, and many other
places where the exempt businesses, once they lose their exemption,
want everybody to- want a level playing field suddenly. And so we're
trying to create a level playing field. Our board is, our board of
directors voted 36 to 1 uh to go in this direction. These are not all
big operators, in fact, if you go to our website and look at our, at
our at our list of board of directors you'll see many smaller operators
on there, mostly independent operators, about 75% of them serve
alcohol, so they are affected by the ban more than anything else. We've
also got the issue of the ma and pa diner that doesn't have an alcohol
license, uhh what happens to them? Inevitably, they lose their business
to a tavern that opens up down the street for breakfast, if you have
that kind of thing. I don't blame the business- the entrepreneur for
taking advantage of the situation but the reality of it is it's unfair
to those that don't have that ability to take advantage of this.
is despicable Orwellian Doublespeak. The Wisconsin Restaurant
Association is nothing but a gang of anti-smokers, who want to ban
smoking without having to pay the price for it in loss of customers.
So, they turn to the government to use force to prevent competition
from others who would allow smoking. They deliberately destroy the true
level playing of the free market in order to protect themselves from
free and fair competition.
Cardin: We'll leave it there. Thank you very much for being with us. Ed Lump, President and CEO of the Wisconsin Restaurant Association telling us why his association supports a statewide ban on smoking in Wisconsin, with no exceptions, that it would include restaurants and bars. We will talk with a guest from the Tavern League after we check the weather. And we'll continue to take your views on this. Do you support the legislation in Wisconsin that would ban smoking in all public places work including bars and restaurants. According to the latest Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert Survey Center Poll, that we are releasing today, 63% of us support such a ban, 35% oppose it. I'm Joy Cardin, this is the Ideas Network.
Cardin: This the Ideas Network of Wisconsin Public Radio. I'm Joy Cardin. It's 12 minutes before 7 oclock. Coming up after 7, we'll continue releasing rsults from our Wisconsin Public Radio - St. Norbert College Survey Center Poll. Next hour, are humans to blame for global warming and what should government do about it, if anything? We'll uh hear what the public has to say about climate change and climate change policies coming up, and we'll also hear from two state lawmakers who have differing views on whether or not the state should limit greenhouse gas emissions. That's coming up after 7. We continue getting reaction to and discussion about whether or not we support a statewide smoking ban in Wisconsin, a smoking ban that would include bars and restaurants. We've heard the survey results - 63% of us support it, 35% of us oppose it. However, for those who oppose the ban, most of the opposition comes when it comes to taverns. 90% say that they oppose the smoking ban because it would uh, ban smoking in taverns. What do you think? What questions do you have for our guest from the Tavern League of Wisconsin, which is going to be pushing to get an exemption for taverns? Should bars be exempt from a statewide smoking ban? Why or why not? 1-800-642-1234, in Madison 263-1890. Our guest is Pete Madland. He is executive director of the Tavern League of Wisconsin. Good morning.
Madland: Good morning.
Cardin: So what do you make of this survey result that 63% of Wisconsinites do support a full fledged ban on smoking, including taverns?
Madland: Well, I- I- I- this is uh not a surprise to me. I think
most people do support a smoking ban but on the other hand I- I didn't
hear the whole survey, but, but the surveys that we have done also show
that uh most people do think that bars and bar areas of restaurants
should be exempt.
Tavern League talks the talk, but they refuse to walk the walk. If
their business is harmed by a smoking ban, they have standing to bring
a lawsuit, unlike smokers who do not own such a business. If they were
serious about fighting the anti-smokers, they would file a RICO lawsuit for conspiracy, fraud and
racketeering against the anti-smokers, based upon the anti-smokers'
systematic scientific fraud, proven political corruption of science,
and their concerted action in censoring the media to conceal their
crimes from the public.
Cardin: Yeah, it is for those who say they oppose the ban, 35% say they opposed it, it was mainly taverns. 90% really opposed it because of taverns but about 70% because of restaurants, too. Well, you are- um, the supporters of the statewide ban said that they're not going to accept any exceptions. We just heard from Steve Wieckert uh uh from Appleton, state representative from Appleton, in our first half hour, who said that we need to level the playing field. What what about that argument?
