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 
Eileen,
Your comment smacks of a petty displeasure that you did not get to interview the LG.
See, it is ok to actually have your own opinions on certain things that may not be in line with one’s party. Some people have opinions before they look to the party for talking points (I know that concept sounds crazy to you). You should pick a party that agrees with most or all of your beliefs, however it is stupid to let the party MANDATE all of your beliefs.
That is why people like Vivian and she is seen an self thinking intellectual and is respected, and you are seen as.. well, as Eileen.
In the sports of politics, Vivian is a player and you, well, let’s just say “go get her some water”.
The bitterness and jealousy you portray against Vivian is high school-ish (at best) and quite frankly you are embarrassing yourself (and your blog). You are like the awkward girl in the 10th grade making snide remarks about the popular kids… and yet this is not high school, there are no ‘popular kids’… Stop trying to re-live and settle scores from your youth. Grow up.
Ever wonder why people flock here of all political persuasions? You want people to see you and your blog as some sort of politico authority or grandeur of punditry in Va. Beach. Respect is earned, not given. Attacks on Vivian like this (And so many others) do you no favors.
Grow up, Eileen. Grow up. Respect is not given, it is earned. Stop pissing in the rain and try earning some.
I have to agree with Vivian on this one. Truth be told, having a smoking ban is really annoying and I think in the end it can hurt businesses. A couple months ago I went to the Army Navy Club in DC and found out I could not enjoy my cigar there. An institution that has been around for almost 150 years no longer lets people who patronize it to smoke. It is an exceptionally classy place.
If market forces say people don’t want to smoke, then everything will be fine. One thing we are all endowed with is free will. We choose what we want to do. Having a law tell us not to do something will cause problems. Imagine if a law was passed banning SUVs. How many people would be up in arms about being limited on what they are allowed to drive? Two different scenarios, but the principals are the same.
VJP and SW, take a pill. I’m just making an observation here. Good grief! Sorry, no Viv, I’m not a regular reader here.
I agree with RK as far as “it” having benefit if indeed we’re asking the hard questions. Why are you therefore upset with my question at RK?
Don’t be so simple, BDM. There are all sorts of laws that regulate choices and free will. When you went to the Army Navy Club, you either paid to park your car in a parking garage, or you put money in the meter out front. You didn’t simply decide that you wanted to park in that sweet spot on Connecticut Ave. And I suspect you didn’t complain about not having your own free spot out front, either. Why? Because we live in a society in which we try to reasonably minimize the imposition of our choices on others. You don’t get to hog a spot all day. You don’t get to throw your plate on the sidewalk when you’re done eating. And you don’t get to take a leak on the trees in MacPherson Square on the way home.
I’m calling BS on that. Shall I put up the IP logs now?
I just love the Monday morning quarterbacking. Eileen, why don’t you call the LG and invite him to do a podcast? Then you’ll have your opportunity to ask the “hard” questions.
The fact is that you added absolutely nothing to the conversation that was going on here, other than to snipe at me. Don’t come over here now and try to act innocent.
Back on topic: I see no one has addressed my point about alcohol, or the coal dust or the auto emissions. I think the answer is a simple one: we make laws for the things we can make laws for and leave the other stuff to just happen.
Whatever! Put up the IP logs if you want. And you’re right on 2 counts. Assuming I could stomach it, I should invite the LG and/or the AG to podcast with me and ask them some really tough questions. and I did come here just to snipe at you. I have a problem with the way these two in particular are trying to mask their rightwing extremist agenda behind all the “hey, I’m a regular ol’ guy” facade and I see you more and more perhaps unwittingly starting to aid and abet them in better fashioning that facade. They are both very dangerous people and I lose sleep at night sometimes thinking that either one of them could possibly win come 2009. But apparently this is my problem and I shouldn’t have come here and remarked the way I did. I truly hope you know what you’re doing, Vivian. You and I obviously have different “styles” in achieving what is hopefully the same ends. And I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree or however the saying goes. Hasta luego hombre! I’ll try very hard in the future to only come here to post when it is completely and totally relevant to the conversation on hand. Hey, your blog, your rules. And obviously there is a special set of rules for me and me alone on your blog here.
Vivian said to Eileen:
“Some of us are capable of seeing things beyond the ends of our own noses.”
How ironic in a thread where a smoker says the Governor’s amendments to end cancer spreading second hand smoke in resturants should be killed.
