Thursday, Jan. 8, 1998 | 11:27 a.m.
SECONDHAND smoke is an issue Nevada will eventually have to face.
Five casino dealers filed lawsuits in Nevada this week against tobacco companies, charging that exposure to secondhand smoke damaged their health. The lawsuits contend the tobacco companies lied about the addictive effect of nicotine, as well as the adverse impact of breathing secondhand smoke.
The lawsuits, which are similar to ones filed in October by other casino dealers, also seek medical monitoring for dealers.
This kind of lawsuit is not novel. The tobacco industry already has settled a secondhand-smoke lawsuit filed by flight attendants, agreeing to pay $300 million, which will create a research foundation on diseases believed to be caused by cigarettes.
In a related issue, Nevada's neighbor, California, banned smoking in bars on Jan. 1, in part to protect bar employees from secondhand smoke.
Worried that the California law will drift to Nevada, the tobacco industry is already making campaign contributions to state legislators. For years, lobbyists have been accused of blowing smoke when the Nevada Legislature meets; no one can say anymore that it's simply a figure of speech.
"I'm sure we'll have to fight it in the next Legislature," Jack Jeffrey, a lobbyist for the Tobacco Institute, told the SUN's Cy Ryan about the possibility of a similar proposal surfacing in Nevada.
A variety of interest groups contribute to state legislative candidates, so it's tough to believe that a $500 or $1,000 contribution can unduly buy the influence of our Nevada legislators.
Many Nevada businesses have already banned smoking from the workplace, believing it to be an irritant, a health hazard or both. Legislators will have a difficult time reconciling protecting the health of casino employees from secondhand smoke vs. the economic well-being of casinos and bars, two businesses that depend on smokers for patrons.
While the tobacco lobby will naturally work hard to prevent a ban on smoking in bars and casinos, it wouldn't be surprising if these efforts are merely a warm-up for the courts, which likely will have the final say on the issue.
archive
