Smokers beware: the verdict on I-901

Chaim Eliyah

Staff Writer

In other countries – Argentina for example – this hullabaloo about smoking in public places would seem a little bit outlandish. In Latin America, as in France and many other locations in the world, someone can smoke just about anywhere they darn well please, and if anybody has a problem with it, well – no, wait. Everyone seems to accept it.

Yet here one finds property owners, bar owners, bus riders, students who have been confined to smoking shelters, our old heroes Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man, and just about every other smoker or smoking supporter in the state up in arms about this extremely harsh ban on cigarette smoke which will be on the ballot Nov. 8.

One article in the Seattle Weekly (“Smoke Gets In Your I-901,” Phillip Dawdy, Oct. 5) cites some of the problems that business owners will have with clientele if the law is passed. Many business owners, it says, consider the ban unenforceable, and one Queen Anne business owner says the ban is trying to impose a “nanny state” approach. A web-based newspaper at http://www.thenewstribune.com/ touts, “Adults should be able to make adult decisions.”

It does seem a little bit over the top. For a country that used to allow smoking in grocery stores or at the theatre, we’ve come a long way, baby. Smoking has taken an unlucky strike – it’s gone. Wherever particular people congregate, the “cool” thing seems to be to isolate smokers. We’re trying to start fresh, as in the case of the smoking shelters on campus. Gone are the days when your 15-minute break was your own to spend in front of your place of work smoking. In fact, people now cringe if you even call it a smoke break. Life has become inequitably more expensive for smokers in this country in terms of life insurance, health insurance; sin taxes paid on their habit, time spent trying to evade nonsmokers who will run them through the coals, and other such tomfoolery.

Interestingly enough, though, the majority of students on campus seem to be entirely neutral on this issue. A couple of smokers at the bus stop here said that they weren’t even aware of the initiative. Other smokers acknowledge the rights of non-smokers to not smell smoke. Barista Kaylin Osborn said, “if people are doing it right outside the cigarette stand it bothers me because I’m allergic and it makes me sick. Other than that I’m neutral – most people on campus are OK about it.” Osborn says she once had to tell two smokers to move because there was a child at the stand, and they complied without incident.

So while the smokers are obviously not pushing the issue, they’re not adamantly opposing it – in fact their only advocates seem to be business owners who want them as clientele and staff writers for the Seattle Weekly. The real juggernaut behind this whole issue is the team of hardcore advocates like Student Body Advocate Chris Mitchell, who says, “I’m very much against smoking – it’s killing yourself. My dad almost died. I’d say this initiative will pass. I recommend checking out tobaccosmokesyou.com/.” About smoking on campus, Mitchell says “As long as people are in the smoking shelters, I’m okay with it, except I have to walk past a couple on my way to class because of the location of some of the shelters and students that ignore the rules and smoke in front of places like the music building.”

It’s pretty obvious that if you’re a smoker, even a polite smoker, your basic choice is to get as far away from nonsmokers as you can. And it seems like it’s about to get a lot worse. In the voters’ pamphlet, the “Statement For” beats the living daylights out of the “Statement Against” by citing organizations like the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Association, AARP, and the American Heart Association. It’s a zealous crowd that’s gaining a lot of support. In a web search one can find 25 “for” sites before ever coming across an “against” site. This issue is being seen as a health issue for business, such as washing dishes or taking out the garbage – and the only argument that the opponents can come up with the issue is how bad it is for the businesses.

The fact is studies have been done in a number of states that have already enacted a similar ban, showing in fact that there is no significant economic impact from this sort of initiative. It’s looking pretty grim for people who want to hang on to their right to smoke.