Due to the volume of news, 2003 had to be split into quarters.
This area contains news from January thru March.
You can view April thru June here.
You can view July thru September here.
You can view October thru December here.

Click on News Header to go directly to their articles

OTHER NEWS SOURCES

---

To view full story CLICK onimage
Note:  Many publications and/or sources do not archive or charge a fee for viewing older articles.
There is a high likelihood that links to articles may no longer be active.

1996 Thru 1999 Archives | 2000 Archives | 2001 Archives | 2002 Archives |
2004 Archives | 2005 Archives | 2006 Archives | 2007 News | Top

March 31, 2003
        Last Call for Joe Camel and Virginia Slim
        By Elissa Gootman

Anna Pilzer, 27, her cousin Victoria Alers-Hankey, 28, and her boyfriend were savoring post-family-dinner drinks at Liquor
Store, a small, dark bar in TriBeCa, when, about 20 minutes before midnight on Saturday, someone whisked the ashtray
from their table.

Could this be the start of the New York City smoking ban, they wondered. Would midnight really mark, with Cinderella-like
precision, the moment that the smoky New York City bar would go the way of the spittoon and the three-martini lunch?

Unsure, the boyfriend, Jim O'Hare, 28, went to the bar. He got another ashtray. He brought it back to the table, where it
remained as Saturday turned into Sunday, the day when smoking in almost all city bars, restaurants and other workplaces
officially became illegal. The three continued to smoke after midnight, without incident, and patrons at nearby stools and tables
did the same. For now, at least, there was a reprieve.

Even as the ban took effect yesterday, cigarettes burned into the morning at many bars — maybe because managers had heard
that city inspectors would issue only warnings, not fines, until May 1. (Even then, smokers will not be fined; just the
establishments.) At some places, ashtrays were removed but patrons kept smoking nonetheless. And at others still, bartenders
cupped their hands, called for silence and eulogized the days of the smoke-filled saloon.

Frank's Restaurant straddles West Chelsea and the meat market district and serves an abundance of hefty steaks during the
week. But its vast, bright dining room was largely empty late Saturday night.

There was a six-top of birthday celebrants in the front of the house and a bachelor event in a private back room. At the bar, a
man in a chef's tunic polished off his steak tartare, fully garnished, then lighted up.

He is the owner, Steven Molinari.

"We've been open since 1912, through World War I, the Depression — we'll make it through this," he said, even as he affirmed that most diners enjoyed a cigar with their steak.

"I asked my grandfather if he sold drinks during Prohibition," Mr. Molinari said. " `It's against the law to serve people alcohol,' is all he'd say." Mr. Molinari suggested that if asked whether he was observing the smoking ban, he would give the same
non-response. "I'll tell you, `It's against the law to allow people to smoke,' " he said.

But he was confident that smoking would not disappear from public places entirely. "They closed the hardcore gay clubs, they
went underground," Mr. Molinari said. "Same thing will happen with smoking — people will find a place to do it."

March 30, 2003
        Sorry, Old Boy, the Mayor Says 'No Smoking'
        By Warren St. John

THEY are as much a part of Manhattan's old private clubs as leather chairs, billiard tables and investment bankers named Winthrop: oak-paneled bars, befogged with cigar smoke.

The oak bars will remain, but as of today, the last acrid skeins of cigar smoke are dissipating into the chandeliers and settling
onto the velvet draperies and dark red Scalamandré fabrics of men's lounges in the city's mustiest old clubs. The city council's
smoking ban, an effort to protect employees from second-hand smoke, has kicked in, and to the dismay of many members of
those clubs, the law applies to cigars — and it applies to them.

"The attitude at every place I know is that this is the most asinine law they've ever heard of," said Michael M. Thomas, a writer
and a member of the Racquet and Tennis Club, on Park Avenue. "I know of no more detested law than this."

Mr. Thomas doesn't even smoke cigars, but that's beside the point, club members say. The basic premise of clubs is that
members should be able to go to their clubhouses and do as they please, which should at least include the option of lazing in a
big club chair with a highball of single-malt scotch and a stinky cigar in hand. Having that option taken away without so much as
a vote from the house committee, well, it's just very un-club-like. Steven T. Florio, the chief executive of Condé Nast
Publications, a member of the New York Yacht Club and a man known for his love of cigars, actually quit smoking four months ago, but that hasn't changed his opinion of the law.

"This is way over the line," he said. "If you're a member of any private club and they have a designated area where you can
smoke a cigar, I think that should be allowed. It's one of those nice things you can do with your buddies."

But what about all those humidors and private cigar lockers? Most clubs haven't figured out what to do with those yet. Charles
H. Townsend, the chief operating officer of Condé Nast and the rear commodore of the New York Yacht Club, recently
donated a humidor to the club, "with a brass plaque and everything," he said.

"I don't know whether I get it back," Mr. Townsend said. "I'm not going to go over there and snatch it."

A good, well-sealed humidor might be exactly what Mr. Townsend and his cigar-smoking buddies need to keep their stogies
fresh until the anti-smoking fervor subsides. At least, he said, that's the hope.

"The tide goes in and the tide goes out," Mr. Townsend said. "Who knows how long this regulation is going to be around?"

March 30, 2003
        Walk a Mile for a Camel? Not Far Enough Anymore
        By Andrew Jacobs

Although she quit years ago, Maggie Paley still fondly recalls the early 1970's, when, she said, nearly every desk in Time-Life's
offices was adorned with an overflowing ashtray. "You'd walk through the office, and everyone was smoking, with all the
windows closed," said Ms. Paley, then a writer for Life magazine. "No one asked for permission to smoke."

How times have changed. Beginning today, America's capital of freewheeling indulgence joins an increasingly puritanical nation
in its war on tobacco. With the exception of a handful of upscale cigar bars, smoking will be banned from all public indoor
spaces; four months from now, an even-more-draconian state law, signed last Wednesday by Gov. George E. Pataki, will
outlaw even the specially designed, employee-free smoking chambers that the City Council had permitted in its legislation.

"This is really the end of an era," said Bruce Snyder, the manager of the "21" Club, the West 52nd Street landmark that has
been an oak-paneled refuge for uptown Brahmins since in 1929. For more than 30 years, Mr. Snyder has been tending to the
well-fed bankers and publishing executives who retreat to the clubby smoking parlor after their meals.

And while he is not too worried about the ban's impact on the bottom line, he does fret over a more intangible loss: the
disappearance of a cultural tradition that, for him and countless others, defines the city that invented the 15-minute cigarette
break, the smoking jacket and the smoke-drenched coffeehouse.

"I mean, having a cigar or a cigarette over port after dinner is so civilized," he said. "I can't imagine New York without it."

March 28, 2003
        Smoking Ban Relies on Voluntary Compliance
        By Richard Perez-Pena

A new team of city inspectors will fan out to bars and restaurants across the five boroughs on Sunday to enforce the new
antismoking law, but officials concede that in a city with 25,000 places to grab a bite or a drink, they will have to rely
heavily on voluntary compliance.

Health Commissioner Thomas R. Frieden announced this week that while the law would take effect on Sunday, the inspectors
would issue only warnings, and not fines, until May 1 — a decision that he said was intended largely to avoid lawsuits by bar
owners saying they do not understand what the law requires.

Despite the city's budget crisis, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has hired a dozen new inspectors, creating a new
night shift in addition to the 100 inspectors who already work during the day visiting bars and restaurants and policing smoking
and other health laws. Officials say they expect the new crew to generate enough revenue through fines to pay for itself.

Yet even with the added resources, the city will depend on bar owners and patrons to police themselves — an inevitable
approach, given the size of the task, and one that has mostly worked well with the various restrictions on restaurant smoking that the city has had since 1988.

But some bar owners complain that the city has not adequately explained the new requirements and has not given them enough
time to adjust. The law was passed three months ago, and the city regulations implementing it were not published until Tuesday.

"By having a 30-day phase-in period, we minimize any potential for lawsuits," Dr. Frieden said.

David Rabin, a part-owner of two high-end clubs, Lotus and Union Bar, and president of the New York Nightlife Association, a group of about 100 bars, said the city was being unrealistic.

"The real world is, it's 2 a.m., there's a table that's already bought $700 worth of drinks and everyone's had a few, and someone at their table wants to light up a cigarette, and won't listen when I ask them not to," he said. "What am I supposed to do? The city says call the police. That's ridiculous. No bar owner would do that."

He also predicted widespread conflict between neighborhood residents and noisy bar patrons escaping to the sidewalk for a
cigarette late at night. And many bar owners have said the ban will hurt their business.

After Sunday, health inspectors will pay random visits around the city. Officials say that bars that have not complied will receive
warnings, and will be at the top of the list for return visits after May 1, when violations will bring fines of $200 to $2,000, at the
discretion of a department tribunal. A customer complaint will also draw a prompt inspection, they said.

The city will keep to its longstanding practice of penalizing only the establishment, not the customer who smokes.

March 28, 2003
        A Bear Market for Ashtrays and Matches
        By Clyde Haberman

O.K., maybe it is unfair to expect that the ban, which goes into effect on Sunday, will work its magic right away, or even when
fines kick in after a month's grace period. But sooner or later it will be reasonable to ask if the number of people who die in the
city, roughly 60,000 a year, significantly declines.

Otherwise, what is the point of this antismoking exercise, not to mention an even more stringent state law passed on Wednesday in what, for tortoiselike Albany, qualified as nothing flat? (Funny how state leaders are incapable of putting together a budget remotely on time, but when it comes to re-engineering human behavior, they shift into warp speed.)

Many predictions have been made about the consequences of the antismoking campaign. Most, including the one about the lives that will be saved, beg a time-will-tell response.

Will bars lose business, as owners warn? Or will they flourish, as Mr. Bloomberg, that world-famous barkeep, confidently
predicts. For now, no one really knows.

The mayor's reasoning is that bar customers will drink more if they are not smoking. Never mind ample anecdotal evidence that
smokers, as a group, are bigger spenders than nonsmokers.

"The smokers will come in after work and have a few beers," said Ciaran Staunton, who testified at several Council hearings as
the owner of O'Neill's, a bar on Third Avenue in Midtown. "At lunch, they kick back and have an extra coffee or dessert. The
check for a smoker is larger. That's a reality."

Another reality is that related businesses expect to be bruised by the ban, not devastatingly perhaps, but enough for them to
notice.

For example, since items that produce ash are prohibited, there doesn't seem much point wasting money on ashtrays. Orders are definitely down, said Carl Talesnick, president of the Hyco Restaurant Supply Company in the South Bronx.

Mr. Talesnick carries everything from refrigeration units to coffee cups. Losing orders for ashtrays or for souvenir matchbooks,
which he also supplies, will hardly break him, he said.