Madland: Well, you know, I just think that our people are- are uh, hard-working businessmen and we're in the hospitality industry and I'm convinced that our people make good choices when it comes to their business, when it comes to their customers, and if the customer base demands a smokefree environment, our people will change. But statistics show that that is not true that uh, our people, smoking bans hurt business without a dobut, and our people are in business, this is their livelihood, this is their retirement, this is what they do for a living, and anything that hurts their business, we're going to, we're going to oppose that.
Cardin: Yeah, and - but he was saying, Representative Wieckert, that yes, bars in Appleton where there is a smoking ban in bars as well, are hurting right now but that's in part, he says, because people can go to the neighboring community and go to that bar that doesn't have a smoking ban, but if we level the playing field that economic impact wouldn't be there.
Madland: What I would suggest is that Appleton should get on board with what the most of the state is. Most of the state is the fact that business people have their freedom of choice. Appleton is the exception, its not the rule. The rest of the state is the rule. And the rest of the- Appleton should adjust to the state and not the state to Appleton.
Cardin: So what are you going to do to try to twist some arms?
Madland: Well, we're not going to try and twist arms, we have a
strong base, we have, our people at this very moment are getting
petitions signed, they are communicating with their legislators and
what their message is, hey it's my business let me run it like,
like I see fit. Cigarettes, until cigarettes are illegal, allow
me to run my business in a legal manner, that's all we're asking.
refuge is that, when the anti-smokers are committing a multitude
of crimes and acts of fraud, with the intent to rationalize the
outlawing of tobacco by the FDA?
Cardin: And we have lots of calls. So let me go to the phones and take Steve in Stoughton. Hi Steve, you're on the air.
Steve: Hey, good morning. Umm, I was just thinking, I don't smoke
I hardly even go to bars, but, I was thinking that if bars installed a
really good air quality system and filter the air to some standard that
there could be a happy medium here - that the bars could have the
business of the smokers, and the air quality could be clean inside for
those who really don't want to smoke, but like to go to bars.
again, it should have dawned on this caller by now that the
anti-smokers do not have the slightest in any "happy medium," no matter
how reasonable. They even resort to lying that "no amount of
ventilation is sufficient to "protect" non-smokers from the phony
"dangers" of secondhand smoke! The anti-smoker group, Americans for
Nonsmokers Rights claims that "No ventilation system has ever been
designed that can protect the public from the death and disease caused
by exposure to secondhand smoke." They cite the 2006 Surgeon General
report and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air
Conditioning Engineers as supposedly independent and "objective"
supporting evidence, when in fact, the SAME POLITICALLY-CONNECTED
RINGLEADER, Jonathan M. Samet, was behind both
of these fraudulent reports, as well as the report of the International
Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph 83,
the "EPA" ETS report, and several Surgeon
General reports of the 1980s, as well as testifying for the
anti-smokers at a number of lawsuits, including the federal tobacco lawsuit.
Cardin: Yeah, would you like that, Pete Madland?
Madland: Steve, you're exactly right and a- a great majority of our
customers have done that. This- this- this image of the smoke-filled
pool room is gone, it's not there any more. The bars don't for the most
part - they have these things in there uh - surveys have been done, a
great, great, great majority of bars are within OSHA standards of, of
air purification and uh we're doing just that, our people are- are,
they react to their customers, they don't have their head in the sand
being stubborn saying we're not going to do anything. Uhh, there's a
of great products out there. We encourage our people to install
those products and they've done that in many many many cases.
Then, after the Tavern League's customers have spent tens of thousands
of dollars on ventilation systems, the anti-smokers outlaw smoking
anyway. That means tens of thousands of dollars which won't be
available to fund a lawsuit. And fund-raising is harder with no
customers, too. Plus, they have the added satisfaction of knowing that
the brother-in-law of the anti-smoker
who wrote the "EPA" ETS report was president of Gunn & Pegelow,
Inc., a representative of heating and ventilating manufacturers with an
office in Appleton - which may have gotten their ill-spent money.
Aren't the anti-smokers just SOOOO clever... just like in the Protocols
of the Elders of Zion.
Cardin: Yeah, um, but the mom and pop up north uh, maybe doesn't have that expensive filtration system and what about the people working at that bar um and the dangers of secondhand smoke?
