A few weeks ago, Gov. Jim Doyle released the state budget for the 2009-'11 fiscal years. Included was a particularly sobering estimate of an approximately $5.4 billion budget deficit by the end of June 2011, indicative of the dire economic times faced by not only the state, but also the entire nation. Embedded in the state budget are two particularly controversial bills—one that would extend health-care benefits to domestic partners of state employees, and the other being a statewide smoking ban in public establishments. This would include bars, restaurants and other workplaces where non-smokers would be exposed to cigarette smoke in an enclosed setting. A ban would not only be a health-conscious decision for Wisconsin, but also a sensible one. However, considering the current state of the economy, there is little room on the current state budget for such a proposal, where the only financial benefits will be provided in the more distant future.
A statewide smoking ban would restore fairness among Wisconsin restaurants and bars. Various cities, including Madison, Middleton and Monona, already ban smoking in restaurants and bars within city limits. However, owners of these establishments complain that it drives away business since smokers avoid these smoke-free restaurants and bars in lieu of others in cities where a smoke-free ordinance has not yet passed. A statewide ban would level the playing field for all, as well as leave cleaner air for non-smoking patrons across the state. And is it really fair that non-smokers be subjected to dangerous secondhand smoke? Is it really fair for us to be putting our health at risk every time we go out to eat, or to the bars for a drink, or to work? No, but a statewide smoking ban would bring respect to the rights of non-smokers who wish to not inhale harmful cigarette smoke.
Everyone knows the obvious health-related hazards of smoking and second-hand smoke, so by reducing the amount of secondhand smoke, which occurs so frequently in bars and restaurants, we can reduce the amount of people afflicted with diseases and illnesses associated with exposure to cigarette smoke. The state also benefits, as healthier citizens mean lower health-care costs down the road.
Of course, the economic advantage of a statewide smoking ban will not be immediate, and few effects will be seen even in the near future. Rather, any financial benefit will come much later, yet Wisconsin residents are struggling now amid current economic issues. So shouldn't Doyle be more concerned with the current financial state of Wisconsinites rather than what may help us in a few years? Instead, if the budget passes as is, taxpayers will be forced to back the enforcement and enactment of this new law, and no matter how just it may seem, this is simply an unreasonable burden for taxpayers during a recession.
The government has little right in telling us what we can or cannot do with our bodies, including smoking. However, don't non-smokers also have a right as to what goes into our bodies as well? Should we be subjected to second-hand smoke, a proven killer, when we go out to a local tavern or diner? Why must we avoid specific bars and restaurants to escape the hazardous smoke from cigarettes? And should non-smoking workers be exposed to dangerous secondhand smoke as well while they try to earn a living? After all, these establishments are intended for people to go to drink, eat and socialize, or to work at—they are not intended to be places to smoke.
According to the Mellman Group and Public Opinion Strategies, independent survey research firms, roughly 69 percent of Wisconsin residents would prefer a statewide smoking ban. Thus, a statewide smoking ban in public places makes sense, though it has little place on the current state budget. Doyle should be focusing on helping taxpayers by relieving current economic stress—with the smoking ban, he is only adding to it. In the long run, a statewide smoking ban is smart and responsible, but in the midst of a national recession, it is simply the wrong time.
Ryan Dashek is a junior majoring in biology. We welcome your feedback. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
