Do I hear an echo?

I’m really tired of the arrogant sense of entitlement some smokers seem to have.  Just because smoking is legal doesn’t meant that you can inflict your toxic habit on other people.  Also, as I stated previously, the world is not your ashtray.  Keep your carcinogenic chemicals to yourself, and clean up your own mess!!!

Why does our society continue to enable smoking behavior when it’s the number one cause of premature death in this country, killing almost half a million people every year?  I understand that providing ashtrays is probably a practical solution to the cigarette butt litter problem, but the simple truth is that smokers who toss their butts on the ground are littering.  FINE THEM.  $50 a butt sounds about right … or they could simply assign violators to community service and have the littering smokers pick up their own mess.

That is incorrect.

Litter-bug smokers who selfishly and irresponsibly believe that the world is their ashtray tax downtown litter control.  Don’t blame this problem on the smoking ban.

The Smoke Free Illinois Act is now in force. Ain’t life grand?

India and the U.K. are now requiring large, picture-based health warnings on tobacco products.  Canada has apparently required such warning labels since 2001.

Hat Tip: Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids International Resource Center.

The right to smoke ends as soon as the smoke touches another person’s lungs. It’s as simple as that, and it’s about damn time that the law recognized this obvious truth.

The inconsiderate & onerous infliction of a smoker’s deadly habit upon others clearly differentiates smoking from other scions of bad health. The over-indulgence in trans fats and complex carbohydrates by my neighbor in a restaurant does not endanger my health or the health of those that work there.

The dreaded “slippery slope” of “nanny state” regulation that some fear is about as frictionless as fly-paper. The much feared fat bans will die in Illinois as soon as the first Southside Chicagocrat can’t get his favorite kielbasa anymore.

The first measure is FDA regulation of tobacco products. According to this recent New York Times article, the current version of the plan has the support of 52 Senators and would pass through the House by a 2 to 1 margin. Some compromises have been made along the way, of course. The one mentioned in this article would allow clove as an additive to cigarettes. That makes me cringe – clove flavoring targets kids – but overall this sounds like a good deal that will save lives.

The second measure relates to the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), something I obviously support as a pediatrician with an overwhelmingly impoverished patient population. In the current proposal, as outlined in another New York Times article, the expansion would be paid for by increasing the federal tobacco excise tax to $1 per pack from the current level of $0.39 per pack. Increasing cigarette taxes decreases cigarette consumption and saves lives, and healthcare for children gets support in the process. Sounds like a win-win to me.

If they were really concerned, then why not ban cigarettes and all tobacco completely?

Em’s not the only one I’ve heard making this argument. The same point has come from many sources, including Emtronic’s usual online nemesis, C.J. Summers.

Sorry guys – I find this argument completely and utterly ridiculous.

Do the people making this argument really think we aren’t going far enough to regulate tobacco use??? I highly doubt it, since most who make this point go on to complain about increasing government interference in our lives. Do the same people really want more interference??? Come on! You can’t have it both ways.

More after the break …

Even though I think that most people making that argument are just doing it to throw up a smokescreen (pardon the pun), I will nonetheless respond to the point.

One – there would be much greater political resistance to an all-out ban on tobacco. Let’s improve public health using measures that are more acceptable to the general public so we can actually get something accomplished instead of spinning our wheels. Two – we have the example of alcohol prohibition. Prohibition was an abject failure that served only to provide massive profits to crime organizations. Do we want to repeat history or learn from it?

Nonetheless, there is a movement to get tobacco products regulated by the F.D.A. This is not an all-out ban, but stringent restrictions would be placed on the sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products. Tobacco Free Kids has a good summary of what F.D.A. regulation would involve. I do support the idea F.D.A. regulation of tobacco, but that’s a federal issue that isn’t really in the cards at the moment.

Emtronics also raised concerns regarding the shuttering of some bars and the possibility that other taxes will increase in response to falling tobacco tax revenues. In my opinion that’s a price worth paying for improving public health and removing the restraints on the personal liberties of non-smokers. If bars & restaurants can’t respond to the winds of change (as all good businesses that wish to stay afloat must), then they deserve to get blown out of the water. I won’t shed a tear.

Finally, Em had this to say …

Since the state is going to regulate where smokers smoke, then will the taxpayers be required to offer at state expense patches and gum to help these people kick their drug habit?

Actually, I do think that there should be more funding provided for treatment of addiction in general and tobacco addiction in particular. Addiction treatment is a dreadfully under-funded sector of our healthcare system. I find it appalling and ridiculously self-defeating that many insurance companies refuse to cover smoking cessation aids (nicotine replacement, buproprion, Chantix).

P.S. Randall – I’m really not trying to pick on you. Your comment just provided a good framework to respond to issues I’ve heard raised in many different forums.

If Blagojevich does sign the bill, Illinois will become the 19th state to pass a comprehensive public smoking ban, finally guaranteeing non-smokers the right to breath smoke-free air in bars, restaurants and other public places.  The law will take effect on January 1, 2008.

Representative Mike Smith is now on my “bad” list for voting against the ban, but local politicians can now breath easier.  They won’t have me on their case to put local bans in place.

If E.M.’s analysis and count of pro-ban votes in the General Assembly is correct, passage of the state-wide ban seems assured. As long as that happens, the Peoria referendum doesn’t have much meaning.

HOWEVER, if the state-wide ban fails to make it through the General Assembly, THEN the referendum takes on new life. In that scenario the referendum results could be used as evidence to support a local ban.

On Tuesday, April 10, Scanlon talked to a crowd at Western Illinois University and dispelled the idea that public smoking bans are bad for the restaurant business. Scanlon says he’s seen little evidence of that. All of Scanlon’s restaurants have been smoke-free for three years. That includes restaurants in Kentucky, the heart of the tobacco belt!

