Government has no greater responsibility than to protect the health of its citizens. It?s the reason we spend billions fighting terrorism, disease and other threats to life and liberty. Yet when it comes to eliminating the dangers of secondhand smoke, I am astounded by the justifications used to defend indoor smoking.
The Surgeon General two weeks ago declared secondhand smoke to be a “serious health hazard” after extensive review of scientific studies documenting the fact that secondhand smoke makes people sick and costs the country billions in medical care.
Government agencies and health experts agree that exposure causes heart disease, cancer, and can trigger serious to fatal asthma attacks.
Even Philip Morris acknowledges these threats justify the regulation of smoking in public places.
In 1994, Maryland?s Commissioner of Labor and Industry determined that secondhand smoke was such a significant health threat he prohibited smoking in all enclosed workplaces, including restaurants and bars, despite debate about economic impact.
Predictions of economic doom led the 1995 General Assembly to scale back the Commissioner?s regulations before they took effect, creating a system of inequality that persists today ? one protecting all but the bar and restaurant workers.
Recognizing this loophole, Howard, Montgomery, Prince George?s and Talbot counties have passed local laws prohibiting smoking in all public workplaces. Charles County passed similar restrictions for restaurants.
While piecemeal, county-by-county regulations improve public health, Maryland would be better served by a statewide ban.
Limiting smoking is not government overregulation. The government has a responsibility to regulate individual behavior and commercial activity to protect and promote the public good.
Providing toxin-free air for the public and employees is appropriate and necessary.
The right to make business decisions does not extend to choices about public safety.
Restaurants are regulated to ensure proper food storage, sanitary and pest control conditions. The dangers posed by warm milk and roaches pale in comparison to the threat from secondhand smoke.
Smoking sections fail to protect workers, and smoke fails to recognize the imaginary boundaries of nonsmoking sections. ASHRAE, the group of engineers responsible for setting national ventilation standards, warns that no engineering method exists to protect health in the presence of smoke.
Smoking restrictions do not remove an individual?s right to smoke or give up a legal activity. They still allow people to smoke, but ask them to use that legal yet lethal product outside where their personal choice won?t hurt others.
Consider a comparison to alcohol restrictions. Consuming alcohol affects only the drinker?s body, where smoking affects everyone around.
Still, the government restricts alcohol use. No drinking on the streets or while driving because you might hurt others.
Refusing to protect those working an eight-hour shift in a smoky environment because they voluntarily chose the job is unconscionable.
Statistics show smoky workplaces disproportionately affect minorities, musicians and entertainers, students needing late and flexible work schedules, and lower-wage, lesser-educated workers with fewer job choices.
These workers are vulnerable, have little bargaining or political power, and are precisely the people the legislature should be protecting.
The “work somewhere else” argument could justify elimination of all workplace safety laws.
Americans once had to endure chemical exposure and dangerous conditions to earn a wage. Thank government regulation they don?t today.
A comprehensive smoking law is in the best interest of Maryland. It will help control the states rapidly escalating health care costs while protecting public health. Eliminating smoking in bars and restaurants makes as much sense as it does for malls, movie theaters, airplanes, grocery stores.
It?s time the legislature guaranteed clean, safe indoor air for everyone.
Michael F. Strande is Deputy Director of the Legal Resource Center for Tobacco Regulation, Litigation and Advocacy at the University of Maryland School of Law. He can be reached at [email protected].
