|
December 12 -
Looking for state aid -
The
bar and restaurant business in St. Paul Minnesota is hoping to stave
off a total smoking ban by lobbying the state to pass a reasonable
smoking ban that applies to the entire state. While localities
have been fairly hostile to smoking bans the hospitality industry
realizes that the tobacco control industry has unlimited funds to
push through total smoking bans. Realists saw for $4-million
spend on buying a smoking ban in Chicago. Hardworking business
people cannot match the largess showered on politicians by
anti-smoking operatives. Good luck to the bars and
restaurants. Anti-tobacco will fight them every step of the
way.
December 12 -
Baby sitters -
Despite
voting overwhelmingly for a phased-in total smoking ban, the
Washington DC city council does not represent the wishes of the
residents. Anger and disgust over treating adults like
children is boiling over. This author makes some good points
but errs crucially in assuming that the validity of the science that
labels secondhand smoke a hazard is irrelevant. Compromise,
the author's solution, is impossible when one side is demanding
prohibition as a health measure. Compromise, as well as
property rights, is what is irrelevant when public health is at
stake. The scientific fraud practiced by anti-smoking zealots
is completely relevant and must be the focal point whenever smoking
bans are proposed.
December 12 -
No thanks -
When
Washington's governor Christine Gregoire went calling on the Indian
tribes asking them to voluntarily ban smoking in their casinos, bars
and restaurants the reception she received was polite. As time
goes by, however, it is obvious that the tribes, who after all are
businesses, are not going to erase their competitive advantage any
time soon. Unmentioned in any of these stories is the
absurdity of a governor who, by supporting the statewide smoking
ban, claimed smoking would be good for business now tacitly
admitting that the smoke-friendly tribes now have an advantage over
their competitors who are not allowed to attract smoking customers.
December 12 -
Ban smoke screen -
The
Washington DC city council voted overwhelmingly to tell a quarter of
their citizens, as well as Americans, to go to hell. The mayor
has vowed to fight the smoking ban legislation as currently written
but the odds are against his reasonable approach.
This story looks at the financial
repercussion, the betrayal of workers and the sad fact that special
interests can buy legislation. Compared to the $4-million
anti-tobacco spent to lobby Chicago's city council, the DC smoking
ban came cheap but the result is the same and the whiff of tyranny
becomes a stench.
December 9 -
Tiny chink in the armor -
The
bad news is that Chicago is poised to impose an onerous smoking ban.
The good news is that, for the first time, indoor air quality is
being discussed. While it may seem counterintuitive,
anti-tobacco has worked very hard to prevent comprehensive analyses
of indoor air quality. The tobacco control industry knows very
well that secondhand smoke does not present any health hazards but
it is visible and it has an odor. Pretending that tobacco
smoke is the only consideration in air quality simplifies
their job and provides protection for property management
corporations who could take a financial hit if indoor air were truly
regulated. One need only read
the reactions of anti-tobacco organizations to a proposal to allow
smoking if the indoor air is a clean as outdoor air.
Anti-tobacco knows that there are plenty of ventilation systems
that can keep indoor air far cleaner than the air outdoors and
circulate out the potentially annoying tobacco smoke. Ever
been inside a Las Vegas casino where thousands of people are
smoking in crystalline air? The same can be done anywhere.
Anti-tobacco, as well as the federal Occupational Safety and Health
Administration that refused to ban secondhand smoke, knows
this and is doing everything possible to keep this information from
the public.
December 7
-
DC Mayor opposes ban -
Within
this story that is filled with the usual anti-tobacco assurances
that telling smokers to "take it outdoors" is good for the
restaurant and bar business and the sadly ignored pleas of the
restaurant and bar owners not to ban smoking is the good news that
Anthony A. Williams, the popular mayor of Washington DC, strongly
opposes the total smoking ban demanded by anti-smoking zealots.
In this era of zero tolerance it is refreshing that a major figure
is endorsing some form of moderation.
Of course Washington DC, or any other
locality, doesn't need a smoking ban. No where are people
exposed to secondhand smoke unless they give their consent.
Washington is filled with nonsmoking restaurants and certainly no
law exists that forbids a bar from becoming "smoke free" if it
wishes. Check out
Ban the Ban,
for up to date information about the effort to eliminate choice and
freedom in the nation's capital.
December 5 -
Tribal issues post-ban -
Anti-tobacco told the voters in Washington state that a vote for the
smoking ban was a vote to protect every worker in the state.