JoAnn Hairston-Jones of the Beu Health Center told the Western Courier that Scanlon also fought to pass one of the most comprehensive indoor clean air ordinances in the country … in Lexington, Kentucky! He served as vice mayor of Lexington from 2002-2006.

Scanlon’s conversion to the smoke-free cause was stimulated by a local public smoking ban. According to the Journal Star article (bold emphasis mine):

Scanlon said the smoke-free idea started when some of the company’s Arizona restaurants were required to ban smoking by a local ordinance. He began to notice those restaurants felt cleaner, and there was no difference in their profit and loss statements compared to those that allowed smoking.

And that was a LOCAL ban, not a state-wide ban! So much for the picture of economic doom & gloom perpetuated by Big Tobacco mouthpieces like the Illinois Licensed Beverage Association.

Money Quote from Scanlon via the Western Courier:

As a public official, I believed that clean-air ordinances are the right thing to do because they are necessary to protect the health of our citizens. As a businessman, I believe it’s the right thing to do because they demonstrate that concern for our employees and our customers is good for business.

Defend the public health and non-smokers’ rights by supporting the Smoke Free Illinois Act!

Barb Strand was the most sympathetic to the idea of a public smoking ban. She’s the only one who came right out and said she supports a statewide ban. Almost everyone else said if it were to be done, it should be done at the state level … but no one else openly endorsed the concept.

I see why people like Rusty Dunn. He’s a good public speaker and has that easy charm that makes him a likable guy. Of course he broke his spell with me when he mocked the idea of a public smoking ban as something that’s not worthy of political attention at all – “I guess they have nothing better to do in Springfield.” That got a big laugh from the crowd. Hopefully his dismissive attitude and the response from the crowd are simply ignorance, because I fail to find the humor in the deaths of at least 30,000 people per annum.

Chad Schmidgall certainly seemed like he would keep an open mind and would support a ban if he felt that it was the will of the citizens. I’m pretty sure Jason Juchems would do the same, although he was more open in his support of the smaller government / free choice concept.

I doubt Richmond, Jones or Abel would ever support a local ban unless there seemed to be overwhelming public support behind the idea. I doubt Maddox would support it either, although he wasn’t at the forum to answer the question. I have a feeling that the Old Boys have too many local business connections to get behind the idea.

Five and a half years ago, our country declared perpetual war and carried out the biggest reorganization of the federal government since the New Deal. Why? Because terrorists killed 3000 people.

Cigarette smoking kills almost half a million Americans EVERY YEAR. Environmental tobacco smoke kills somewhere between 30,000 and 60,000 Americans EVERY YEAR. Every year, ETS wracks up a death toll 10 to 20 times that of Al Qaeda on 9/11.

What’s our response to this in Central Illinois? We twidle our thumbs and do nothing, accepting chemical assault as just another facet of our society. We make jokes about it. We pass the buck. We hem and haw about property rights and personal choice while a minority are allowed to poison the air that we breath and dictate the choices of the majority. We become enablers for a destructive addiction and complicit in the death it causes.

We see the smoke … and ignore the fire.

They obviously didn’t realize that I’m not an anonymous blogger anymore, since they just quote me as “Knightindragonland.” I guess I’ll forgive them if they run a front page apology.

…

That is obviously a joke. They could call me Jiminy Cricket if they want … they got the URL right! Wooooooohoooooooooooooooo!!!!!!

Hat Tips: Eyebrows McGee, Billy Dennis.

Ahem.  In case you didn’t notice, I get a little fired up (pun intended) about the issue of smoking in public places.  I feel strongly that it’s an issue of public health and respect for the personal liberties of non-smokers.

There is no right to smoke.  Smoking in a restaurant or bar is an assault on the lungs of non-smoking bystanders.  A restaurant would be shut down if they let some customers poison the food of the other customers.  What’s so different about the air?

I wasn’t at the SBA forum, so I don’t know how the question was presented to the candidates and I don’t know how each candidate answered specifically.  If I’ve unfairly characterized anyone’s opinion on this matter, I apologize.  I also realize that Chad Schmidgall and Harvey Richmond did not participate in this particular forum, so they get a pass.

I based my original post on this quote from the Times article:

Pekin smokers may not have to worry anytime soon about having their butts literally put out the door.

At Tuesday’s SBA forum candidates were asked if they would approve a citywide indoor smoking ban in public places. Every candidate said that decision should be made by a business owner or patrons of an establishment.

I agree with some of my commenters that this is an issue that would be better addressed at the state or even federal level.  That would eliminate a lot of the arguments from some business owners that smokers would just move down the road a few miles and put them out of business.  If a public smoking ban were imposed more broadly, that wouldn’t be an issue since smokers would run into the same restrictions everywhere. 

However, the federal government has abrogated their responsibility in this matter.  A state-wide measure is pending here in Illinois, and I hope it passes.  However, that shouldn’t prevent local municipalities from taking leadership in this area instead of punting to the state.  Besides, Pekin would hardly be taking leadership, since Bloomington-Normal, Champaign, Chicago and many other municipalities in Illinois have already taken this step.  We’d simply be following the pack.

Frankly, if a few smokey dives go out of business because of smoking bans, I won’t be all that heartbroken.  This is the future, folks.  These ordinances are multiplying rapidly across the country and all over the world beacause it’s the right thing to do … just like it’s the right thing to inspect our restaurants to help prevent food-bourne illnesses and to restrict toxic emissions from our automobiles and our industries.  Even the pubs of Ireland are now smoke-free!  The owners of restaurants and bars would be wise to recognize this trend and embrace the future instead of clinging to the toxic past.