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 discussion the economiceffectsof a smoking ban of in St. Louis Crty. I provide this letter without compensation haveno stakein whetheror not and your community approvesa ban. I am a non-smokingacademiceconomistwho has published joumals (listed at end of eight articles on the economicsof smokingbansin refereedacademic letter). The table below displaysrough estimatesof how many ownersof bars and restaurants will be adversely affected by a smoking ban. Estimatesare based on my researchin which I have empirically examinednationaland state-specific data.
of Predicted Ellbcts liom Ban Losers Gainers Z5Yoto54Yo 3Yotol7%o 8l% to 83% Io/oto2Yo

Restaurants Bars

No Effect 37Yoto57Yo

t3%

Theseestimates consistent with economictheory and show that smokingbanswill adversely are 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 reasons indicatethat economicharm in St. Louis City wilt be on the high-endof the above numbers.One reasonis that relatively few of its residentsfavor bans in restaurants and bars accordingto the 2007MissouriCounty-Level Studyconducted the Office of Epidemiolory the by of MissouriDepartment Healthand SeniorServices. of Only half (49.4%) survey of respondents believed
that smoking should be banned in restaurants and one-fourth (24.5%) believed in bans in bars. My empirical researchhas demonstrated that economicharm is greatestin areasin which residentsdo not fully supportbans.Also notice that theseresponses consistentwith data aboveindicating that harm are would be greaterfor bar owners. The other reasonis that relatively many residentsof St. Louis City smokeand thereforeeconomicharm will be on the high side because research my showsthat 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

. Bakerefield. Pomona.

Chamellslands. Sacnmento.

Chico.

DominguezHills. SanDiego.

Frsno.

Fullerton.

Halvard.

Humboldt'longBeach'IosAngeles'MaritimeAcademy' SanMarcm'Sonoma'Stanislaus

MontereyBay.

Northidge.

SanBemardino.

SmFraci*o.

SmJoe.

SanluisObispo.

Emoking Plsvalance

n

9b I

21

19
1995 19S6 1Sg/ 199a 19S 20oo 2001 2W

2003

2oO4 ',05

M

m7

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

/51MichaelL. Marlow, Ph.D. of Professor EconomicsandDistinguishedScholar Califomia PolytechnicStateUniversity SanLuis Obispo,CA93407 mmarlow@.calpoly.edu

3 Publicatignsby Michael L. Marlow on SmokineBanS Refereed "Eptd".tt"t.gic and Economic Research,and the Question of Smoking Bars," Journal of Summer2049and Surgeons, AmericanPhysicigns o'TheEconomic Effects of Smoking Bans on Restaurants and Pubs in the UK," (with Barrie 2008. Affairs December Economic Craven) ' ooHonestly, Reflectionsof a Non-smoking Scholat," Who Else Would Fund Such Research? 2008. Watch,5(z),pp.24A-268, EconJournal "The Private Market for Accommodation,"Easjern Economic Journal (with John Dunham) 2A04. Summer 3A377-91, "The Economic Incidenceof SmokingRestrictions,"Applied Economics(with John Dunham), 2003. 942,Decertber 35: 1935-1 18: Baf,sand Tavernso" 326-333' "The Differential Effects of SmokingLaws on Restaurants, (with JohnDunham). EconomiqPolicY,July 2000 Contemporary o'smokingLaws and the Allocation of Restaurant Bar Seating,"EcqnomicInguiry January and 2000:38:l5l-157. (with JohnDunham). "smoking Bans and the Coase Theorem," B4efine Notes in Economics, May 1997, (with William J. Boyes).