This was a lie on two levels. The first, of course, is that
secondhand smoke poses no hazards to anyone. The second was
that every worker would be "protected" from secondhand smoke.Norman Kjono examines the huffiness of
the mainstream media that helped ensure that tribal enterprises were
granted a state monopoly on catering to smokers but now is concerned
that tribal gambling interests are too powerful. He examines
the hypocrisy of newspaper editors who gleefully advocate granting
favored industries an edge over their competitors then whine about
unfair advantages.
November
30 -
Codifying hypocrisy -
Earlier
this month the nonsmoking voters of Washington State ganged up on
the smoking citizens. The majority, the nonsmokers, told their
smoking neighbors, friends and relatives to go to hell. As
Jacob Sullum notes in his devastating article about voter initiative
901 nonsmokers in Washington were hardly wreathed in secondhand
smoke prior to the vote. Most establishments voluntarily
forbade their customers to smoke. Those that allowed
smokers sought to attract the kind of crowd smoke-friendly venues
attract.
While Sullum gives the anti-smoking
voters a partial pass by showing that the pro-ban special interests
outspent those who wanted property owners to retain their right to
set their own smoking policies by 100 to 1, he rightly notes that
health wasn't the issue at all. The initiative was a
sledgehammer smashed upon the skulls of law-abiding, tax-paying
citizens who refuse to quit smoking as the elite wishes them to do.
The vote for initiative 901 is a low point for a state that claims
to be enlightened. It demonstrates once again that property
rights mean nothing when weighted against the desires of Big Health.
November
28 -
Human nature trumps smoking ban -
When
the Royal Liverpool Hospital self-righteously eliminated its smoking
rooms and even tore down its outdoor smoking shelters, it thought it
was doing its part to make Liverpool "smoke-free." No such
luck. The residents of Liverpool, a gritty industrial city in
England, are made of sterner stuff who refuse to trek to the
boundaries of the hospital grounds to have a smoke, congregating
instead at entrances to the building. Where once those who are
annoyed by cigarette smoke could be content that smokers were
smoking in designated areas where nonsmokers couldn't be bothered,
now must run the gauntlet of smoking visitors and patients.
Chalk up another stupid anti-tobacco idea that has made life worse
for everyone.
November 23 -
Try, try again -
The
anti-tobacco fanatics are back in Maryland hoping that this time
they will prevail in their plan to ban smoking. While Maryland
has been hard on smokers, and the hospitality business, for many
years, many restaurants and most bars still offer their customers
the choice of whether to smoke or not. Since not one place
must remain for smokers to enjoy, the anti-tobacco goon squad is
pressuring the legislature to pass a 100 % smoking ban.
November 14
-
Outdoor bans; the dubious frontier -
With
all the wads of health-care cash flowing to anti-smoking
organizations the activists are faced with a problem we all would
enjoy; how is it possible to spend all that money! They may
not provide any health care or medical discoveries but the
anti-tobacco operatives are creating at devising ways to spend other people's
money.
In some locations where indoor
smoking bans have been enacted or where they cannot be enacted, the
activists have taken the public's money and lobbied for outdoor smoking
bans. Michael Siegel, who works in tobacco control, finds
outdoor smoking bans peculiar, unjustified and ridiculous.
Merely by saying so he has found himself on the receiving end of
anti-tobacco abuse. In this article he comments on the
absurdity of banning people to "protect the children."
November 9 -
The trouble with outdoor bans -
The
fanaticism of the smoking ban crowd must be getting out of control
when one of the tobacco control advocates opposes the latest spate of
outdoor smoking bans. While we strongly disagree with Michael
Siegel's support of indoor smoking bans, and have the
evidence to backup our contention that such bans are
unneeded and fraudulent, we wish him nothing but the best in
persuading his peers they are walking off a cliff.
November 7
-
Phony polls lead to phony results -
You
have to wonder about a poll that shows smokers want smoking banned
outdoors. The poll was taken at the behest of something called the New
York Tobacco Control Program and the state's Department of Public Health
which is explanation enough.
Regardless of the source, or anything
else in these mad times, the poll results will be widely believed.
Indeed we believe this much: probably half as many amongst the general
population, and a quarter as many smokers as the poll suggests, really
do want smoking on the sidewalk punishable by ... oh, maybe public
stoning, or brutal starvation followed by death in a gas chamber.
This is how and why victimization works
when and where it works. Lots of people like to vilify and humiliate and
abuse others, a fair number amongst our species are masochists, and many
are timid, while most others are content to sit back and applaud bloody
spectacles. Human nature is much older than the Coliseum.