STILL, a loss is a loss. And ashtrays are only part of it. He, too, believes that smokers linger at the table more than nonsmokers. "We supply the coffee, the food, the drinks," he said. "I sell the glassware for the after-dinner drinks and even the whipped cream for Irish coffee. That's going to hurt us even more than ashtray or matchbook sales."

"On the selfish side," Mr. Talesnick volunteered with admirable candor, "I'll probably lose some business on bar stools."
Inevitably, stools get cigarette burns. "Now, there will be no need for them to be replaced," he said. "We sell air fresheners. I'm
sure there will be a loss on that, too."

March 27, 2003
        New York State Adopts Strict Ban on Workplace Smoking
        By Winnie Hu

After two years of legislative gridlock, New York today became only the third state to pass a tough antismoking law that would
ban smoking in nearly every restaurant, bar and workplace.

The Legislature moved exceptionally quickly to pass the measure, overcoming fierce opposition from some Republican
members and a heavy lobbying campaign by the tobacco, liquor and restaurant industries, which derailed a similar effort less
than a year ago.

Hours later, Gov. George E. Pataki signed the bill into law, clearing the way for the smoking ban to take effect in 120 days. But

Lisa Dewald Stoll, the governor's press secretary, said that Mr. Pataki remained concerned about what he saw as
inconsistencies in the new ban, including how it would affect local antismoking measures. He urged legislators to address those
concerns.

In addition, the state law will close several exemptions that were added at the last minute by the City Council. Smoking will no
longer be allowed at establishments personally operated by their owners, and bars and nightclubs will no longer have the option

of building specially ventilated rooms that can be used for up to three years.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who initially proposed the city ban without those exemptions, has told state legislators that he
supports the state ban. Jordan Barowitz, a spokesman for the mayor, said that Mr. Bloomberg "is very pleased that the state is
ensuring that all New Yorkers work in a safe environment."

March 26, 2003
        Ban on Smoking in the Workplace Draws Little Protest
        By Winnie Hu

The Senate Health Committee had only one issue to debate today — a proposal for a statewide ban on smoking in the
workplace — but so many lobbyists, political aides and journalists jammed into its conference room here in the State Capitol
that the door could not be shut.

As supporters and opponents spilled out of the room, the 16-member committee unanimously passed the smoking bill after only

muted criticism from several senators.

Lawmakers were cautious, knowing that things have a way of veering off course in Albany, but they said the Legislature could
pass the measure as early as Wednesday.

The bill, which re-emerged just days before New York City's tough new antismoking laws are to go into effect, would ban
smoking in nearly every restaurant, bar and indoor workplace across the state. The bill, which has broad, bipartisan support,
was approved today by the health committees in both chambers.

But 5 of the 10 Republicans in the Senate committee officially signaled their reservations about the bill by voting in favor, but
"without recommendation."

"I agree that smoking is very bad," said Senator Thomas W. Libous, a Republican from Binghamton. "But the ramifications of
this bill, as strict as it is, will be devastating on small businesses. I think there could have been much more compromise."

"I think individual counties should be setting the rules," Assemblyman Burling said afterward. "I'm not pro-smoke, but I am
about individual rights and freedoms."

That message was also echoed by the Conservative Party of New York State, which is influential with upstate Republican
senators. Even before the bill was introduced last Friday, Michael R. Long, the party chairman, had already faxed out a news
release saying that American troops in Iraq would be shocked "to find that their freedom of smoking a legal substance has been
usurped by our democratically elected officials."

The state ban, if approved, would apply to localities that either do not have any existing legislation or have less-restrictive
legislation. It would not affect localities that have stronger laws, like Westchester and Nassau, or limit their ability to pass
stronger laws in the future.

March 25, 2003
        Ban on Workplace Smoking Nears Vote in State Senate
        By Winnie Hu

ALBANY, March 24 — Legislative leaders have agreed on a tough new bill that would ban smoking in nearly all workplaces throughout the state, including restaurants and bars, but the fate of the bill remained uncertain tonight after it ran into stiff opposition from some Republican senators.

The proposed state ban, if approved, would be one of the most restrictive antismoking measures in the country — even more
stringent than the new smoking ban that is scheduled to take effect in New York City on Sunday, because it does not include
several exemptions that were added to the city's law by the City Council.

The state proposal would prohibit smoking in nearly all indoor work places, except in a small number of cigar bars and
membership clubs with no paid employees. It would also allow special tobacco-promotion events at restaurants and bars, but
would limit them to two a year instead of the five allowed under the city ban.

The state ban would also not exempt establishments that are operated by their owners, nor would it allow bars and nightclubs to have separately ventilated smoking rooms for up to three years. The city's law makes exceptions in both cases.

The Legislature took up the smoking issue again this week after coming close to passing a more-narrowly focused law last year
that would have banned smoking in restaurants. While the Assembly passed last year's bill, Senate Republicans, facing a heavy
lobbying campaign by restaurant groups and the tobacco and liquor industries, never put it to a vote.

Today, the Senate majority leader, Joseph L. Bruno, pledged to support the bill, but stopped short of saying that it would pass
the Senate.

The bill was debated by Senate Republicans behind closed doors this afternoon, and several aides said afterward that there was substantial concern about how a smoking ban would hurt small businesses, primarily in upstate communities.

Senator Bruno acknowledged this evening that his members "were very vocal about sharing those feelings, and I am very
sensitive to all of that." But aides to the senator and lobbyists closely following the situation said that Mr. Bruno was considering
allowing the bill to come to the floor for a vote on Wednesday, even if he is not sure of how his entire Republican conference
intends to vote for it. It is expected to be discussed in the Senate Health Committee on Tuesday. "We're still talking about it,"
Senator Bruno said. "We'll just see how it goes this week."

If passed by the Legislature, the bill would then be sent to Gov. George E. Pataki for approval. The language in the bill says that the proposed smoking ban would take effect 120 days after the governor signs it.

Mollie Fullington, a spokeswoman for Governor Pataki, said that "the governor is generally supportive of the concept, but he'll
need to review the details of the legislation."

March 19, 2003
        Tobacco Companies Pledge to Fight Justice Department
        By Sherri Day and Jonathan D. Glater

Tobacco companies pledged yesterday to fight Justice Department efforts to recover $289 billion from the industry, which the government contends conspired to deceive consumers about the dangers of its products. Several legal and industry
experts questioned the legal foundation of the lawsuit.

The companies named in the suit are Philip Morris, a unit of Altria; Brown & Williamson, a unit of British American Tobacco;
Lorillard, a unit of Loews; R. J. Reynolds Tobacco; and the Liggett unit of the Vector Group. They plan to file a joint motion for dismissal in the fall, lawyers for the companies said.

The companies say that they are confident in their chances of a dismissal because the judge overseeing the case has already
thrown out two of the three counts in the initial suit, which was filed in 1999.

Lawyers and tobacco analysts said that the government's chances of winning this case against the tobacco industry seemed slim.

March 18, 2003
        U.S. Seeks $289 Billion in Cigarette Makers' Profits
        By Eric Lichtblau

The Justice Department is demanding that the nation's biggest cigarette makers be ordered to forfeit $289 billion in profits derived from a half-century of "fraudulent" and dangerous marketing practices.

Citing new evidence, the Justice Department asserts in more than 1,400 pages of court documents that the major cigarette
companies are running what amounts to a criminal enterprise by manipulating nicotine levels, lying to their customers about the
dangers of tobacco and directing their multibillion-dollar advertising campaigns at children.

Those practices continue even today, despite the industry's repeated pledges to change its ways, the Justice Department said in
filings in federal court in Washington as part of a federal lawsuit first filed by the Clinton administration in 1999.

The Justice Department's aggressive attack on the industry surprised many legal analysts because Attorney General John
Ashcroft has voiced public skepticism in the past about the strength of the federal lawsuit.

The tobacco industry said the charges were without merit, asserting in new filings of its own that its public pronouncements about cigarettes were free speech protected by the First Amendment.

March 17, 2003
        A Last Call on Tobacco Is Starting to Feel Real
        By Elissa Gootman

There are, certainly, supporters of the smoking ban, among them reformed smokers who find cigarettes either disgusting or too tempting, nonsmokers who loathe smelling otherwise after a night on the town, and waitresses who pass through dense gray clouds on their way to the kitchen. But to many patrons at beer-drenched sports bars, neighborhood pubs and velvet-roped cocktail lounges, the smoky bar is nothing less than a mainstay of city life.

In all corners of all five boroughs, there are those - among them boisterous baseball fans, overworked secretaries and tormented artists - who argue that a bar without smoke is hardly a bar at all.

March 13, 2003
        Restaurateurs Sue to Block Nassau County's Ban on Smoking
        By Bruce Lambert

Several bar and restaurant owners have sued to overturn Nassau County's new smoking ban — and if the court finds it defective, shrinking political support could thwart passage of a new version.

The suit was filed on Tuesday in United States District Court in Central Islip, where lawyers for both sides may appear before a
judge as early as Thursday.

What makes the challenge crucial is that the ban, which the County Legislature here barely passed, by a vote of 10 to 9, has lost at least one of its original supporters.

Nassau's law, which broadened a partial smoking ban, took effect March 1. It will be followed by a similar one in New York
City on March 30.

Neighboring Suffolk County has postponed its ban until 2006, and some Nassau bar and restaurant owners — especially those
near the Suffolk County border — say they will lose many customers to competitors in Suffolk. Supporters of the Nassau law
disagree, saying that bans in other states have drawn more business from nonsmokers.

The plaintiffs include the Garden City Hotel and the Pankos and Stardust Diners, in East Meadow. Their suit contends that the
legislators adopted the ban improperly because they failed to make a required environmental impact review and failed to repeal
the old law, which they said contradicted the new law.

"They were in a rush to judgment," said the owners' lawyer, Arthur J. Kremer. He is seeking a temporary injunction lifting the
ban.

March 13, 2003
        New York Budget Dispute Carries Threat of a Shutdown
        By Al Baker

This afternoon, Mr. Silver publicly accused Mr. Pataki of trying to shut down the government, referring to a March 7
memorandum from the governor's budget director, Carole E. Stone, that laid out a plan for frugal spending on only the most
essential services. Within hours, the governor shot back that Mr. Silver was the one who was trying to shut state government,
and Pataki officials said that the memo described their effort to keep government running.

Mr. Silver, speaking before about 4,000 hospital executives, administrators, health care workers and others gathered outside the Capitol to protest proposed budget cuts, likened Mr. Pataki to a boy who will take his basketball and go home unless everyone else plays the game his way.

"He's raising the threat of closing down state government if he does not get tobacco securitization," said Mr. Silver, referring to
the governor's plan to borrow $4.2 billion immediately against the state's share of the federal tobacco settlement to solve about a third of the looming $11.5 billion budget gap this year and next. About $10.4 billion of the state's share of the settlement was to have trickled in at a rate around $500 million a year over the next 20 years.

