The smoking ordinancein columbia

The smoking ordinancein columbia

I like the result, but not the way we got there. I am not a smoker - well, I do enjoy an occasional cigar - but I have a strong libertarian bent. In other words, I am high on individual liberty and freedom and not crazy about paternalistic government.

I thought the earlier ordinance (designated areas for smoking and nonsmoking) and the marketplace worked reasonably well and never really had any problems about secondhand smoke. I am not even sure about secondhand smoke’s health risks, which were used as the justification for the new ordinance. If you sit in the same room for 60 years with a spouse who smokes three packs of Camels a day, you have a secondhand smoke problem. But an occasional whiff in a restaurant? Sure, it is unpleasant, but the science is unclear about health risks.

It also bothers me a great deal that we have had a number of restaurants and bars close over the past year. Common sense tells you some of the closures were at least in part caused by the smoking ordinance. No one will get me to believe differently, thank you very much.

Having libertarian genes, I am starting to worry: Should I eat my fatty foods now, before they are taken away?

Here’s an idea: Let restaurants and bars advertise themselves as either smoking or nonsmoking so consumers can make intelligent choices. That way everyone knows in advance what they are getting into.

Finally, couldn’t we have voted on this? Something with so many interrelated issues such as government interference in the marketplace, health and individual liberty seems like it should be voted on in a plebiscite.
http://www.columbiatribune.com