When you argue against enacting a statewide smoking ban, you're asking for trouble. Sure, the discussion might remain polite, but in some eyes, you become a tool of tobacco companies, a lout who doesn't care about the welfare of our children or a fool oblivious to the rising cost of health care in this country.
None of those labels apply to me - or to 98% of the people opposed to the idea. I know smoking is bad, I know it's addictive and I know it is deadly. In 1987, I watched my paternal grandfather, a lifelong smoker, die a horrible, lingering death from lung cancer. In response, my parents became very anti-smoking, and just as predictably, I then took up the habit. I quit smoking in 2006, and three years on, I'm still not cocky enough to promise that it's a lifelong achievement.
No, I agree with the ban's medical premise. I have two different objections:
I don't think the state has the right to regulate personal choices in the first place. But if you disagree with me and think the ban is important for the public good, then you must be left puzzled by Madison's logic. Smoking is bad, so bad that the state feels compelled to act against it. So do we ban it outright? Do we prohibit the sale of cigarettes inside the state line? Do we at the very least tax it out of existence, instead of keeping smokers on the hook and looking at the vice tax as plain ol' revenue?
No. Instead, Madison puts forth a plan to ban smoking in public, at places like restaurants and taverns. Their good health thus protected, Wisconsinites will be free to consume their nightly beers and buffalo wings in comfort.
To me, it seems like more of a media stunt than honest lawmaking.
More practically, I object to the timing of the bill. Twenty years ago, this would have had a drastic impact on Wisconsin. Now, why bother? In 2005, as a pack-a-day smoker, I took over as general manager of a hotel. One of the first things I did was to eliminate smoking in public areas and the majority of guest rooms. Why? Because it's the 21st century, and the age of the smoker is at an end. It made no financial sense to cater to a market that had been pushed out of existence.
The majority of Wisconsin businesses already have adapted to the times, law or no law. Those proprietors who still allow smoking aren't being stubborn; they know their clientèle, and they know that banning smoking means running the risk of closing their doors for good.
While I'm certain the legislation will pass on Wednesday, I see no point in a law that the market, on its own, has made largely redundant. And in these economic times, I can't fathom a reason to toy with small business owners struggling to weather the storm.
To me, it makes as much sense as lighting up a cigarette in the first place.