"The governor is threatening to close down government to get his way," Mr. Silver said.

March 5, 2003
        Philip Morris to Leave New York
        By Janny Scott

Just weeks before one of the toughest antismoking laws in the country is to go into effect in New York City, Philip Morris USA announced yesterday that it intends to end a 101-year relationship with the city by moving its headquarters to Richmond, Va.

A spokesman for the company, which has 682 employees in Manhattan and 6,800 in and around Richmond, said the decision
was in no way prompted by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's antismoking legislation.

The decision by Philip Morris USA, the largest cigarette maker in the country, comes at a time when the city has lost nearly
176,000 jobs over the last two years and unemployment has jumped to 8.4 percent. The Bloomberg administration is struggling
to close a $3.4 billion budget gap for the fiscal year beginning July 1, and residents are facing the largest property tax increase in city history.

Even so, several economists said the broader implications of the company's decision, if any, remain unclear. The city has been
losing corporate headquarters for decades. While having one's headquarters in New York City brings certain advantages,
including access to a highly skilled work force, it is expensive; in a downturn, they said, all companies try to cut costs.

Philip Morris's announcement comes less than a month before March 30, the date Mayor Bloomberg's antismoking legislation, a sweeping ban on indoor smoking in public places, is to take effect. According to Mr. McCormick, Philip Morris had been
exempted, along with other tobacco businesses and manufacturers, from the city's less stringent antismoking law enacted in
1995.

Asked whether the new law influenced the company's decision to move, Mr. McCormick said it did not.

"You wouldn't make a decision of this magnitude based on something like that," he said. "We have employees around the
country, many of whom work in buildings where smoking is not permitted, and they certainly comply with the law. The law goes into effect at the end of March and we intend to comply with that."

March 4, 2003
        Westchester Lawmakers Ban Smoking in Workplaces

WHITE PLAINS, March 3 — The Westchester County Board of Legislators voted 12 to 3 tonight to outlaw smoking in all indoor workplaces.

The ban, which will go into effect in 90 days, met its stiffest opposition from the restaurant and tavern industry, whose businesses are covered to protect workers there.

The county executive, Andrew Spano, is expected to sign the legislation, which will join bans already approved in New York
City and in Nassau County.

The Westchester legislation does not have loopholes for promotional uses or allot extra time to phase out specially ventilated
smoking sections, as New York City's ban does.

Dennis Gallagher, the general manager of the Willett House restaurant in Port Chester, N.Y., said the ban would push 20
percent of his business into adjacent Connecticut, where there are no bans on smoking. He said half of the people calling for
reservations want to know if they can smoke.

Six years ago, when the Board of Health told restaurants they had to reconfigure to create separate areas and ventilation for
nonsmokers, the restaurant spent $500,000 to remodel, he said.

"This law isn't about secondhand smoke," he said, "it's about the American Cancer Society trying to get people to stop smoking."

James O'Toole, a bartender at Dudley's Parkview Restaurant in New Rochelle, testified that if the law was passed, "I'll be on the unemployment line."

March 2, 2003
        Going Out for a Breath of Fresh Smoke in Nassau Bars
        By David W. Chen

When Jacqueline Venditto arrived late Friday night at Minnesota's, a popular nightclub in Long Beach, Nassau County, she knew that something odd was in the air.

First, the employees at the club seemed to be going out of their way to amplify the finer points of a new local law banning
smoking in bars and restaurants. The disc jockey repeated the announcement several times as midnight approached, in a fashion that reminded her of a New Year's Eve countdown.

Then, after 12 o'clock came, Ms. Venditto, 22, a student at St. John's University, ended up outdoors because her friends could
no longer smoke inside. It was 27 degrees. No one in the group was happy.

Forcing people to go outside to smoke was making the county look foolish, Ms. Venditto said.

From Great Neck to Farmingdale, Long Islanders who were out and about as Friday yielded to Saturday were grappling with
the new reality of a world without indoor smoke.

From Great Neck to Farmingdale, Long Islanders who were out and about as Friday yielded to Saturday were grappling with
the new reality of a world without indoor smoke.

Some bars and restaurants made a point of asking patrons to do their smoking outdoors. Others made halfhearted efforts to
enforce the ban, while expressing their distaste for it. Still others flouted the law, believing that the enforcement would be spotty
and the penalty inconsequential.

The initial reaction, predictably, was split. Some nonsmokers were elated. Some smokers, seething, promised to boycott Nassau County. Still others tried to make light of the situation by cracking jokes or repeating a line from Sharon Stone's most notorious scene in "Basic Instinct": "What are you going to do? Charge me with smoking?"

March 1, 2003
        W.H.O. Adopts Tobacco Pact but Many Countries Object
        By Alison Langley

GENEVA, Saturday, March 1 — The World Health Organization adopted a final text of the Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control early today, but many major nations, including the United States and Germany, said they would not
adopt the treaty in its current form.

The draft treaty, approved after four years of negotiations, will be presented at the W.H.O.'s annual conference here in May.

David Hohman, the American health attaché in Geneva, said the wording in some sections was either unacceptable or violated
the Constitution. "While the U.S. does not object to forwarding the draft convention to the World Health Assembly," he said,
"these and other issues will have to be addressed."

If adopted in its current form, the treaty would place ban advertising and promotion of tobacco products, in countries where that would be constitutional. It would also impose high taxes on tobacco products.

Further, the tobacco industry would be required to divulge all the ingredients in cigarettes and print warning labels that cover at
least 30 percent of the package. The treaty would also ban companies from using terms like "ultra light" or "light."

It would encourage nations to fight against cigarette smuggling and enact strict indoor air laws.

If the treaty is passed in May, it then goes to the W.H.O.'s 192 member nations for ratification. Once 40 have passed it, the it
officially goes into effect in the countries where it has been approved.

February 28, 2003
        Last Call, and Last Puff, as a Smoking Ban Nears
        By Bruce Lambert

The metropolitan region's first total ban on smoking in bars and restaurants takes effect in Nassau County at midnight tonight. But exactly what will happen is anybody's guess.

Will smokers obediently stub out their butts when the clock hits midnight, or defiantly puff away into the wee hours? Will
bartenders scowl and whip out fire extinguishers, or look and breathe the other way? Will smokers forgo Nassau County and
frequent bars and restaurants in Queens and Suffolk County?

One thing is certain. Squadrons of enforcement agents will not be swooping down on all-night diners, or bursting through the
swinging doors of saloons armed with ashtrays. Midnight, in fact, may prove to be a bit anticlimactic.

"I don't know that going out on Friday night is going to be any different from going out on Thursday night," said Dr. David M.
Ackman, the county health commissioner.

His agency is in charge of enforcement, but he said, "We're not putting anybody under surveillance Friday." Nassau's 23 health
inspectors, called sanitarians, will not even be on duty that night.

In the next couple of weeks, a notice about the new rules will be mailed to the county's 5,000 bars and restaurants, as well as to bowling alleys and bingo halls. The ban at bingo halls will not take effect until Jan. 1. Inspectors will include smoking on the list of what they check during unannounced visits, made at least once a year.

Based on their experience with Nassau's 1996 ban on smoking in many workplaces, health officials say they expect most
businesses to voluntarily comply. The new rules are an extension of the 1996 law.

But officials are ready to get tough with those who resist. "There will be a few places, and I expect it to be a handful, where we
have repeated complaints," Dr. Ackman said. "Generally for the first offense, we will talk to the owner. Only after the second
infraction will we bring a violation."

The fines — imposed on the business owner, not the offending smoker — are up to $250 a day. If an owner continues to violate the law, absorbing the fines as a cost of doing business, health officials can resort to the ultimate weapon and shut down the establishment.

February 27, 2003
        Voters Say Why Mayor Is Slipping in Popularity
        By Jennifer Steinhauer

At the mention of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's name, Barbara Carr's arm moved furiously up and down, as if she were trying to wave away the odor of three-day-old cod.

"Please, no, I can't stand him!" said Ms. Carr, turning her sunglassed gaze toward a case of cream pies and zeppoles in Alfonso's Pastry Shoppe, a popular bakery in the Meier's Corner neighborhood of Staten Island.

Ms. Carr, 45, cast her vote for Mr. Bloomberg with a majority of Staten Island voters in the 2001 election. But the mayor's
decision to raise property taxes 18.5 percent, his antismoking legislation and his scant appearances in her borough have since
turned her against him.

"At that time I thought he was going to do things for us," Ms. Carr said. "But he has come down so hard on us, it's absurd. To
me, New York City is his little play toy that he sits back and plays with and then jets back to one of his islands as he watches us fall into chaos."

Yesterday, a Quinnipiac University poll put the mayor's approval rating at 48 percent citywide.

Much of the erosion of support is among voters who were most affected by the property tax increase and, it would seem, least
support his anti-smoking policies, based on interviews with those polled and with other New Yorkers. They are the people who least appreciate hearing about tolls on East River bridges, after a recent hefty increase in parking fines.

"I am 48 years old, my mom is 73 and we've lived in New York all our lives," Robin Leckow, who lives in Whitestone, Queens, wrote in a recent e-mail message to a reporter. Ms. Leckow said she is a smoker, like her mother, whose social life revolves around bingo. The new smoking law prohibiting smoking in bingo parlors has ruined that, she said. "She won't get out of the house now, or see her friends," Ms. Leckow said.

"The mayor has completely priced us out of buying our cigarettes in New York," added Ms. Leckow, who voted for Mr.
Bloomberg. "So once a month we drive out of state and buy cartons for our own use. Now he wants to criminalize this, and hunt me down for taxes.

February 25, 2003
        Legislators Unmoved by Bid to Delay Nassau Smoking Ban
        By Bruce Lambert

Restaurateurs and bar owners staged a last-ditch effort today to delay Nassau County's new smoking ban, which is set to take effect at midnight Friday. Supporters of the measure, however, urged county lawmakers to stand firm.

The rival groups held rallies and news conferences on the front steps of the main county office building here, and more than 100
people signed up to speak at the Nassau County Legislature meeting, even though the issue was not on the formal agenda.

In the end, the Legislature closed the meeting without action, leaving the ban's effective date intact. But the opponents are
continuing to press their case.

"My customers are telling me, `We're going to go to Suffolk,' " said Michael Panagatos, who owns the Empress Diner in East
Meadow.

Nassau legislators adopted the ban in October in a narrow party-line vote, 10 Democrats to 9 Republicans. But opponents were heartened today that one Democrat, Lisanne Altmann, now favors amending it. Since the ban passed by only one vote, her switch could be pivotal.

But the presiding officer, Judith A. Jacobs, was adamant about sticking with the March 1 date. "I have no intention of putting this back on the floor for a vote," she said.

Even if the Nassau Legislature takes further action, County Executive Thomas R. Suozzi, a fellow Democrat, has vowed "in
unequivocal terms that he would veto any attempt to amend this legislation," Ms. Jacobs said. A spokesman for Mr. Suozzi
confirmed that.

