OPINION & EDITORIAL
Don’t snuff out state smoking ban
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Robert Phansalkar:
- Privacy stopped at traffic lights (January 21, 2008)
- Modern society troublesome for 'Christian nation' (November 30, 2007)
- 'Think, Respect' does neither, preempts rational action (November 14, 2007)
- 'Taser this' editorial tame compared to past (October 2, 2007)
Related Stories:
- They voted for what? (November 6, 2003)
- Giuliani's ego looms large (March 28, 2007)
- Score one for state credibility (October 30, 2007)
- Open the flue (April 22, 2004)
- District 5 dishonesty (November 29, 2001)
by Robert Phansalkar
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Sen. Roger Breske, D-Eland, believes that “it should be a
requirement for every politician to have a real job before running for elected
office,” and surprise, surprise, Mr. Breske’s “real job” before representing
Eland wasn’t in medicine.
Mr. Breske, who has put himself at the forefront of the latest battle in the
Senate, claims he has been flooded with support for his opposition to Senate
Bill 150 — popularly known as the smoking ban.
His ammo: Mr. Breske ran a family-owned tavern in his previous “real job” and
uses this as the basis for his claim that a smoking ban throughout the state
will have a devastating effect on local businesses and hardworking Wisconsinites.
At this point, since the smoking ban appears to have significant momentum, Mr.
Breske is only fighting for a delay in the ban. However, if Mr. Breske were
living in a perfect world — at least the perfect world according to him — we
would let tavern owners have the freedom to choose their own policy on smoking
in their establishments.
Now, fighting for the little guy is always a tough go, but when you’re fighting
for the little guy’s right to be subjected to secondhand smoke, you’re really
swimming upstream.
However much he relishes his role, Mr. Breske’s points are unmistakably off
base. The presumption that regulation is inherently inapposite to business is
legendary stuff for the right — just ask environmentalists — but Mr. Breske,
who is actually a Democrat, is taking this to another level altogether.
To moderate the hysteria, look at what businesses are actually being asked to
do.
State lawmakers are not requiring paper instead of plastic — at least not yet.
Rather, they’re simply asking for tobacco enthusiasts, addicted and otherwise,
to take it outside and keep the bar air cleaner. It’s applied statewide, and
with Illinois and Minnesota on board too, the ban won’t have the extensively
foretold effect on border town bars that opponents suggest.
Yet, all the same, Mr. Breske persists. How this will shut down businesses
across the state is a mystery Mr. Breske refuses to elaborate upon, but one
thing about the mystery man is becoming clear — his aversion to reason.
Don’t bother citing the countless medical reports from the American Lung
Association that say secondhand smoke is a known cause of cancer. Don’t mention
how the current surgeon general’s report showed there is no risk-free level of
exposure to secondhand smoke. And whatever you do, don’t bring up statistics
that show productivity increases with smoking bans.
That’s the kind of stuff — reason — that Mr. Breske just doesn’t want to hear.
Instead, he would rather paint this as a freedom issue. But the logical line
between A and B just doesn’t connect.
Some people, Mr. Breske included, like to make this out to be an issue of moral
bullying. The point is not lost on me — certainly, the imagery of a government
telling you what to do is unappealing — but they’re not telling you not to
smoke; they’re just telling you not to do it indoors.
In fact, the ban has very little to do with smoking itself; it just seeks to
regulate the time, place and manner in which it’s done. You know, those
constitutional limitations on rights with which everyone seems to be on board.
Mr. Breske, the self-appointed king of compromise, still thinks this is too
much, but considering that the state could ban tobacco entirely, this is indeed
the compromise he should be seeking.
Charges that businesses are going to be crushed by the smoking ban are
baseless, given the continued rampant success of established taverns in
Madison, despite the smoking ban. The same was said when Madison decided to
quit cold turkey: Business will be hurt, Big Brother is treading on our
liberty. But by most measures the ban has been nothing short of a success.
But once again, don’t bother sending a letter to Mr. Breske with these little
tidbits, because you’ll end up being brandished, as his press releases show, as
a Madison liberal telling him what to do.
And even if you could get past his name-calling, what would be the point of it
after all? As he has shown through his own words and actions, reason is
hardly his ally.
Robert Phansalkar (rphansalkar@badgerherald.com) is a first-year law student.
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 2:01am):
You're a pretty good LSAT proctor.
Bill Hannegan (February 5, 2008 @ 2:49am):
Mr. Phansalkar, only a minority of secondhand smoke studies have found a statistically significant link (RR2) between secondhand smoke exposure and lung cancer and heart disease. It is very likely that Senator Breske, though a veteran of smoky bars, has never known anyone who has died of secondhand smoke exposure and this causes his skepticism. Whatever small health risk workplace tobacco smoke poses can be readily clear away by affordable, readily available air filtration machines. Wisconsin bar owners should be allowed that option.
http://www.air-quality-eng.com/tobacco.php
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 11:03am):
If there is any "bullying" going on it is the smokers who want the "freedom" to impose their filthy, nasty, smelly addiction on everyone everywhere.
There is no redeeming feature of smoking.
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 12:30pm):
Man, Bill you're really making the rounds.
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 1:41pm):
I would bet that the link between second-hand smoke and stinky clothing and smelly hair is statistically significant in any study.
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 2:56pm):
Everyone knows that the only reason to smoke is that it keeps your herpes breakouts to a minimum. Yes, smokers have herpes... everyone should know this.