The press bulletin linked with here
doesn't even mention the bogus "threat" of secondhand smoke. It merely
quotes the opinion of an anti-smoking activist that "some people" find
smokers "obnoxious." The pogrom has progressed so far that's really
quite enough now. Carrie Nation lookalike John Banzhaf (we've shown you
the uncanny photos before) is also quoted in the article: "It shouldn't
be at all surprising. I think the new frontiers in terms of non-smokers'
rights are outdoors and also protecting children in cars and their own
homes."
No we're not surprised. Street violence
against smokers is already a growing phenomenon and the battle-axe has
already come through more than a few doors. The anti-smoking sadists
cannot stop encroaching, goose-step by goose-step, nation by nation and
foot by foot, over every inch and every smoker they can see across a
street or across a state, or imagine behind any door.
We're more than dismayed, but far from
surprised, so we are prepared. If you're not one of those who can't stop
yourself from bending over, stand up very straight now, stay alert, and
be ready to face the devil himself. Yes he'll patrol every bar and
restaurant and workplace and hiring office and every street corner.
You'll also spot him in your rear view mirror, and you'll find him on
your own front porch, and he'll pop up in the back yard too. When you've
locked every door you'll see him by the flames of your living room
hearth. This culture wants Hell on Earth, and it's going to get it, from
our side too.
October 19
-
Tribal Issues - Anti-tobacco claims that enacting
prohibition is "revenue neutral" as far as Washington State's
coffers are concerned. As usual, anti-tobacco is lying.
October 19
-
Save The Horses - An incident of interspecies sexual high
jinks, an affair that startled even the sophisticated residents of
Washington State, prompts an inquiry into how animal lovers will be
affected should the initiative to ban smoking in "all" workplaces
pass.
October 10 -
I-901: Diverse Opposition
- The Washington State statewide smoking ban is projected to win by
a recent poll. Would that result come from the merits of that
initiative or the absence of coordinated opposition? Norman
Kjono provides commentary and emails concerning this interesting
subject.
October 7
-
California's shakedown
-
Although
federal regulations govern tobacco issues, the born again
anti-tobacco state attorney general found an opportunity to trump
the feds while simultaneously shaking down a tobacco company.
When R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. passed out
samples of their cigarettes to adults the attorney general decreed
that bit of advertising illegal. Many people wonder why it is
okay for him to take tobacco money in political donations but not
okay for adults to try a sample cigarette.October 3 -
Dear Michael Fancher -
To no one's surprise the Seattle Times came out in support of the
voter initiative "to ban smoking in public places." What was
surprising is that the editors hold their readers in such contempt
as to present blatant contradictions as somehow logical.
Allowing smoking in tribal establishments while banning it from
every other enterprise does not "create healthy workplaces
for everyone." The condescension displayed by the editors goes
even further as Norman Kjono reports.
September 30 -
Anti Utopia -
The
Times of London here gives us highlights from an article in Public
Health News. The cries of "Heil Health!" come forth as a single ugly
rasp from the two "politically correct" and "progressive"
publications. We're told that the near-criminalization of tobacco
use in the tiny and theocratically repressive nation of Bhutan "may
be the key to cracking public health’s top problem."
Teardrops ooze from the newsprint
with the lament that a smoker pogrom such as Bhutan's "could be
difficult to replicate elsewhere." The Times also bemoans that
"perhaps inevitably" a tobacco black market now flourishes in Bhutan
while some heretics "are openly flouting the ban on smoking in
public places."
At the same time the paper enthuses
that "in at least one survey" half of smokers have given up, while
failing to tell us just who made that survey, why anyone under a
tyrannical regime would admit criminality to a pollster, or how a
tobacco market hidden underground can possibly be measured.
Details, details, why should a
newspaper bother about those? At least the smokers are thought to be
paying through the nose now and are certainly being violently
harassed. Why quibble when the New Order is advancing toward the
Final Solution? Why interrupt one's applause for even a moment when
theocracy and healthocracy are becoming one before our very eyes?
If the Public Health News frets that
it "could be difficult" to exterminate smokers in places like the UK
or the US, that very phrase, and much else, tell us the Healthists
believe it is quite possible to do so. If it's true as the Times
admits that Bhutan's pogrom "isn’t without detractors," well, it
isn't without cheerleaders either. This blitz is going worldwide
while journals like the Public Health News and the Times of London
flag the bombers in.