February 24, 2003
        Sales of Cigarettes Online Hit
        By Bob Tedeschi

ONLINE sellers of cigarettes have been in an enviable position — until recently. As states steadily raised cigarette taxes in an effort to balance budgets and curb teenage smoking, more and more consumers turned to the Web, where cheap
cigarettes abound.

But such bargains may not be so easily found in the future, some analysts said, as states like New York prepare to outlaw online tobacco sales, while others crack down on cigarette buyers who do not pay taxes.

The law was largely intended to curb under-age smoking, since many online cigarette sites do little, if anything, to verify the age
of customers. But skeptics point to legislation in other states to enforce online cigarette tax collection, and say the law's true
intent is to protect state coffers, not coughers.

"We all know this isn't about public health," said Joseph F. Crangle, a lawyer with Colucci & Gallagher in Buffalo, who has
represented online cigarette sellers from Indian reservations in upstate New York. Mr. Crangle, who declined to identify his
clients' Web sites, said traditional merchants lobbied Albany to protect the economic interests of both the state and the
merchants, who have lost substantial sales to the online retailers.

Those who work with the online cigarette sellers differ on how much the new laws will affect business. Robert Rubin, a Forrester Research analyst, said online cigarette retailers were likely to flout the law. "States can get tougher with the regulations, but their ability to police is limited," Mr. Rubin said. "It's so hard to police because these sites can pop up and go away so quickly. The anonymity of the Internet is great for this."

Enforcement of cigarette-related laws has long been a problem. A report by the General Accounting Office last year noted that
the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Justice Department were responsible for investigating and enforcing the Jenkins Act, the law requiring remote cigarette sellers to inform states when a purchase takes place.

But, the G.A.O. report said, neither the Justice Department nor the F.B.I. identified "any actions taken to enforce the Jenkins
Act with respect to Internet cigarette sales." One problem, the report said, is that violations of the act are considered
misdemeanors, and government investigators do not think such charges are worth pursuing.

Santa Fe is one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit that was overturned this month by the appeals court panel, paving the way for the reinstatement of the New York law banning mail-order and Internet tobacco sales. Mr. Sanders said the company would take "whatever course of action" required to overturn the law, including a petition to the United States Supreme Court.

February 23, 2003
        As City Tobacco Ban Looms, Tavern Owners Get Sly
        By Denny Lee

Let the cat-and-mouse games begin. With only weeks to go before Mayor Bloomberg's smoking ban rolls into town, bar and club owners are maneuvering to dodge it.

More than a few bar owners have vowed to simply ignore the law, and risk fines of up to $2,000 and the loss of their permits.
One bar owner on Staten Island, who, like nearly all those interviewed, requested anonymity, plans to hold a raffle each month
and collect $5 from each smoker. Half the pot would go toward paying off fines, the rest to the winner.

Some bar owners are considering "smoke-easies,'' secret back rooms they can use to evade the nicotine police. Less intrepid
souls are searching for loopholes.

One of the few legal exemptions is for ventilated smoking chambers, which employees are forbidden to enter, even to empty the ashtrays. Despite the high price tag ($15,000 and up) and the fact that these chambers can be used only until March 2006, many owners are betting that these rooms will offer them a competitive edge.

"Everybody is putting one in," a downtown club owner said. "It's capitalism."

Perhaps the haziest area is enforcement. If a barfly lights up despite a no-smoking sign and a bartender's nudge, can a bar owner be fined? Smokers themselves are not liable for fines, according to Sandra Mullin, a spokeswoman for the Health Department, which plans to hire a dozen nighttime inspectors before the law takes effect on March 30.

"We expect the law will be largely self-enforcing," Ms. Mullin said.

NY C.L.A.S.H. Note:  Ms. Mullin is mistaken.  The law states that smokers can be fined $100 for each incident.

February 23, 2003
        A Sad Ballad for the Water-Pipe Cafes of Astoria
        By Bill Werde

At the heart of this community in Astoria are the shisha cafes. Six of them dot the two-block stretch, each with a handful of small wooden tables and a stable of the ornate namesake water pipes that filter flavored tobacco - apple is the most popular - for patrons.

"I'd say they bring as much as 50 percent of the business to this block," said Rafea Nablsi, one of the owners of Laziza.

Now the centuries-old tradition of shisha, and those cafes, face the specter of the city's new Smoke-Free Air Act. When the law goes into effect on March 30, it will leave little wiggle room for the shisha cafes.

For a community already beset by tougher restrictions covering immigration registration, closing the shisha cafes would mean not just the loss of a cultural institution but also the loss of up to 40 jobs.

And at Mazazique Cafe, Ali el-Ride added between greetings to customers: "The law is ridiculous. The only people who come
here are people who want to smoke. Who is the law protecting?"

February 21, 2003
        6 Are Charged With Selling Millions of Counterfeit Marlboros
        By William Glaberson

Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn charged six men yesterday with importing millions of counterfeit Marlboro cigarettes from China and selling them through tax-free businesses on the upstate Seneca Indian reservation.

February 20, 2003
        Firms Try to Delay Law on Cigarettes, Say Advocates
        By Winnie Hu

More than two years after New York passed a landmark law requiring that cigarettes be made to extinguish quickly to avoid setting fires, some state legislators and advocacy groups are accusing the tobacco companies of trying to delay the regulation.

Philip Morris Companies, the nation's largest cigarette manufacturer, and other cigarette companies have sought more time to
evaluate and comment on the preliminary regulation, which was published Dec. 31 by New York's Department of State, the
agency that is overseeing the new law.

Last week, state officials extended the deadline for public comment on the regulation by 60 days, until April 15. That means the
fire safety standard for cigarettes cannot take effect until October, at the earliest, because the law gives the cigarette companies
180 days to comply once the final regulation is published.

Brendan McCormick, a spokesman for Philip Morris, said that company officials were not trying to delay the regulation, and that they had worked closely with the state to address complicated technical issues. He said the company would have to change its manufacturing and distribution processes significantly, but he declined to estimate the overall cost.

February 19, 2003
        As Animosity Grows, Pataki and Silver Take Rift on the Road
        By James C. McKinley Jr.

Both the Republican governor and the Democratic speaker of the Assembly went to western New York today and trumpeted their sides in an increasingly bitter debate over the state budget, another sign of a growing
animosity between the two men.

"It's mortal combat," a senior Democratic official said. "Frosty is an inane understatement. The staffs hate each other."

Mr. Silver has become more and more strident in his public criticisms of the governor over the last two months. The governor
has nimbly counterattacked with the assertion that the Assembly leader has blocked anti-terrorism legislation, which Mr. Pataki
considers critical.

Mr. Pataki has also pleaded with Mr. Silver to authorize about $4 billion in new borrowing, backed by annual payments from a
court settlement with tobacco companies, to help balance the state's books. Mr. Silver has refused to act on that proposal, too.

"It's getting frosty at this point, as nothing is happening," one person close to the governor said.

The speaker has made it plain that his chamber will not give the governor the ability to use the borrowed tobacco funds until the
entire budget for next year is negotiated.

February 14, 2003
        Ban on Internet Cigarette Sales Is Upheld
        By Terry Pristin

Reversing a lower court ruling, a federal appeals panel yesterday upheld a New York State ban on Internet and mail-order cigarette sales.

The ban, intended in part to prevent children from buying cigarettes through the Internet, was approved by the State Legislature
in 2000, but never took effect. Two tobacco companies, Brown & Williamson and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco, a direct-order
cigarette business, successfully sought an injunction against the statute, and it was subsequently struck down by a federal judge in 2001 on constitutional grounds.

Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the Federal District Court had erred in finding that the law violated the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The panel of Judges José A. Cabranes, Roger J. Miner and Rosemary S. Pooler said the ban applied equally to businesses in New York and elsewhere that did not engage in face-to-face sales. The court held that the state had legitimate reasons to justify the restriction, including the public-health goal of reducing tobacco consumption by imposing a heavy excise tax on cigarettes.

In June 2001, Judge Loretta A. Preska of Federal District Court in Manhattan said the state had failed to seek less restrictive
remedies.

The state attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, said the law would take effect within a few days, after necessary documents were
processed.

January 29, 2003
        Suffolk Votes to Ban Smoking, With a Grace Period of 3 Years
        By Bruce Lambert

Suffolk County, which has a reputation for readily banning everything from detergents with phosphates to the release of balloons, is turning out to be less of a pioneer on curbing smoking.

Its County Legislature voted yesterday to ban smoking in bars and restaurants, but delayed the effective date until 2006. Bans in neighboring Nassau County and in New York City are to take effect in March.

The sponsor of the Suffolk law, Legislator Brian X. Foley, said that the delay was a necessary compromise to gain the backing
of leaders from the bar and restaurant industry and to win the votes needed for passage.

Some bar and restaurant owners complained that they had already spent thousands of dollars for special ventilation to satisfy an earlier Suffolk law, and that they needed the continued patronage of smokers to pay off those investments.

The Suffolk legislators approved the ban in a 13-to-5 vote. County Executive Robert J. Gaffney has not said if he will sign the
bill.

January 18, 2003
        City Seeks to Recoup Tax Money From Internet Cigarette Vendors
        By Diane Cardwell

Seeking to recoup millions of dollars in uncollected tax revenues, the city filed suit yesterday against several companies that sell cigarettes over the Internet but, the suit alleges, do not properly report the sales to the authorities.

Lawyers for the city said they believed it was the first time a locality had taken such strong aim at Internet cigarette tax evasion.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said that the suit, filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan, was intended to punish companies
that advertise tax-free cigarette sales through the Internet.

One site, BuyDiscountCigarettes .com, advertises itself as selling cigarettes tax-free because it is located on the Jemez Pueblo, a federally recognized American Indian sovereign nation, it says. But Mr. Proshansky said that non-Indians must still pay tax on
cigarettes bought there, and that the company should be filing reports of Internet sales.

"We file reports with appropriate taxing authorities," said Kai Gachupin, the owner of a company that operates the site along
with four others named in the suit. Mr. Gachupin said that cigarettes were no different from other goods that are sold tax-free on the Internet.

NYC C.L.A.S.H. Note:  We bold that statement for good reason.  If govt. is going to go after one outlet/industry that sells items on-line and doesn't charge tax then they should be going after all of them.  Otherwise, it's just part of the anti-smoking crusade and nothing more.

January 16, 2003
        In Shift, Restaurant Group Backs Smoking Ban
        By Al Baker

The New York State Restaurant Association, once a vociferous ally in the fight to allow smoking in bars and restaurants, reversed course today and vowed to push for a statewide ban on smoking in all places of employment.

The group's announcement, labeled historic by advocates of the tough new antismoking laws that are sweeping across counties in New York and states from Maine to California, immediately rekindled an antismoking proposal that died in disagreement during last year's legislative session.

