The No. 1 complaint of opponents of St. Joseph’s proposed smoking ban goes to personal responsibility and the freedom of choice for informed adults to decide what is best.
This is where the thinking adult stops at the sign at the door advising he or she is about to enter a smoking establishment and chooses to not enter.
This is where the business owner, intent on serving an interested public, offers goods and services with full knowledge some prospective customers might not care if the business permits smoking and some might object strongly.
This is where the hopeful job-seeker surveys the field and chooses to put in an application at those employers meeting his or her requirements — pay, benefits and working conditions, perhaps including whether or not smokers are welcome.
Scientists and our own federal government have determined smoking is bad for us and secondhand smoke is a health hazard as well. Still, whether it is a preference or an addiction, millions of Americans smoke and prefer options in society that allow this choice. These opinions should matter.
The push to ban smoking in all public places and workplaces in our community has led to the proposition on the April 8 ballot. We advocated for compromise but have concluded this is a flawed proposal that goes too far in removing choice from public life. It also goes too far in restricting private businesses and favoring some over others.
Today in St. Joseph it is easy to go out for a meal or a night of entertainment and move about the community with barely any notice that others might choose a smoking environment. Job-seekers have many nonsmoking options to choose among. The argument for change, when viewed in this light, appears significantly about wanting to restrict others’ rights to pursue a lifestyle they choose.
The supporters respond they are most concerned about health issues — but it seems they primarily mean the health of others, and the choices of others.
Business owners who compete for an entertainment audience, including bowling alleys and bars that offer keno, are right to see a threat in allowing the casino gaming floor to fall outside the smoking ban, as well as membership clubs and organizations.
Opponents also are justified in questioning the fairness of requiring a longtime business proprietor to cease smoking even in his or her private office and company-owned vehicle.
Across the country, more than a fourth of the largest cities have stopped short of banning smoking in all businesses. At last count these included: Arlington, Fort Worth, Jacksonville, Memphis, Miami, Las Vegas, Nashville, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Tampa and Tulsa. The suggestion that St. Joseph is the last place of substance to go down this path is incorrect.
While each of these other communities is different, many are viewed as highly desirable places to live and work and offer amenities that are in demand. Their decisions on permitting smoking in limited venues have not defined them in a negative way.
If there is message here, it is that St. Joseph voters can both recognize the health risks of smoking and also value personal responsibility and freedom of choice as essential to our community. We think current law strikes an appropriate balance and will vote “no” on the ballot issue April 8.
Originally written By The Editorial Staff, NewsPressNow.com, St. Joseph’s MO
