Casinos in Rhode Island Maintain Smoking Permissions, Limited to Enclosed Spaces
Rhode Island Casinos Permit Smoking Lounges Following Senate Bill 188
After the passage of Senate Bill 188 in Rhode Island, casinos are now subject to the state's existing smokefree workplace protections, but with a notable exception. A last-minute amendment allows for the creation of smoking lounges within casinos [1]. This means that while the broader casino areas remain smoke-free, designated smoking lounge spaces are legally permitted inside these gaming establishments.
The bill, initially sponsored by Rep. Teresa Tanzi, is now headed to Gov. Dan McKee's desk for his signature. However, Tanzi removed her name from the sponsorship after the amendments allowed for enclosed smoking spaces. The legislation does not specify whether employees can be required to work in these smoking chambers [1].
Rhode Island's policy on casino smoking is somewhat mixed compared to other states. Some states with similar smokefree laws for workplaces and casinos enforce complete indoor smoking bans without exceptions. In contrast, Rhode Island explicitly allows these specialized smoking lounges due to the amendment [1].
New Jersey recently debated closing its long-standing casino smoking loophole, historically allowing smoking indoors in casinos despite statewide bans elsewhere. Atlantic Cityβs casinos reintroduced smoking areas four years ago, making it another state with similar partial exemptions [5].
The compromise in SB 188 allows for enclosed smoking spaces in casinos. Notably, Bally's requested a $25 million state marketing subsidy in exchange for smoke-free casinos, which was not granted [1].
The Rhode Island General Assembly passed the bill on June 23, 2025, to limit casino smoking. The casinos, Bally's Lincoln and Bally's Tiverton, will continue to allow tobacco use [1].
The bill repeals most indoor smoking exemptions afforded to casinos, including the ability to designate nonsmoking and smoking areas on gaming floors. The casinos must now have smoking lounges with proper ventilation systems that prevent the migration of smoke to nonsmoking areas [1].
Tribal casinos, as sovereign businesses, can decide whether or not to allow indoor smoking. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 11.6% of US adults, or 28.8 million people, are smokers [1].
Rep. Teresa Tanzi and some other state lawmakers oppose the enclosed smoking rooms due to potential health threats to certain Bally's employees. However, Rep. V. Susan Sosnowski (D-South Kingstown) championed SB 188 following Tanzi's exit, stating that the compromise best satisfies both sides [1].
The casinos generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annual tax revenue for Rhode Island. Along with Rhode Island, states where indoor casino smoking remains include Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, and West Virginia.
Patti Doyle, a spokesperson for Bally's, expressed gratitude for the compromise that allows the casinos to accommodate smoking patrons [1].
- After the passage of Senate Bill 188, casinos in Rhode Island like Bally's Lincoln and Bally's Tiverton will continue to allow tobacco use, with the exception of designated smoking lounges.
- Although the broader casino areas remain smoke-free, Rhode Island's casinos are legally permitted to create smoking lounge spaces due to an amendment in SB 188.
- Rep. Teresa Tanzi, the bill's initial sponsor, removed her name from the sponsorship after the amendments allowed for enclosed smoking spaces.
- Bally's requested a $25 million state marketing subsidy in exchange for smoke-free casinos, which was not granted, as the bill permits smoking lounges instead.
- The Rhode Island General Assembly passed SB 188 on June 23, 2025, requiring casinos to have smoking lounges with proper ventilation systems to prevent smoke migration.
- The compromise in SB 188 has faced opposition from some state lawmakers, including Rep. Teresa Tanzi, due to potential health threats to certain employees, but it has also been supported by others as the best solution for both sides.