But unlike that bill, which included exemptions to the ban, the goal this year is to draft a bill that would entirely ban smoking in
everything from factories and state office buildings to restaurants and bowling alleys — anywhere people are employed, the
antismoking advocates said.

If passed as envisioned, the law would supersede local rules and be stricter than any laws now on the books, including the one
set to take effect in New York City on March 30. Rick J. Sampson, the president of the restaurant association, said it would
create a "level playing field" for businesses by eliminating smoking as a draw for customers.

But another trade group, the Empire State Restaurant & Tavern Association, which represents 5,000 bars, restaurants and other businesses where alcohol is sold, still favors the more modest smoking rules in last year's bill.

"We support adoption of a reasonable restriction of smoking in our establishments," said Scott Wexler, the group's executive
director.

It is unclear whether a bill that meets the Restaurant Association's goals will be drafted, proposed or passed.

January 9, 2003
        Smoke in Suffolk, Revisited

Leading critics of a proposed ban on smoking in bars and restaurants in Suffolk County now support a revised ban, the
measure's sponsor said yesterday. The agreement is expected to clear the way for the ban's adoption by the Count
Legislature at its next meeting, on Jan. 28.

"This is a breakthrough," said the sponsor of Suffolk's ban, Brian X. Foley, a member of the County Legislature. He plans to
hold a news conference today in Hauppauge, where he said representatives of bars, taverns and restaurants would endorse the
revised bill.

The announcement did not specify how the bill would be changed, but Mr. Foley said that "the revisions do not in any way water down the intent."

January 5, 2003
        As Smoking Ban Hits Jails, It's the Guards Who Worry
        By Robert F. Worth

Some inmates in New York City's jails will soon face an additional punishment: no smoking.

Starting in March, the antismoking legislation signed last Monday by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg will go into effect. It will be
applied to jails as well as most bars, restaurants and city-owned buildings, city officials said Thursday.

The plan may be welcomed by those irritated by clouds of secondhand smoke in cellblocks, but some prison guards say
removing nicotine from an already tense environment could cause trouble.

The move is likely to anger inmates as well as guards, said Capt. Peter Meringolo, the president of the Correction Captains
Association, which has 950 members working in the city's jails.

"The inmates do use cigarettes as a form of stress relief," Captain Meringolo said. "I am concerned about their reaction, and I
would hope there would be some area where the staff could smoke."

Norman Seabrook, the president of the New York City Correction Officers' Benevolent Association, a union with 10,000
members, said: "I think this will cause officers to have some confrontations with inmates. I think correctional officers have a right
to smoke if they want to."

In a statement, the city's Department of Correction commissioner, Martin F. Horn, said city lawyers were still studying the new
law, which mentions city-owned buildings but does not specify jails.

January 1, 2003
        Dutchess and Orange Counties Will Enforce Smoking Rules
        By Lisa W. Foderaro

Two counties in the Hudson Valley will begin enforcing new smoking restrictions in restaurants and workplaces on Wednesday.

The smoking bans enacted by Dutchess and Orange Counties are not as strict as the ones recently approved by New York City and Nassau County on Long Island, but they are causing a local furor all the same. The new smoking law in New York City is to go into effect March 30, and Nassau's is to start March 1.

Groups representing restaurants and bars in Orange and Dutchess Counties have already filed federal lawsuits against their
Legislatures.

The suit filed by the Dutchess/Putnam County Restaurant and Tavern Association on Monday seeks to have the new law
overturned and declared unconstitutional. "It is overly vague and overly broad," said the lawyer representing the group, Kevin T. Mulhearn. "Its enforcement applications don't make sense."

The president of the association, Michael J. Leonard, who owns a restaurant in Wappingers Falls in Dutchess County, said he
installed an exhaust system two years ago in his bar area, which is separate from the restaurant. Under the new county law,
smoking will be prohibited throughout his establishment, Greenbaum & Gilhooley's.

"It will be devastating to my business and to my smoking customers," he said. "It's totally unjust."
 
 
 

1996 Thru 1999 Archives | 2000 Archives | 2001 Archives | 2002 Archives |
2004 Archives | 2005 Archives | 2006 Archives | 2007 News | Top

March 31, 2003
        OUR TROOPS FIGHT FOR FREEDOM WHILE OUR POLS RESTRICT IT
        By Steve Dunleavy

LOOK at it this way - our troops are risking their lives for freedom.

Freedom from the brutal regime in Iraq, freedom for us at home to maintain those freedoms that so many have died for.

They fight so that those nitwits who staged a "die-in" on Fifth Avenue are free to demonstrate. They fight to maintain a freedom of choice in government, whether it's the freedom to join the Ku Klux Klan or freedom of choice for women.

Today as I remain smokeless at my hangout of Langan's bar, I feel that I have lost a small degree of freedom.

No question, being barred from smoking is trivial to some of the greater freedoms.

But history has shown that losses of small freedoms accrue and lead to others.

Can the collective Cromwellian claque in Albany and City Hall realize that banning smoking in bars and restaurants is banning a product that is legal?

This canard of second-hand smoke is just blue smoke and mirrors.

During the now infamous tobacco hearings, it had to be said that industry leaders lied through their teeth.

But the anti-smoking lobby used a carbon copy of those lies.

They constantly referred to "medical reports" where in fact there has not been one independent study into second-hand smoke.

Cross Fifth or Sixth Avenue behind a bus, get stuck in a New Jersey tunnel and tell me about our lungs.

Look, if you don't like a newspaper, don't buy it, if you don't like a television show, turn it off, if you don't like fast-food restaurants, don't eat there.

You want to support the war or oppose it. Go ahead, knock yourself out, support or oppose, that's what this country is all about.

But to suppress the freedom to smoke in a bar or a restaurant which is quite obviously up to the proprietor or the workers who have the choice to continue work or not, is mind-boggling.

Banning small freedoms begat bans on bigger ones, and that's not what this country was built on when they figured that taxation without representation was not a fair shake.

This ain't a fair shake.

March 31, 2003
        MIKE: IT'LL ALL BLOW OVER
        By Frankie Edozien and Angelina Cappiello

 Mayor Bloomberg yesterday predicted that the furor over the city's tough indoor smoking ban would soon peter out and that
everyone would just get used to it.

The law went into effect yesterday, but pub-crawlers kept lighting up, taking advantage of a one-month grace period before fines begin.

But some bar patrons insisted that Bloomberg was just blowing smoke.

Grace Garcia, 58, who was sipping some brew at the Playwrights Bar in Midtown, said the ban "sucks."

"Considering the stress level in the city, this restricts us from going out and relaxing."

Renee Calisano, 37, of Queens, concurred. "I think it's awful," he said. "Once you open the door for the government to take away your rights, they keep taking."

March 30, 2003
        SMOKERS HECKLE MAYOR
        By Stephanie Gaskell

Whose the biggest clown in town?

According to a few thousand people who attended the circus at Madison Square Garden last night the answer is: the city's
cigarette-busting mayor, Michael Bloomberg.

Hizzoner was roundly heckled while serving as honorary ringmaster for the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey's Circus at the Garden - hearing boos from a crowd that wanted to snuff out his butt ban.

"Smoking shouldn't be banned," said one of the hecklers, Laquesha Glen of Manhattan. "I can understand restaurants, but bars? Please, be real."

The worst moment for the mayor was when he introduced the clown Bello as "the greatest clown in the world" - only to hear wiseguys shout back "that's you!"

Bloomberg's office did not return a call for comment.

March 30, 2003
        ...AND GREED, TO BREED
        Editorial

Speaking of Albany, who says they can't walk and chew gum simultaneously?

Just last week, legislation passed the Assembly and Senate and was signed by Gov. Pataki.

And all on the same day!

What sort of issue could warrant such near-historic alacrity?

A state terrorism bill? Uh . . . no.

The budget?

Please.

No, the winner is: A smoking ban.

The law not only goes beyond Gotham's tough new rules (which took effect last night), it exceeds those of every other state in the union.

Yet, amazingly, there was little opposition to the bill - even though, at the beginning of the week, upstate Senate Republicans chirped their outrage.

In the end, it seems, they didn't want to be on the wrong side of Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, who has been pushing
this for a while: It sailed through the Senate with all Republicans on board.

And then Gov. Pataki signed it immediately - despite what he termed "concerns" about it.

Could he have first considered the bill's ramifications - for small businesses, the state's tourism industry, etc. - before deciding to sign?

No, that would be logical. More important, waiting might allow time for some real opposition - such as from his Conservative Party backers - to coalesce.

So - poof! The ban is now law.

This, folks, is what can be achieved when the lords of Albany actually set their minds to it.

Who cares that the budget will be late for the 19th consecutive year, and drive the state ever deeper in the red?

The worst budget crisis in state history, terrorism - these and many other critical issues can wait.

Albany's got other priorities.

And to hell with New Yorkers.

March 30, 2003
        LAST LEGAL GASP FOR PUFFERS
        By Hasani Gittens, Tatiana Deligiannakis and Erin Calabrese

The deadline for the city's anti-smoking ban came and went this morning - with defiant pub patrons continuing to puff away.

"I think it's completely irrelevant, especially when there's so many other things to worry about," said Wade St. Germaine, who lit up a cigarette at the East Village bar Supper well after the midnight deadline.

"Smoking helps relieve stress."

The city's anti-smoking law went into effect this morning at one minute past midnight, but bar-hoppers kept blazing up around the city, enjoying the start of a 30-day grace period before bartenders will be forced to extinguish smokers.

But John Conroy, 30, doesn't think 30 days is nearly enough.

"They will never stop smoking in Irish bars," Conroy said, enjoying a cig at a SoHo haunt. "A pint of Guinness and a smoke, that's their night out."

Mariana Bell, smoking at the Kettle of Fish in Chelsea, said the new law is "like Prohibition. It won't last."

One East Village bartender said city officials can fine her until they're blue in the face, but she'll never kick out a smoker - especially a civil servant.

She said she volunteered for the Red Cross after Sept. 11 and, "after talking to the people and hearing their experiences, if they want to come in here and smoke, I'll let them and I'll get fined and I'll pay for it out of my own pocket."

Customer Elizabeth Press wasn't smiling when she called the policy "fascism at its finest.

"More people die from obesity than second-hand smoke."

At the famous Cedar Tavern, where painter Jackson Pollock and writer Jack Kerouac used to hang out, Bruce Ferguson, 80, of Manhattan, legally sucked on a ciggy for the final time earlier in the day.

"This is the first time something I want to do is being taken away from me. I fought for this country's freedom for four years in World War II," he said, taking a drag on his cigarette.

He had three words for anti-smokers: "You people stink."

