Legislation that would allow smoking in Illinois casinos has been tabled in the Senate. Senator Martin Sandoval, who proposed the bill, a companion to a House bill that recently passed a committee vote, decided not to call his bill for a committee vote. Sandoval said that he is still building support and wants more time before bringing it to a vote. Opposition says he tabled the bill because he doesn’t have enough votes to pass it.

Senator Sandoval says that the legislation would create jobs in the state. Back in 2008, Illinois passed a law banning smoking in indoor public places. Since then, casinos have seen a decrease in revenue. Of course, that was the same time that the Great Recession hit America, so it’s difficult to tell how much of an impact the smoking ban had. However, statistics have shown that whenever casinos are forced to prohibit smoking, their profits decrease. Many casino players – 20% according to the American Gaming Association – like to smoke while they play. Since neighboring casino markets in Iowa, Indiana and Missouri do allow smoking, Sandoval believes that failure to exempt casinos will cost the state jobs and money.

Sandoval’s bill does face stiff opposition, though. The American Lung Association has campaigned hard against it, saying that it discriminates by not protecting casino employees. Governor Pat Quinn opposes creating an exemption for casinos. Senate President John Cullerton not only opposes it, but he was the sponsor of the 2008 smoking ban. The Illinois casino industry backs Sandoval’s bill to give them an exemption. If the bill passes the House, Sandoval may be able to get more support in the Senate.

I love America, but it isn’t without its problems. One of the big problems is that the people here are ridiculously litigious. You can’t turn on the news without hearing about some frivolous lawsuit. The most ridiculous seem to be those aimed at easy targets like Big Tobacco, alcohol companies or casinos. In this case, it’s the casino.

The mother of a former casino dealer who died of cancer last year filed a lawsuit yesterday, seeking damages and stating that the casino was responsible. Maceo Bevrotte, Jr. died of cancer due to prolonged exposure to secondhand smoke at the casino, according to the lawsuit. The mother filed the suit against Caesars Entertainment Group, which owns the casino that employed Bevrotte, Harrah’s New Orleans Casino.

According to the lawsuit, the casino failed to protect Bevrotte and other employees from the dangers of secondhand smoke. The lawsuit also asks the judge to certify the case as class action status to include at least 1,000 current, former and future casino employees.

Bevrotte’s death, like anyone’s death, is tragic, but that doesn’t mean this case has merit. It doesn’t make the casino responsible. Everyone knows that smoking goes along with casino gambling. In fact, I’d say that there are three places in this world where you are pretty much guaranteed to be overwhelmed by cigarette smoke – casinos, bars and trailer parks. Hang around any of them and you will inhale smoke. If you work there, you’ll inhale a lot of smoke. That is why I have no desire to ever work at a casino or a bar, but that doesn’t make the employer responsible.

Bevrotte had to know before walking into the casino that he would be entering an environment with a lot of cigarette smoke. If he didn’t, then he should have figured it out when he showed up for the job interview. Knowing that there is a lot of smoking at the casino and knowing that smoke is hazardous to your health, he took the job anyway. Bevrotte had just as much say as the casino in whether or not he inhaled smoke. Sure, the casino could have banned smoking and asked all smokers to leave. On the other hand, Bevrotte could have chosen to work in a smoke-free environment.

Just imagine if Caesers was to lose this lawsuit. Think of the precedent it would set. Concert security staff could sue if years of standing in front of thousands of watts of rock music caused hearing damage. Boxers could sue the boxing association and any venues hosting their events (hey, it’s casinos again!) if they get brain damage for letting a strong guy repeatedly punch them in the face.

Bevrotte’s death is tragic and it is natural for his mother to want someone to blame. However, that does not mean that Caesars Entertainment is liable. Everyone has a personal responsibility for their own protection. Employers should do what they can to lessen the risks, but in the end, some occupations are risky. If you choose to enter the occupation anyway, you are acknowledging that the job, or the paycheck, is worth the risk.

Last Friday, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm signed a new smoking ban into law that outlaws smoking in all bars and restaurants. The new law will take effect in May 2010. Similar smoking bans already exist in other states, such as Florida and California. Smokers have predictably called the legislation discrimination, saying that it tramples on their right to smoke wherever they please. Like is often the case, these people have no idea what is a “right” in our country and what is a privilege. I’ve read the US Constitution many times, including the Bill of Rights, and smoking is never mentioned. The anti-smoking crowd points out that they have a right to eat food without choking on someone else’s cigarette smoke, but they aren’t right either. The truth is, each establishment has the right to choose whether or not they want to allow smoking. A smart restaurant separates the smoking and non-smoking sections in such a way that smoke from the smoking section won’t bother people in the non-smoking section. If they do not, non-smokers have right to refuse to eat there. But I digress. For the record, I think smoking is a filthy habit and I can’t enjoy eating a meal when someone else’s smoke is in my face. Plus there is still that believe, though unproven, that second-hand smoke can cause cancer.

As is often the case, though, the new legislation does not affect everyone equally. Lobbyists are very good at getting new laws to work to their benefit. As a result, cigar bars and casinos are exempt from the smoking ban. As a result, some believe that casino business could increase. Smokers enjoy smoking as a social activity, and if they can’t do it at their local bar but can at a casino, why not go to the casino? And while you’re there, you can always try your hand at blackjack.

Some employees of casinos have complained about having to inhale smoke all night at work and are likely unhappy with the exemption, but there are now plenty of places where they can work in a smoke-free environment. Only time will tell if the ban significantly increases the business of the casinos, because it’s unlikely that smokers will go there instead of a restaurant to eat, but they could take away a lot of business from bars. Of course, while that’s good for the casinos, it’s not so good for the bars. We’ll keep you posted.