Eileen,
When you invite the LG or the AG to a pod cast, make sure you share this comment with them:
” I have a problem with the way these two in particular are trying to mask their rightwing extremist agenda behind all the “hey, I’m a regular ol’ guy” facade and I see you more and more perhaps unwittingly starting to aid and abet them in better fashioning that facade. They are both very dangerous people and I lose sleep at night sometimes thinking that either one of them could possibly win come 2009.”
Never mind. I will for you.
And you wonder why you get so few pod casts and even less readers.
Also, does anyone ever notice that whenever Eileen is called out for being snotty, snippy and flat out bitchy, she folds her arms like my 3-year old and says something to the effect of ‘fine, I’m leaving’… WHHHAAAA.
Eileen, the number one reason the average Joe hates politics is because of the BS sniping and useless anger… More to the point: your style. You are a Bill Maher wanna be. You wonder why more people don’t flock to be around you? Because you come off as bitter and angry about everything… At least the times that you are not acting smug, which you have no grounds to be smug, therefore you just look foolish.
You want to be important and influence people, but in dong what you think makes you look smart, you simply push people away, even Democrats.
Stop making everything about Eileen… Ugh, I feel like a broken record.
BTW, Beore you lecture Vivian n asking the AG or the LG ‘hard’ questions, remember the phone lines were open and when you called into the AG Pod Cast maybe you could have spent less time reading you pre-written speech and mmore time asking an actual question… Of course, then it would have not been abut Eileen so that makes no sense to you.
Ben,
As always, your smugness level is amazing.
The higher the horse, the greater the fall.
What a minute… Eileen: Is your problem that Vivian does Pod Casts etc with the likes of Jim and BD?
Oh, that is rich!
Wow this thread took a turn somewhere…let me try and get it back on track.
“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.”
We do have laws concerning omissions from factories and power plants and the EPA is supposed to enforce infractions made by those companies…that’s the price of doing business.
Car emissions are again controlled by environmental regulations to minimize their impact on the environment and our lungs. We could have better standards but the auto companies are a powerful lobby and no one in Washington is willing to stand up to them.
Drunk driving is covered by numerous laws and their our severe penalties for being caught. We have reduced drunk driving instances over the last few years with increased police presence and messaging.
The example that I can think of that is akin to smoking would be to take a 12 ounce beer and drink all but one ounce of it. Then, take that last ounce, swish it around in your mouth, spit it into a glass, and have someone drink it.
Look, I’m generally very libertarian when it comes to social issues. I just feel that there have been no economic impact from cigarrette bans in other states and localities. If someone has some figures to show me otherwise, then I will reconsider.
Jesus…that one paragraph up there concerning drunk driving has numerous errors…proof read next time Kevin!!!! Sorry about that.
Vivian, you are so right on this. We tried banning alcohol-that went sooooooooooooo well, didn’t it? What everyone does not realize is that this “small step” as you call it (to ban smoking in restaurants) is just going to open the floodgates for serious babysitting of citizens. California was one of the first states to enact non-smoking bans, if not the first. Today, there is a county in California (Calabassas, I believe) that allows people to make a citizens arrest if they see someone smoking OUTSIDE. Outside. That’s insanity, and I think if you cannot agree with that, then you are indeed refusing to see any side of the issue but your own. Additionally, when NYC enacted their non-smoking ban in restaurants, the cops went on a ticket spree for the first few months going after smokers by pulling up in front of bars and giving smokers tickets for public intoxication. So, the smoker was punished by having to walk outside, no matter what the weather, and then they were punished for following the law.
Yet some of you are actually saying that it isn’t a big deal that smokers walk outside. Please explain to me why it is fair that someone who is paying a retaurant bill JUST LIKE THE NON SMOKER IS should have to get up, leave the building after explaining to the server that they are just going outside and not dining and dashing, stand in rain/sleet/snow/heat/etc., come back in, sit down, hang up the coat, etc., etc., etc….and guess what?People like some of the commenters here will end up batting the air and complaining that even though there is no smoke, you can still smell it on the person who came in after doing what YOU WANTED THEM TO DO.
There is no pleasing the ardent supporters of the anti-smoking movement except banning smoking altogether, which will never happen for political/economic reasons. So, you’ll just make our lives miserable. I mean why not; we’re “choosing to kill ourselves anyway’, right?
Does anyone know what Jim Webb’s position is on this? I highly doubt he is for the ban.
It’s because the choice of the non-smoker to not smoke doesn’t impact you, Jaime. When you choose to smoke, it impacts the people around you negatively. You may not care, but most of them do.