Two researchers at the University of Wisconsin have concluded that smoking bans cause more drunk driving.  Scott Adams and Chad Cotti published their findings through the Journal of Public Economics this month, although it appears to have been available on the Science Direct website since January of this year.  When smokers want a drink, they drive farther to find a place to do so rather than give up either of their predilections:

Using geographic variation in local and state smoke-free bar laws in the US, we observe an increase in fatal accidents involving alcohol following bans on smoking in bars that is not observed in places without bans. Although an increased accident risk might seem surprising at first, two strands of literature on consumer behavior suggest potential explanations — smokers driving longer distances to a bordering jurisdiction that allows smoking in bars and smokers driving longer distances within their jurisdiction to bars that still allow smoking, perhaps through non-compliance or outdoor seating. We find evidence consistent with both explanations. The increased miles driven by drivers wishing to smoke and drink offsets any reduction in driving from smokers choosing to stay home following a ban, resulting in increased alcohol-related accidents. This result proves durable, as we subject it to an extensive battery of robustness checks.

I oppose smoking bans on the basis of private-property rights.  If a bar or restaurant owner wants to serve smokers, the government shouldn’t interfere in that transaction, since neither are doing anything illegal.  Customers who want a smoke-free environment can vote with their feet.

The proponents of these bans argue that they improve public health and safety, but as with all attempts to impose government restrictions on markets, this has its own strange and consequential twists.  Ban-backers claim that employees that get exposed to second-hand smoke risk their lives for low-paying jobs — as if anyone forced them to work at a bar or restaurant — but Adams and Cotti provide evidence that the bans put the entire community at greater risk.   I’d say a drunk driver on the road represents a greater risk than breathing cigarette smoke.

King Banaian notes that those who assumed that smokers would just stay home got it wrong.  Some of them turn to the stage instead.   At least it’s not as deadly as a drunk driver.