What a Great Story
A huge thumbs-up to Rachel Kytonen, Greg Hunt, and Jon Tatting, of the Isanti County News, for their in depth report on the smoking ban’s affect on local business owners and patrons. I wish I had done it.
Many quoted in the story echoed a sentiment I have made often: there is nothing public about restaurants and bars. They are private establishments and people already have the freedom to avoid them if they so choose. “The freedom to breath,” in other words, already existed.
Moreover, the option of going smoke-free was already there for any business.
There is no doubt the ban is going to hurt business, primarily small business. In a border area like my hometown, smokers will simply cross the river into Wisconsin. That’s what I intend to do.
It stinks because those businesses in Minnesota did nothing to earn this “punishment.” But I don’t go to the bar to support local business. I go there to have a good time and Minnesota just made that a lot harder. The last thing anyone wants is the nanny state breathing down their neck when they are out on the town. And really, who goes to the bar concerned about their healthy lifestyle?
Do we really imagine that people are out there are terribly concerned about their lungs at the very moment they are actively attacking liver function?
While I think it’ll be grand to drink and dine in a bar/restaurant without cigarette smoke, I totally believe it’s the individual proprietor’s right to provide a smoke filled or smoke free environment. Just as it’s our individual right to choose which establishment we patronize, or not. I think it was a huge mistake on our state government’s part to play a role in “keeping us healthy” while violating our rights.
What they should do is look at providing incentives to those establishments that provide a smoke-free environment, or heavy duty ventilation.
And while we’re on the “health” issue - health insurance companies should reimburse people for gym memberships and body massages! Both of which aid in destessing, therefore living a more healthful life.
Yep, banning personal vices of any kind, or otherwise trying to ostracize them, is shoddy public policy. It’s no coincidence that cigarette smoking has been cornered in from two sides, some on the left who take it upon themselves to “keep everyone healthy,” and some on the right who take it upon themselves to keep everyone “moral.” There’s sort of a continuum at work here - the lessons of the Prohibition era just never sank in, it seems.
This matter of insurance is a big one, though. Insurance costs get passed along to the public at large, whether directly, in the case of subsidized health care (low-income, seniors, veterans, etc.) or indirectly, through premiums that I suspect don’t vary nearly enough based on personal behavior and history. And of course, whether a person brought a condition on themselves or not, they have to be treated. Therein lies the quandary, for me at least.