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 3:49pm):
When outside of the beautiful city of Madison, I am often shocked and disgusted when, upon entering some public building such as a restaurant, my nostrils and very constitution are assaulted by a sulfurous scent and deadly haze. If you desire to smoke, and many do, I see no undue harm in requiring you to do such a deadly act outside of a building where those of us who have chosen not to smoke have gathered.
Anonymous (February 5, 2008 @ 5:14pm):
The smoking ban in the UK is closing 57 pubs every month.
www.innthecold.com
Anonymous (February 6, 2008 @ 3:11pm):
Senator Breske has received numerous letters of support...including this one from Clearing the Air:
Wisconsin lawmaker rightly calls "warnings about the dangers of secondhand smoke hogwash
Clearing the Air's letter of support to Senator Breske follows:
Senator Breske,
I read about your comments in the Senate regarding the proposed smoking ban:
A former bar owner and ex-president of the Tavern League of Wisconsin, Breske called warnings about the dangers of secondhand smoke "hogwash."
Breske said he started working in a bar when he was a child, and the air in that bar was "blue" from the smoke. "I'm still alive," Breske said. "I'm 69."
To help prove your point you may be interested in air quality testing of secondhand smoke conducted by such names as Johns Hopkins, American Cancer Society, a Minnesota environmental health department, and various researchers whose testing and report was peer reviewed and published in the esteemed British Medical Journal......of course all these groups originally conducted these tests to prove how "hazardous" secondhand smoke is in the workplace.....however, in fact the air quality testing proves that secondhand smoke is 2.6 - 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations:
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/11/johns-hopkins-air-quality-testing-of.html
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/04/bmj-published-air-quality-test-results.html
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2004/04/american-cancer-society-test-results.html
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2006/02/air-quality-testing-and-secondhand.html
Additionally, there is a more urgent reason to oppose such anti-business legislation, here in the Twin Cities, smoking bans have closed down 155+ bars and restaurants eliminating thousands of jobs. As a frame of reference, in 2004 the last year without a ban, only 14 closed:
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/01/100-bars-and-restaurants-put-out-of.html
Around the country smoking bans have eliminated 1,000+ establishments
http://www.smokersclub.com/banloss3.htm
Can anyone doubt that smoking bans are fueled by inaccurate and exaggerated data, and more importantly have contributed to the economic downturn we now experience.
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2008/01/economist-at-federal-reserve-declares.html
If it saves just one state from making a political blunder......it's worth it.
Mark Wernimont
Minnesota
Sue Smith (February 6, 2008 @ 7:08pm):
I'd like to ask Mr. Phansalkar what business he owns. As a bar owner in Ohio, let me tell you what the ban has done for the tavern industry and State of Ohio. Since the ban, Anheuser Busch sales to bars have dropped 7.8%, draft beer 8.1% while sales to the drive thrus and carryouts have INCREASED by 1.7%. Not only is this a huge impact on the distributors and bars but it's having a huge impact on the sales & use taxes collected. The State of Ohio will be imposing the first massive layoff in decades. Our unemployment rate is now one of the 7 states that is at or above 6%. These sales figures also tell you that people are now drinking and smoking at home. Many of the smokers don't go out now and the ANTIs are also anti-alcohol so they, too, don't go out. I suggest If Mr. Phansalkar wishes to have a smoke free bar to patronize that he hock everthing HE owns, as we all have, and IF he's not FORCED TO ALLOW SMOKING, he'll have the ability as the OWNER OF A PRIVATE BUSINESS, to make that decision for himself. But don't act like smoking bans do no harm. That was the lie that was sold to the voters in Ohio. As a bar owner, I can personally tell you it's a lie. And while we're on lies, if 53,000 people die every year from SHS, who are they? I mean, if the ACS can claim it, they should be able to back it up. After all, they don't care if we lose our businesses and homes so I think we're entitled to know who these people are that died the last couple of years. And before you cast stones, have you "followed the money" behind the bans? You should. Every single person, including first year law students, whould research every bit of it before believing what they tell you. For example, did you know that the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) paid the ACS, AHA, etc. over ONE BILLION DOLLARS to lobby for these bans? Did you know the RWJF paid the ACS almost ONE MILLION DOLLARS to market nicotine replacement therapies? Did you know the RWJF paid the ACS SEVENTY PLUS THOUSAND DOLLARS to lobby Medicaid to pay for smoking cessation products? Now, add that up and ask who the RWJF is. They're JOHNSON & JOHNSON how makes Nicoderm and who bought Pfizer OTC in 2006 to get Nicorette. If this was about health, why did they buy Nicorette?This is the biggest, however criminal, marketing strategy and scam ever perpetrated on the American People. Do your own research on them www.rwjf.org and see for yourself. Research will also show you that of the 81 spousal studies done, only 16% show a statistically significant risk elevation. We've asked for a Congressional Hearing into these bans. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/conghearing/index.html If you don't want to sign it, you should at least read the comments left by those who have. This country is MAD. The people were lied to and we have a right to a Congressional Hearing. It's time the truth was told. And bravo for Senator Breske for standing up for business owners.
Thomas Laprade (February 6, 2008 @ 8:18pm):
Here is another Senator and his opinion on the smoking issue
http://tomneuville.com/index.php?s=second+hand+smoke
Anonymous (February 12, 2008 @ 5:49pm):
Luckily, I smoke rocks : )
-Toast
Anonymous (February 14, 2008 @ 3:34pm):
great column Robert!
Liz
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
