Tobacco Control is well aware smoking bans have little effect on restaurants while bars are negatively impacted. So why were restaurants included in Klein's study? According to Pat Carroll, President of the Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association, "It's obvious why it was done this way. It's to distort the truth. You can't lump bars and restaurants together. We have entirely different customers and provide different atmospheres. We demand this study be done again without restaurant data." Pam Parker, BLPHA Board Member and co-founder of Opponents of Ohio Bans asks "The problem is that this study, timed quite nicely to be released just as we have SB 120 introduced to exempt family owned bars in Ohio, has been widely distributed. If the data from this study is reexamined and finds that bars are hurt from smoking bans, will the researchers go to similar lengths to see that proper retractions are printed and headlined?"

President Obama's March 9, 2009 Memorandum said, "The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions." "I guess that doesn't apply when it's Tobacco Control and it hurts family owned bars. Imagine how our members feel that have been losing money since enforcement began, they're struggling to keep their doors open when they turn on the TV or read in the paper that a study says they're really not harmed by the ban. They're livid," said Carroll.

Related Web sites: www.thebarbiz.com and www.opponentsofohiobans.com