Published Feb. 11, 2007 in the Hibbing Daily Tribune
By Aaron J. Brown
I’m a freedom
guy. I have a
wooden plaque carved with the First Amendment to the Constitution on
the wall
in my home office. Conservatives would bristle to hear that I am a
card-carrying member of the ACLU. I support freedoms even when they are
unpopular. I oppose any constitutional amendment that would ban the
burning of
the American flag, not because I support burning flags but because I
support
the freedoms represented by the flag. I oppose laws banning lawful
people from
owning guns. I oppose controls on what can be said in the media. I
oppose the
concealment of what our government does behind closed doors. I oppose
government spying on any citizen without just cause. You may disagree,
but
enjoy the fact that you have the right to disagree.
So when the issue
of
statewide smoking ban comes up this legislative session, as it has, one
might
expect me to again cite freedom of choice in opposing the ban. But this
issue
is not about freedom of choice; it’s about public health. As such, I
support a
public smoking ban in all
In as much as
possible,
people should be free to make personal choices. You may choose between
a greasy
burger and a salad, maxing out your credit card or pinching pennies. As
such,
people must also be subject to the consequences. That’s why we
shouldn’t ban
the sale of tobacco products. However, unlike using alcohol, using
tobacco
affects other people.
Government buildings have already banned smoking because of the liability of secondhand smoke. It’s been decades since office buildings have seen the clouds of smoke they once knew. Since the various agencies in charge of regulating workplace safety already impose standards that most people accept, this would simply be a modern addition to those basic rules. Workplace discrimination is unacceptable. Unsafe workplaces are unacceptable. Secondhand smoke, when preventable, is unacceptable too.
The state smoking
ban idea is
a public health issue, not an attempt to control what people do. You
may smoke
in your houses, your cars, outside, or in places where others have the
reasonable choice to avoid the smoke.
Local lawmakers have been cool, if not outright opposed to a restaurant smoking ban for many years. They have their reasons, usually related to freedom of choice. This year, for the first time, many of them are now acknowledging that a restaurant smoking ban is likely. This is a positive step.
Passing a total workplace smoking ban is not an easy thing to do.
Many
businesses, especially bars, will say that a statewide smoking ban is
going to
harm their businesses. The evidence just doesn’t back that up, however.
What
has been found in states that have already passed bans is that, after a
short
period of adjustment, establishments return to identical or even
improved
levels of patronage in a smoke-free environment. What is often
overlooked is
that new customers will often replace smoking customers.
You can’t change
the human
desire to go out and have a good time with friends or enjoy a meal in a
restaurant.
You can change the need to smoke while doing so. We live in a changing
world
and a workplace smoking ban is overdue.
I’m not going to
tug at your
heartstrings about the effects of secondhand smoke. Almost no one
argues that
second hand smoke is bad for public health and causes preventable
diseases.
It’s time for public laws to reflect this public fact.
Right now efforts are being made to pass a smoking ban in St. Louis County. That’s a good start. The state legislature is also expected to visit the issue this year. Gov. Tim Pawlenty has said he would sign some form of a statewide smoking ban in public places. A workplace smoking ban would best be handled at the state level. It’s not an easy thing to do, but it’s the right thing to do.
Aaron J. Brown is a columnist for the Hibbing Daily Tribune.