March 30, 2003
        CIG BAN IS ASH-ININE
        By Linda Stasi

GIVING a whole new meaning to the term oxymoron (or maybe just moronic), the city has agreed to a "smoking cooling-off" period. How you can be smokin' and cooling off at the same time no one knows, but they know they really mean it. Maybe it's like sex without heat.

In short, the new smoking laws the mayor shoved down our throats like grain in a paté duck will not be stringently enforced for 30 days.

However, what the dopey politicians never figured on when enforcing their wills against perfectly legal tobacco is that it  is now cheaper - and safer - to get caught smoking pot.

Restaurant owners should be allowed to choose whether to have smoking or nonsmoking establishments - and we should be allowed to choose whether to go there or not. It's one thing to prohibit smoking in the workplace. We have to be there - but who's ever been forced to go to Le Cirque!? And no, I don't smoke anything. Well, not anymore.

March 30, 2003
        EVEN OUTDOOR CAFES ARE BUTTING OUT
        By Sam Smith

Many city bars and restaurants plan to make their sidewalk tables and chairs smoke-free - even though the new laws that kicked in last night permit up to 25 percent of licensed outdoor space to be set aside for smokers.

Owners and managers contacted by The Post said they thought it would be too hard to keep die-hard puffers corralled in the exempt space.

"It would be a management nightmare," said Guy Carpo, owner of Carpo's Café on Bleecker Street in Greenwich Village, who is making his entire outdoor seating area smoke-free.

"How do you explain to tourists who are unfamiliar with the laws only two tables can smoke? Then how do I decide who sits there?"

The city's smoking law, which covers nearly all public spaces, kicked in at 12:01 this morning. Tougher state laws - which rule out city exemptions like ventilated smoking rooms and owner-operated bars - come into force in about three months.

The state regulations include restricting cigarette company promotions in bars and clubs to two a year - three less than the city was prepared to allow.

That has caused a frenzy in the industry in recent days to secure promotional nights with the city's hippest venues, industry sources say.

March 30, 2003
        GATHERING DUST INSTEAD OF ASHES
        By Sam Smith

Ashtrays are a thing of the past in bars and restaurants as of last night, when the city's smoking ban went into effect.

As some souvenir-hunters sought out some higher-end models, with embossed bar names and logos, workers at many bars and
restaurants were left wondering what to do with items made obsolete by the new law.

At 21, the restaurant's green marble ashtrays will go into storage.

"Prohibition ended. Maybe the smoking ban will end, too, and we'll be able to use them again," said spokeswoman Diana
Biederman.

At L'Orto, a posh Italian restaurant in lower Manhattan, owners are brainstorming new uses for their stock of lead crystal ashtrays.

"Maybe use them to hold condiments or potpourri in the bathroom. Or maybe we'll put lottery tickets in one and bet on how long it takes to rescind the law.

March 29, 2003
        GOING BUTT NAKED
        By Adam Miller

Holy smoke!

Smoke-loving New Yorkers were hauling ash to their favorite bars and eateries across the Big Apple yesterday to enjoy some last puffs before it's lights out for lighting up with drinks or after meals.

Tonight, at the stroke of midnight, the city's highly controversial ban on smoking in bars and restaurants goes into effect - and there's no butts about it.

At Muldoon's bar on East 43rd Street, smokers were savoring some last gasps - and burning over the ban.

In between puffs, Paz Ulseth, 27, said the city's ban can kiss his ash.

"I think it sucks," fumed Ulseth, a flight attendant from Manhattan.

"It's not right. The city's taking away one of our freedoms. It's outrageous. I love smoking. I find it so relaxing."

Glen Barrack, 31, of Manhattan, said the ban should go up in smoke.

"It's ridiculous," said Barrack as he puffed away with his buddy, Troy Hedien.

"It's going to really hurt business at these bars and restaurants. The city should stop the ban before it starts."

Hedien, 37, said the city deserves a major butt-kicking for smoking out smoking.

"The ban is awful," said Hedien.

"It's wrong. And the bars and restaurants are really going to suffer as a result."

Muldoon's manager Tom Downey added: "It's very upsetting. We're going to lose a lot of business. I can guarantee that."

To enforce the ban, a dozen cigarette cops will patrol bars and restaurants.

Meanwhile, Mayor Bloomberg yesterday defended the ban - and said that most bar and restaurant owners "secretly don't
want smoking."

NYC C.L.A.S.H. Note:  Just like the "literal" 1000 people he says have died each year from secondhand smoke, he KNOWS what most bar and restaurant owners want.  Give us the names of the dead or the owners that agree with you or stop lying Mr. Mayor.

March 27, 2003
        PUFF-SNUFF HUFF
        By Kenneth Lovett and Stephanie Gaskell

Gov. Pataki yesterday reluctantly signed a stringent statewide ban on smoking in public places - just minutes after the Legislature overwhelmingly passed the controversial measure.

The statewide ban will supercede the Big Apple's own smoking law - which is set to go into effect at 12:01 a.m. Sunday - and kill some of the exemptions in the city ordinance.

Pataki spokeswoman Lisa Stoll said that while the governor has reservations about the bill, he signed it super quick "because he believes a statewide ban on smoking in the workplace will lead to a healthier New York and will reduce the cost of health care for New Yorkers."

The law, which is one of the toughest of its kind in the country, goes into effect 119 days from today and effectively outlaws smoking in almost all public places.

Exemptions exist for private homes, personal automobiles, hotel rooms, retail tobacco businesses, existing cigar bars, and outdoor areas of restaurants with no roofs.

Separately enclosed rooms of residential health-care and adult facilities are exempt, as well as volunteer organizations with no employees - like an American Legion Hall.

Steve Salvesen, an architect with R.I.P. Construction in lower Manhattan, has been hired by six bars to build special smoking rooms.

"It's just another case of one hand not knowing what the other's doing," he said.

"I think that it's kind of sad that a city agency would be overrun by a state agency, especially when people have spent their hard-earned money to retain professional services and then at the last minute a new law which overrides the underlying law screws everybody."

Salvesen said he spoke to two of his clients yesterday and they're "pretty hell-bent over it."

Opponents complained the bill is too restrictive, infringes on people's rights, and has too many inconsistencies.

March 26, 2003
        HOLY SMOKE! NOW MIKE WANTS A STATEWIDE BAN
        By Kenneth Lovett and Stephanie Gaskell

Even as the city granted a grace period in enforcing its new smoking ban, Mayor Bloomberg yesterday came out in support of a tougher statewide prohibition on smoking in public places.

Bloomberg spokesman Ed Skyler told The Post yesterday the mayor supports the controversial bill expected to be acted on by both houses of the state Legislature today.

Unlike the city law, the state bill would not allow smoking in small bars where the owners are the only employees.

March 23, 2003
        FUMING SMOKERS HAUL ASH TO JERSEY
        By Sam Smith

In one last gasp of protest against the upcoming smoking ban, smokers are taking their butts to Hoboken.

The group CLASH, Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, will congregate across the Hudson River at midnight next Saturday, one minute before Mayor Bloomberg's smoking ban takes effect.

(NYC C.L.A.S.H. Note:  Appreciate the publicity but the reported event time is inaccurate.  Cocktail hour begins 5PM on Sunday, March 30th)

"We're going where smokers are accommodated equally," said head CLASHer Audrey Silk. "This city is hurting for money. Well, we're going to take ours somewhere else."

The "Bye Bye Bloomberg Bash," as the group is calling it, will take place at Frankie and Johnnie's Steakhouse, a former Hoboken speakeasy, and will feature speakers and, probably, a lot of smoking.

Another protest, a mass walkout from Big Apple bars onto sidewalks to coincide with the start of the ban at 12:01 a.m. next Sunday, is being discussed by city bar owners and will be decided upon Tuesday.

City officials will unveil further details of their plan this week to enforce the new smoking ban, and how the new detail of a dozen cigarette cops will patrol bars and restaurants.

March 20, 2003
        Pipe dreams for smokers
        Page Six

IT seems that smokers here in the city are hoping for a last-minute reprieve. The rumor among restaurant owners is that Mayor Michael Bloomberg will delay his strong-arm anti-smoking tactics for 60 to 90 days before the new laws kick in. "It apparently would be for economic reasons and the war," says our source. "I mean, really - New Yorkers can't not smoke in wartime." But a representative for the mayor says it's all wishful thinking, declaring, "The ban starts March 30."

March 16, 2003
        CLUB OWNERS HUFF AND PUFF TO OVERTURN CIG BAN
        By Sam Smith

With 13 days remaining before they pack up their ashtrays, some club and bar owners are still hoping to stub out the city's smoking ban.

At least three clubs are planning legal action, seeking exemptions to the new law because of their member-only status.

Other businesses, under the umbrella organization New York Nightlife Association, are considering a lawsuit against the city based on the lack of an environmental review before it was adopted.

A similar action is already under way in Nassau County, where smoking bans kicked in at the beginning of this month.

The three member-only clubs seeking exemptions are the Players Club, a 110-year-old establishment on Gramercy Park South; the Down Town Association; and the swanky Union Club on the Upper East Side.

Attorney Richard Farley, who is representing the clubs, said, "There has been long-held recognition that, in private places, there is limited government rights to go in and start regulating.

Farley said the member-only clubs also are interested in New York Nightlife Association's contention that an environmental review is required.

March 12, 2003
        JORDAN'S MAY BE ONLY ONE TO BEAT BUTT BAN
        By Braden Keil

The air may truly be rarefied at Michael Jordan's The Steakhouse in Grand Central Terminal, once New York City's smoking ban begins March 30.

After The Post's report on Sunday that a legal loophole left Grand Central's restaurants and bars exempt from the city smokeout, Metropolitan Transportation Authority czar Peter Kalikow issued an order requiring all tenants to comply with the clean-air rules.

Yesterday, leaseholders at Grand Central and Penn Station received official notice of the restriction from the MTA.

"The provisions of your lease requires you to abide by New York City's laws, as well as New York state law," the letter said.

In a statement issued yesterday afternoon, Kalikow said, "Adopting New York City's anti-smoking legislation at our [city] facilities makes sense and avoids confusion . . . MTA customers, employees and employees of retail establishments in our facilities are entitled to enjoy the health benefit of a smoke-free environment."

But the MTA decree, legal experts say, won't apply to Michael Jordan's.

A Manhattan Supreme Court judge ruled in 1999 that the city could not enforce anti-smoking regulations against Michael Jordan's because the weaker state law superseded city law. The decision applied only to Jordan's.

Jordan's owner Peter Glazier had no comment on his possible status as the only restaurateur in the city who can still invite his patrons to light up.

When asked about the Jordan's exception, MTA spokesperson Tom Kelly said, "We would expect them to comply."

But the restaurant is not compelled to comply.

The 1999 court case arose after a city inspector determined that the eatery had exceeded the number of seats by the bar at which smoking was permitted, then issued the restaurant 12 summonses alleging Jordan's violated the Clean Air Act.