Madland: Well, a lot of mom and pops do have those systems. There are a lot of systems that are not real cost prohibitive and that's just- that's what they're doing. As far as those employees go, when you talk to those employees time and time again like I have, they say, hey, you know, when I take this job I know there are risks. There's risks with any job. This is a risk and you know what, they'd rather be working there than being unemployed. It's very simple.
Cardin: Tom in Wausau is next. Hi, Tom.
Tom: Hi, my concern is we have a- we have a ban in Wausau in the restaurants are not allowed to smoke and they're allowed to smoke in the tavern as far as, as long as 50% of their business uh, doesn't come from uh eating uh, but yet at the same time the, the bars are hurting the restaurants uh, uh, because people are going to the bars to eat and the restaurants are hurting. Uh, so I think we need a equal playing field there across the board because uh, they're hurting these uh, mom and pop and uh, smaller restaurants as far as smoking. So that's my comment and I'll take it off the air.
Cardin: Ye- yeah thanks, that's what Ed Lump was saying just before you came on, Pete Madland.
Madland: Yeah, I guess I have not seen that. I haven't been to Wausau. I know most of our people are not in, for instance, the breakfast business, and here again I would argue that if that's the case, then we should eliminate the smoking bans period. Let the, let the market drive itself. I'm not in favor of any type of ban where people are going to be dictated by the government as to, as to what to do. Uh you know that-
Cardin: What would you define a tavern as being? Would there be some sort of percentage of alcohol s-s-sales would make a tavern a tavern?
Madland: No, our idea of a tavern is anyone that owns a Class B liquor license, Class B beer license, so-
Cardin: Yeah, so it could be a big restaurant.
Madland: It could be a big restaurant but we would limit the smoking just to the bar area of those restaurants, which I think without exception I think without exception our people are doing that right now. They're adjusting to that. I was at the supper club last night and had dinner and he said my customers in the restaurant area we don't have any smoking bans here but my customers don't expect to smoke in the rest they come up to the bar they step outside. And we're adjusting already.
Cardin: We go to Kathleen in Townsend. Hi, you're on the air.
Kathleen: Good morning. I'm wondering if the ban that youre talking about would apply to casinos because uh, casinos just seem to be very smoke-filled places and I'll hang up and take my comment off the air.
Cardin: Well the- the legislation does not I- I- think because Indian reservations are sovereign nations, this would not apply to Indian reservations, Pete Madland?
Madland: That is correct, that's my understanding also that casinos are exempt in this.
Cardin: Yeah and that concerns you too?
Madland: Well it's an issue that where people talk about a level playing field, already obviously casinos have a huge advantage and this would add to that, without a doubt.
Cardin: Yeah. So, um you're not giving up without a fight. Everybody is saying that this is inevitable, the time has come; it- the trend is clear, this is gonna happen, you're not giving up yet?
Madland: Not at all. I don't think that it's inevitable. We hear
about states that go smokefree but we don't hear about the states that
have voted not to go smokefree um and uh I really think that we will
fight this and we did a survey among our members- and they're adamant
to keep fighting about this, this is a huge issue awith our people.
They have their livelihoods at stake. And we are gonna fight for our
talk the talk but refuse to walk the walk! And truly, the leaders of
the Tavern League appear to be so dense, that they may even really be
paid agents who are merely distracting attention with empty talk, while
purposely throwing the fight.
Cardin: Thank you so much. Pete Madland is executive director of the
Tavern League of Wisconsin talking with us about the proposed statewide
smoking ban that would prohibit smoking in all workplaces including
bars and taverns. The Tavern League is going to try to get taverns
exempted from this regulation. Thanks to Leo Duran and and Karen Prager
for producing the hour and to Karen Prager for on-air production, and
thank you for listening. Hey, our spring pledge drive starts next week,
but your online pledge before the drive will help shorten the drive.
And if we raise enough online we won't even start the drive, so
that's incentive for you. Our members have already contributed more
than nine thousand dollars toward our goal of $275,000. When the goal
is reached the drive will end. Pledge online at wpr.org. And while
you're there you can check out our progress towards the goal. I'm Joy
Cardin, this is the Ideas Network.