The very first trip I ever took to the General Assembly was to accompany then-Delegate Thelma Drake to a committee hearing where I testified about the need to exercise control over credit card companies. I recall getting out of her car and lighting a cigarette. Upon reaching the doors of the building, I put my cigarette out. After all, I had been used to not smoking inside government buildings, having been a federal government employee when that ban was introduced. (That is a story for another day.)
Upon entering the building, my first stop was the ladies’ room. When I came out, I could smell smoke – in this case, cigar smoke. I asked Del. Drake about it and she said that smoking was indeed allowed in the building and that up until recently, members of the GA smoked at their desks during session! As Margaret Edds said in her column today:
By all rights, as a reporter covering the General Assembly over several decades, I probably
should be dead by now. Other than “bartender,” if there were a profession or a workplace more consistently draped in a canopy of smoke, you’d be hard-pressed to find it. Once, I remember counting the ashtrays in a committee room. Astonishingly, they outnumbered chairs.
However, it is not because of the history of Virginia being so intertwined with tobacco that I oppose the smoking ban. Nor is it because I am a smoker. Heck, I’ve had parties at my house and retreated outside my own home to smoke in deference to those who don’t smoke. No, I oppose the ban because it is simply the wrong thing to do.
People talk about personal responsibility and how the government shouldn’t interfere in our lives and then they turn around and support a ban like this. Where’s the consistency of thought? Either you want government to regulate behavior or you don’t.
I don’t.
Everyone has a choice. I choose not to go to outdoor baseball parks that ban smoking. (Of course these same parks allow folks to get rip roaring drunk and then get behind the wheel of a car. Hmmm.) I sometimes choose to go to nonsmoking restaurants because I happen to not like smoke around me when I’m eating. But I am unwilling to impose my choice on someone else. It’s kind of like what was said about gay marriage: don’t want one? Don’t get one.
Don’t want to be around smoke? Don’t go to a restaurant where it is allowed. Vote with your feet and your pocketbook. If enough people don’t want smoking in restaurants, guess what will happen? Restaurants will be smoke-free. We already see that happening.
But for those who want to have a cigarette, places like Greenie’s shouldn’t be put out of business simply because government is “protecting” us. If the majority of Greenie’s customers prefer a smoke-free environment, guess what? Greenie’s will either adopt a non-smoking policy or go out of business.
Government is not always the answer, folks. Business people who are afraid of being the first one on the block to go smoke-free have no guts. If you believe it is the best thing for your customers and staff, then do it. Grow a pair and stop relying on government to help you out.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
woot woot
go libertarians go
Careful, Viv… Your “let the free market decide” and “Too much gvernment” ideas are, well, pretty Conservative 🙂
I Agree though.
Vivian, if the market properly responded to nonsmokers’ concerns, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. There is not a single bar in Arlington that is smoke-free. The market has failed, so government needs to act.
TheGreenMiles – Then start your own business. Or just stay home (like you’d have smokers do).
Whatever, Jason. Your habit so bad you can’t go a couple of hours without making someone else pay for your addiction?
~
But Vivian! How could you write this?
Of course you want gov’t to regulate behavior. On the easy end of things, I am certain you want them to stop people from killing, stealing, and beating other people. Further down the line, you probably want them to enforce noise ordinances, environmental regs (e.g., car emissions), and stalking. So it’s hardly an either/or choice. It’s about deciding where to draw the line. And there are some pretty compelling cases to be made regarding the public health effects of smoking. Moreso than public urination, which I’m also pretty sure you’d want gov’t to regulate.
“Or just stay home (like you’d have smokers do).”
Dude…smokers would still go out. They would have clean air on the inside to breathe and would smoke on the outside…They do it in Delaware. It’s not a big deal.
Come on Kevin, listen to Jason! The simple, rational solution here is for me to start my own business! 🙂
Jason, smokers don’t “just stay home” in Delaware, Massachusetts, DC, New York, or countless other places that have smoking bans. They go out as usual, but just step outside to smoke. My favorite bars back in MA now have tables out back where the smokers hang out. It’s couldn’t be less of a big deal.
As a non-smoker married to a quit-smoker, I can see both sides of this one. However, I’d be very careful about basing my opinion on any personal issue on how the General Assembly handles it. They only very recently began to provide adequate rest rooms for their female members. Like U.Va., I guess they were just waiting to see if this going co-ed thing would last. It would be interesting to know the median age of all General Assembly members, since this probably influences their world view quite a bit. I think it is more important that they get in touch with the opinions of society at large than the other way around.
And only tangentially related:
Not too many years ago, I was at a meeting in one of Hunton & Williams’ Richmond office conference rooms. It was the end of a half day affair that had taken place in various other H&W office venues, including a very nicely done lunch in their top-floor dining room. It was mid-afternoon, and I was feeling a bit peckish. I looked to one of the candy dishes on the middle of the table to see what was on offer. Hmm, one in front of me was empty. Looked to the next. Hmm, also empty. Strange, as they’d hardly overlooked any other details during the day. So my attention went back to the meeting. Glanced at the bowls again. Strange cutouts on the edges.
Oh. Wait.
Ashtrays.
Only in Richmond, folks.
Oh good. I thought Thadd and I were the only Democrats turned Conservative in the eyes of other bloggers because of this issue. 😉
Normally, Vivian, I would agree with you about personal liberty and personal responsibility. There are all kinds of behaviors that I don’t want the government regulating. But some that I can see a reason for because they impact others.
I would greatly oppose making cigarettes, cigars and pipes illegal. I don’t want to intefere with anybody’s personal behavior. The trouble with smoking is the second hand smoke that it creates for others.
I suspect that as many restaurants would like to go smoke free but are afraid of losing business if they do. Business people don’t want to make any customers unwelcome, which is why, space permitting, they try to have both smoking and non-smoking sections. The trouble is in lots of place the smoke wafts over from the smoking section to the non-smoking part of the restaurant.
A state-wide ban would level the playing field. If all restaurants had to abide by it, probably customers would continue patronizing them and step outside to smoke.
Also, could there be an exception made in the law for venues that wish to be considered private smoking clubs?
Also, you are quite right that lots of places are going smoke free on their own because their customers – including smokers – want it. Even people who enjoy a cigarette often don’t want to be in an environment that reeks of stale smoke.
vivian – please stop smoking. we’ll be needing you around for a long time to come 🙂
How coincidental! These are the same sentiments even down to practically the same verbage issued by the LG in the BD podcast.
Eileen – what are you insinuating? That I am somehow a Republican now?
Take you petty, childish behavior elsewhere. I’ve had it with your snide remarks, both here and on RK. If you had read anything on my blog, you would know that this isn’t the first time that I’ve said that the market should dictate. Try reading this post from a month ago.
Some of us are capable of seeing things beyond the ends of our own noses. You continue to demonstrate that you can’t.
GreenMiles – I’m sorry that the folks in Alexandria don’t have the guts to go smoke-free. And AIAW, I disagree that the government should step in to help private businesses “level the playing field.” In this case, the field is level. No one has the right to make a living running a restaurant.
Sitting in traffic, sucking car emissions is worse than second-hand smoke. Traveling down near the coal piers here in Norfolk where the dust coats everything is worse than second hand smoke. And certainly a drunk getting behind the wheel of a car is worse than second hand smoke.
By y’all’s reasoning, we should outlaw driving, coal and alcohol. Oh wait – we tried that last one. Didn’t work out too well.
Bottom line for me is that people have a choice in this matter.