The MTA even joined in the suit with Jordan's to argue for the tenant's rights against the city. It was a slam-dunk decision for the restaurant.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Stanley L. Sklar ruled that Michael Jordan's "served a transportation purpose and that its lease with the MTA could exempt it from city regulations."

"Under the lease, we had a right to smoke, and the city challenged that right," Jordan's attorney told The Post in an earlier interview.

"And we were successful in convincing the court that we weren't subject to the city smoking regulations."

One Grand Central restaurateur, who requested anonymity, said he expects lawsuits by the other non-exempt businesses could arise against the MTA, if a New York state law, now being drafted, isn't passed in Albany soon after the city ban goes into effect as expected.

March 11, 2003
        'GRAND' PLAN TO SNUFF SMOKES
        By Kenneth Lovett and Braden Keil

By the end of the month, the only puffing at Grand Central Terminal will be done by trains, if two state lawmakers have their way.

Sen. Charles Fuschillo Jr. (R-L.I.) and Assemblyman Alexander Grannis (D-Manhattan) are planning to introduce legislation that would close a loophole in city law designed to prohibit smoking at restaurants.

Since Grand Central is state property, the law now exempts eateries there.

Fuschillo and Grannis said their bill would make the state's smoking laws as tough as the city's.

Gov. Pataki has said that he would support a statewide smoking ban but first wants to see the specific language in the bill.

And the New York State Restaurant Association has issued a statement saying it endorses a smoking ban "in all workplaces including restaurants, taverns, bars and private clubs."

Julie Canfield, a spokeswoman for Grannis, said, "We're very close on the language. The law itself would be as strong if not stronger than New York City."

But Canfield noted there could be exemptions in a state bill to allow - as city law does - smoking in cigar bars and tobacco shops.

March 9, 2003
        THE 'GRAND' PLACE TO SMOKE
        By Braden Keil, Sam Smith and Sarah Gilbert

Grand Central Terminal is set to become a smokers' oasis on March 30, when the city's ban on smoking in bars and restaurants is scheduled to kick in.

The famed station's establishments - which are leased out by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority - have special status because the building is run by the state agency, giving it statutory immunity from outside regulation.

And that includes Mayor Bloomberg's tobacco patrol, authorities confirmed to The Post.

In anticipation of their windfall, proprietors from the seven eateries and bars with liquor licenses inside the terminal - including Michael Jordan's The Steak House, the Campbell Apartment and a branch of Cipriani's - are gearing up to take full advantage of their unique status.

"They are exempt because it's a state building," said Tom Kelly, a spokesman for the MTA, which operates the terminal and holds a 110-year lease from Penn Central.

City health officials who are enforcing the ban also confirmed the train station's smoking status.

"The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene does not regulate establishments that are on state property," said department spokeswoman Sandra Mullin.

"Due to the exemption, we are going to make a sizable portion of the restaurant a smoking section," declared James Chapman, a spokesman for the terminal's Cipriani Dolci.

Chapman said a smaller section, once cordoned off for smokers, will soon be set aside for nonsmokers.

A representative of nearby Metrazur said the restaurant is planning to host cigar nights, while the terminal's Oyster Bar, which permits smoking in its saloon and bar, said it expected its clientele to double after April 1.

Bloomberg spokesman Jordan Barowitz said the city has no plans to pursue litigation against the state's rule.

That's likely due to the fact that Grand Central's special status was confirmed by the Manhattan Supreme Court in 1999, after city officials tried to make the terminal's Michael Jordan's The Steak House comply with city anti-smoking laws and ban its smoking section because of the open configuration of the restaurant.

Instead, the owners won in a decision that ruled that state law superseded the tougher city law in the landmark building.

"Under the lease, we had the right to smoke, and the city challenged that right," said Mark Rottenberg, an attorney for Michael Jordan's told The Post. "And we were successful in convincing the court that we weren't subject to the city smoking regulations."

March 9, 2003
        VAGUE RULES LEAVE ROOM FOR ERROR
        By Sam Smith

With 21 days until Mayor Bloomberg's smoking ban, bars and restaurants who want to build a special smokers' room say
they're being left in the dark by the city about the new regulations.

Under the new law, which takes effect at 12:01 a.m. on March 30, all establishments regulated by the city must be smoke-free, unless they build a self-contained room.

But those who are considering the option are finding a mess of confusing building regulations, uncooperative bureaucrats, and a price tag that could send their profits up in smoke.

"It's $20,000 minimum to build one," said architect Steve Salvesen of R.I.P. Construction Consultants, which is working with six downtown bars on smoking room plans.

Splash, on West 17th, plans to convert a coat-check room into a smoking chamber. But because of confusing building specs, it won't be ready in time for the ban, said owner Brian Landeche.

"There's a lot of mystery on the amount of air that needs to be pulled out and pushed into the room," he said. "You can't get information from [the city]. The only way you find out a lot of times is to go ahead and build it and wait for an inspector to come in."

Langan's, on West 47th, has been trying to get answers from the Health Department since January about rules over building materials.

"The last correspondence we got [from the department] was six weeks ago, and they said they didn't have any answers at that time," said owner Des O'Brien. "We started this back in January so we'd have the 10 weeks to get it done. That 10 weeks has evaporated."

Meanwhile, Bar None in the East Village has a smoking room already under construction - to stop smokers congregating on the sidewalk. But manager Pam Schon said building work is being hampered because the city's smoking room specs are confusing and vague and "no one is committing to say what the laws are."

The Health Department says it has supplied appropriate information, but that regulations aren't yet finalized for the new law and if bars want more clarification they will have to wait until then.

March 9, 2003
        CHEF'S ROUNDABOUT SOLUTION: GET ON THE BUS
        By Braden Keil

Top chef Daniel Boulud has come up with a novel scheme for anyone who wants to puff after a meal at his four-star eatery come March 30 - he'll send them riding around the block in a fancy bus.

"There is no ban on smoking on a private bus," said the award-winning chef.

Boulud, one of the more creative culinary figures in the world, has a vision of a luxury trailer that could be parked outside his Upper East Side restaurant, Daniel.

"They could retreat to this cozy, decadent den to smoke to their hearts' content . . . with some excellent cognac, of course," said Boulud.

"The luxury smoking salon on wheels could even travel from restaurant-to-restaurant to accommodate stranded smokers
shivering on the cold sidewalks," he said.

The chef's street lounge would be a self-service operation with ashtrays that emptied automatically, and stocked with the finest aperitifs, hors d'oeuvres, cigarettes and cigars. Of course, the driver's side would have to be enclosed from the smoky main cabin.

The zany idea could even attract sponsorship from tobacco companies and luxury car manufacturer, said the chef.

"Then all we would need is the parking permit," Boulud said.

Lois Freedman, general manager of Jean-Georges Vongerichten's restaurants, also had the idea of a mobile smoking salon.

At this point, the van is just an idea. "It's a concept we may explore in the future," she said.

March 8, 2003
        FUMING OVER A FINE MESS
        By Stephanie Gaskell

Bar and restaurant owners were fuming yesterday after learning health inspectors will only issue tickets to them and not to smokers who light up in violation of the upcoming ban.

"The law makes it clear that we're both liable," Rob Bookman, attorney for the New York Nightlife Association, said during a final public hearing yesterday before the law takes effect March 30.

"If a Health Department inspector comes in and tickets us because five people are smoking, they better give tickets to those five people, too," Bookman added.

Health Department spokeswoman Sandra Mullin said that won't happen.

"The onus to comply with the law is on operators," she said. "Notices of violation will be issued against operators who permit smoking, not customers."

Like the previous 1995 smoking law, the new ban affecting virtually all public spaces allows inspectors to slap a $100 fine on people caught smoking in off-limits areas.

"We did not exercise this aspect of the 1995 law and do not intend to begin this practice now," Mullin said.

"The intent of the law was to have enforcement focus on the owners," said City Council member Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan), who chairs the Health Committee. "The target is going to be places that flagrantly thumb their nose at the law."

March 6, 2003
        BUTT BUSTERS HIRED FOR ANTI-SMOKE LAW
        By Stephanie Gaskell

Call them the "Butt Cops."

The city Health Department is hiring a dozen inspectors for special nighttime duty to enforce the city's tough new smoking ban - which is just weeks away, The Post has learned.

The tobacco inspectors - called "environmental technicians" - will bolster the force of 100 health inspectors who work daytime hours, said spokeswoman Sandra Mullin.

"The law goes into effect on March 30 and on March 30 we're going to begin enforcing the law," she said.

The new evening enforcers are not licensed health inspectors - but have the power to issue smoking and other health code summonses, Mullin said. They will earn $13 an hour, she said, a little less than regular health inspectors.

The new law, which takes effect at 12:01 a.m. on March 30, bans smoking in all workplaces, including bars and restaurants.

Critics have argued that the law will be very tough to enforce. But officials say they're ready and business owners should be, too.

"We will be enforcing the law," Mullin said.

The law provides exemptions for cigar bars and for bars or restaurants that are operated entirely by their owners - as long as there are no more than three of them. The law also allows businesses to build special smoking rooms.

Only business owners will receive tickets. Customers who smoke are not liable. Fines start at $200 for the first offense and jump as high as $2,000 for the third offense.

NY C.L.A.S.H. Note:  The reporter is mistaken.  The law states that smokers can be fined $100 for each incident.

March 2, 2003
        NASSAU SMOKERS GET BUTT-KICKING
        By Lisa Pulitzer and Cynthia R. Fagen

It was lights out for lighting up in Nassau County yesterday.

The state's most stringent workplace smoking ban went into effect, prohibiting smokers from lighting up in public places, including restaurants and bars.

The controversial new public-health law is being met with mixed reactions.

While proponents are breathing a sigh of relief, bar and restaurant owners worry their businesses will go up in smoke, driving customers to cross the border into Suffolk, where the ban does not go into effect until 2006.

February 21, 2003
        CIG ARRESTS
        By Kati Cornell Smith

The feds yesterday charged six smugglers who slipped at least 35 million fake Marlboros onto an upstate Indian reservation, where they were sold as the real deal, authorities said.

The bogus butts, made in China, were passed off as Marlboros at two Cattaraugus Reservation tobacco shops - Double D
Smokeshop and the Iroquois Tobacco Co. - and through a Web site. [Smokemcheap.com]

February 14, 2003
        MAYOR MIKE'S HALL MONITORS
        Editorial

Responding to the City Council's decision to override Mayor Bloomberg's veto and pass a bill banning cell phones in theaters, Hizzoner's press secretary, Ed Skyler, had this to say:

"Considering the challenges facing the city, we think our law-enforcement officers should spend their time keeping New Yorkers safe instead of raiding movie theaters."

Indeed.

But many cops won't be able to make it to the theater, anyway. They'll be too busy patrolling city bars and restaurant, looking for that ultimate evil-doer: the cigarette smoker. This, at a time of heightened concern about terrorism.

It looks like Mayor Mike isn't all that much better than the council, when it comes to deploying cops for the important stuff - like protecting New Yorkers from the real bad guys, the criminals and terrorists.

The council should've heeded the logic in Skyler's words.

And maybe his boss should've, too.

February 4, 2003
        SPITZER VS. N.Y.
        By William Tucker

STATE Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has made his choice. Given the option of supporting trial lawyers or the people of New York, Spitzer has gone with the trial lawyers.

Last Monday, Spitzer filed a motion in New York's Appellate Division opposing the effort by State Supreme Court Judge Charles Ramos to open an investigation on whether six law firms that represented New York in the 1998 tobacco settlement deserved fees of $625 million.

The judge wants the fees deposited in an escrow account controlled by the state. If they are indeed excessive, he says, the state might be entitled to some of this money.

For a state facing a $12 billion deficit, $625 million is nothing to sneeze at. But Spitzer disagrees. As the state's chief litigator, he has come down firmly on the side of the lawyers.

Here's how it happened.

The tobacco lawsuits, as you may recall, involved the claim by 46 states against the tobacco companies for alleged "excess" Medicaid costs incurred by people who smoke cigarettes. A 1998 Master Settlement Agreement awarded the states $246 billion, to be paid over the next 25 years. New York's share: $25 billion.

In fact, a 1997 study in the New England Journal of Medicine found there are no "excess Medicaid costs." In cold, harsh terms, a smoker who dies of lung cancer at 65 costs Medicaid less than a healthy individual who spends his or her last four years in a nursing home. Long-term care is Medicaid's fastest growing expense.

At bottom, the tobacco settlement was just a novel and easy way for states to raise money.

Judge Ramos is a lawyer with a conscience. Last June, when the settlement came before him for routine approval, he blinked. $625 million! Isn't that a rather large amount for a case that never went to trial? Is it possible that the state might be entitled to some of that money? The judge decided to conduct his own investigation.

But when Ramos asked the attorney general's office to participate, Spitzer turned him down.

January 29, 2003
        JAIL GUARDS: SMOKE BAN IS UN-KOOL
        By Frankie Edozien

City inmates are about to lose one of their few privileges - smoking.

Corrections Commissioner Martin Horn announced yesterday that Mayor Bloomberg's smoking ban will be put into effect in city jails, beginning April 1.

Fearing prisoner unrest, Horn said the upcoming ban is one of the reasons his agency needs a new $120 million punitive unit.

Horn testified at a City Council hearing that tight living space could cause inmates to be edgy and misbehave.

That surprised Yvette Clarke (D-Brooklyn), the chair of the Fire & Criminal Justice Services Committee.

"Just as an aside, are you going to be offering [smoking] cessation programs?" she asked.

The smoking ban didn't sit well with the corrections officers union, which is considering a lawsuit to block it from being enacted.

January 29, 2003
        POLS OK CIG BILL TO BAN SUFFOLK-ATING SMOKE

Joining their neighbors to the west, Suffolk County legislators yesterday passed a ban on smoking in all bars and restaurants, beginning in 2006.

The measure, which passed by a vote of 13-5, is similar to smoking bans recently enacted in New York City and Nassau County.

Suffolk County Executive Robert Gaffney said he had not yet decided whether to sign the measure into law.

Suffolk's implementation of the smoking ban would not be fully realized until 2006, as part of a legislative compromise.

January 26, 2003
        BONDED TO SMOKERS
        By Nicole Gelinas

GOV. Pataki wants to plug part of New York state's growing budget deficit by selling bonds backed by future revenues from our share of the national tobacco settlement.

He also wants folks to quit smoking.

He can't have it both ways.

Tobacco bonds add a new twist of hypocrisy to the 1998 deal between 46 states and the Big Four cigarette firms.

New York state, in theory, wants people to stop smoking. "We are sending a clear message not to smoke," state Health Commissioner Antonia Novello said in 2001 as she touted the increasing number of people who have called the state-run quitters' hotline.

She should stop working so hard.

Investment bankers and ratings analysts are explicit about the fact that the success of tobacco-backed bonds hinges upon the public's continued inability to quit.

January 18, 2003
        MIKE CASTS DRAG 'NET
        By John Lehmann and David Seifman

Mayor Bloomberg has launched a new attack in his war on smoking, hitting cigarette pirates with federal racketeering charges.

City lawyers charge out-of-state operators have devised a "massive tax-evasion scheme" by selling smokes over the Internet and dodging millions of dollars in taxes.

The city is suing the owners of 15 Web sites for more than $15 million - three times the amount it claims it has lost in unpaid taxes.

January 1, 2003
        SMOKING BAN IGNITES LAWSUIT

A group of Poughkeepsie-area restaurant and tavern owners has filed a lawsuit in federal court, saying a new smoking ban is unconstitutional.

The Dutchess County legislature passed a law in September that will take effect today banning smoking in restaurants (bar areas and dining rooms), bingo halls, bowling alleys and work places. Bars or taverns that generate 60 percent or more of their gross income from selling alcohol would be excluded and could still allow smoking.

"The heart of the lawsuit is the vagueness and overbreadth of the law," said Kevin Mulhearn, the attorney representing the restaurant and tavern owners. "It was a very poorly drafted statute."

The suit asks a judge to declare the law unconstitutional and keep the county from enacting or enforcing it.
 
 
 

1996 Thru 1999 Archives | 2000 Archives | 2001 Archives | 2002 Archives |
2004 Archives | 2005 Archives | 2006 Archives | 2007 News | Top

March 31, 2003
        Beating butts ban
        City's few tobacco bars a haven for smokers
        By Fernanda Santos

Andrew Gordon took a deep drag from a Gitanes Blondes, then puffed small circles into the smoky air of a swanky SoHo
cigarette lounge.

"This is an after-work ritual I won't have to quit," Gordon, 32, of the upper West Side said Friday night, his body sunk deep
 into a squishy velvet chair at Circa Tabac on Watts St.

The citywide butts ban that began yesterday eliminated smoking in almost every bar and restaurant - but there's a handful of places where it's still legal to light up.

"Tobacco bars" like Circa Tabac - usually in the form of cigar bars - are one of the rare exemptions to the city's anti-smoking law and a more stringent state regulation that is set to go into effect July 23.

March 31, 2003
        State may ease up on smoke law
        By Nicole Bode, Joe Mahoney and Lisa L. Colangelo

Take a deep breath, smokers: The state's new butts ban may not be as tough as it looks.

State lawmakers, who pushed through one of the nation's most stringent smoking laws last week, are considering changes that would broaden exemptions for some hard-hit businesses, officials said yesterday.

State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R-Rensselaer) is willing to look at amendments to the law before it takes effect in July, spokesman John McArdle said.

Meanwhile, it was a tough first day in the city for New Yorkers who just wanted a drink and a smoke.

An unhappy Nelson Ala stood in the cold rain last night as he puffed a cigarette outside the Molly Wee pub on Eighth Ave.

"I completely forgot about it and then I noticed there were no ashtrays," said the 33-year-old guitarist from Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. "I just kept thinking Bloomberg is probably the worst mayor ever."

March 30, 2003
        State butts in on bars
        New law snuffs out special smoking rooms
        By Fernanda Santos, Kerry Burke and Maki Becker

At 10 minutes to midnight, Carlo Schiano, the manager of the boutique bar Pianos on Ludlow St. in the East Village, turned
off the music and announced: "Last call for smoking."

He was greeted with boos and catcalls. Still, at 12:01 a.m. today, when the city's ban on smoking in all workplaces went into effect, his bartenders picked up the ashtrays and asked everyone to snuff out their cigarettes.

Many patrons walked out. One defiant couple continued to puff away beneath a "No Smoking" sign.

"I don't agree with it, but it's the law," Schiano shrugged.

The other bars on Ludlow seemed more hazy in their response to the ban.

"I came out specifically to smoke my brains out," said Matt Skiba, 24, a Manhattan musician who was with friends at Max Fish where the air was thick with the familiar smell of tobacco both before and after midnight.

"I don't even smoke, but I'm smoking tonight for freedom," said Skiba's friend, Matthew Rasenick, 23, a playwright from Brooklyn.

Many bar owners had hoped to skirt the city smoking ban, which allowed establishments to offer patrons a separately ventilated smoking room until 2006 and permitted smoking in small bars where the owners are the only employees.

But the plans fell apart last week when the state suddenly passed an even tougher measure that outlawed the smoking rooms and nixed exemptions.

Smokers at Lee's Blah Blah Lounge will instead have to make do with one small patio table - the only smoking area that the Park Slope watering hole can offer under the state ban, which goes into effect July 23.

"I'm not even sure it makes sense to have just one table for smokers," Lee said. "You run the risk of having a bunch of people fighting for it."

A provision allowing bars and restaurants to set aside 25% of outdoor space for smokers remains in effect.

March 28, 2003
        Smoke-filled room
        Editorial

With smokers focused on Sunday's expected start of the city's new, too-tough anti-smoking law, Albany surprised everyone Wednesday by overriding it with even stricter rules. The state law makes the city's version look like a puffer's dream. And it was adopted with zero public discussion.

Typical Albany. They take 30 years to fix the city's schools. They haven't had a timely budget in a generation. But they pass the nation's most restrictive smoking ban in a single day with no debate.

The legislation was fast-tracked through the state Senate and Assembly by Majority Leader Joe Bruno and Speaker Sheldon Silver, respectively. Within minutes, it was signed, sealed and delivered by Gov. Pataki. The message to the public: Butt(s) out.

The law forbids smoking indoors everywhere but in private homes and private cars. No restaurants, no bars, no offices, no stores, no nuttin'. Even the paltry few exceptions in the city law are gone.

Compare this with how Mayor Bloomberg went about it. He introduced his smoking plan in August, and the City Council didn't vote until December. In between, while Bloomberg took the political heat, there were hot debates and Council hearings. Amendments were offered, and a compromise was reached.

Similar results, but vastly different processes. The city seeks input, Albany shuns it. The public should huff and puff. Any smokers fuming at Bloomberg should direct some of their understandable anger at Messrs. Pataki, Bruno and Silver - who seem to have forgotten that taking the public's pulse is part of public health.

March 27, 2003
        By George, butt out
        Gov signs tough workplace smoking ban
        By Lisa L. Colangelo and Joe Mahoney

Gov. Pataki signed a law yesterday that would ban smoking in bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and virtually all other workplaces across the state.

The landmark measure - even tougher than the restrictions set to go into effect in New York City on Sunday - would give the state one of the strongest anti-smoking laws in the country. The state law is set to go into effect July 23.

Joe Conway, a spokesman for the governor, said Pataki signed the law - overwhelmingly approved by the Legislature - despite some reservations.