Here are a few pertinent suggestions
for our readers. Buy your tobacco products carefully from discount
sources (or grow your own) and openly flout bans on smoking in
"public places" (i.e. virtually everywhere you can see or think of
now but expanding into the cosmic realm.) Get ready for bigger and
crueler fights in the next few years, know you're in a war against
an increasingly fanatical fascism, and be prepared to win. Just
incidentally, if you're a Brit with a subscription to the Times,
drop it.
September 23 -
Ushering in true prohibition -
A
handful of Asian countries signed an agreement to work with each
other to ban tobacco completely. While the document is not
worth the paper on which it was printed, one of the countries,
Singapore, may indeed, on its own, impose prohibition on its
citizens. While Singapore reaps reams of great press due to
its modernity and its spotless physical condition, it is a
dictatorship. The current regime does have the power to
enforce its will on a rather docile population. As to the
other countries, China and Bangladesh, beset by real problems, will
not expend any effort in targeting tobacco. Japan and South
Korea. while rich, are unlikely either to irritate their
heavy-smoking populations or curb the revenue they reap from selling
cigarettes.September 5 -
The Facts -
The
tobacco control industry has been very busy in the United Kingdom
with Scotland and Wales being first in line for prohibition.
To pull of the con a deluge of "evidence" has been presented to
policy makers. The Report of the Committee on Smoking in
Public Places is the document that will be used to justify the
elimination of freedoms in Wales. To no one's surprise it
echoes the agenda of anti-tobacco operatives who are very willing to
bend or even make up the "facts" to advance its agenda.
Michael McFadden has read the report and prepared a detailed
response. Sion Jones, who is on the ground in Wales, writes this
introduction:
In May 2005, the National Assembly for Wales produced its anti
smoking document entitled Report of the Committee on Smoking in
Public Places.
This document was supposed to be the result of an objective study
of the evidence regarding health risks connected with environmental
tobacco smoke and the economic impact of restrictions of smoking in
public places.
What the document actually turned out to be (surprise, surprise)
was not an objective study at all, but the usual collection of junk
facts designed to support an all out smoking ban. Yes, ladies and
gentlemen, the National Assembly for Wales wanted to show how fit it
is to govern us by jumping on the anti smoking bandwagon. As if
there aren't better things to do!
Well, well, Assembly's document cited many of the usual culprits
utilised by the extremist anti smoking lobby. For example, we saw
mentioned approvingly the California EPA study, the 1998 SCOTH
report, the 1999 WHO report and even the Helena Heart Study. In
addition, even the 2002 report by the Chief Medical Officer for the
UK - that well known conjuror Liam Donaldson - was thrown in and we
all know how miraculously that man produces figures from thin air.
Moreover, and as usual with such biased documents, when it came
to examining the economic impacts of smoking bans, the words of
tobacco control organisations were taken over and above the inputs
of any of the other contributors.
A perceptive friend described the National Assembly's report as a
document fit only to be consumed by lemmings and how right he was.
The campaign against the Assembly's intentions is heating up and
as part of that campaign Michael J. McFadden
produced a document entitled Critique of the Report of the Committee
on Smoking in Public Places, which has been sent to many Assembly
members and there are plans for further distribution. Michael's
critique is attached with this document. So for those Welsh people
that log on to FORCES site or for anyone with an interest in Wales
please take the trouble to read it. The fight definitely goes on!
Our thanks also to Weil Maessen, President, Forces Netherlands
for his contribution to the campaign.
September 2
-
Corpus Christi resists -
Attorney
James Skrobarcek has bothered to take a look at the facts, and tells
the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, "There is no valid scientific study
that shows that second-hand smoke is a cause of cancer." The
newspaper says "Skrobarcek is an advocate of smoking" but they've
got that wrong. He's an advocate of tolerance, decency, free choice,
and the increasingly rare faculty of clear thinking. He is resisting
a proposed restaurant smoking ban in his Texas city. He understands
the nature of his political opposition, describing them as
"prohibitionists," and their tactics as "scientific charlatanism."
The anti-smoking crusaders, funded by
MSA payments, taxes paid by smokers and the pharmaceutical
industry, have indeed descended on Corpus Christi as on so many
other unfortunate localities. They prey on fear and on plain
stupidity. The latter weakness is exemplified by Corpus Christi
restaurateur J.P. Jordan. He says a smoking ban would be hell on his
business. The solution? Quoth Mister Jordan: "If the city votes to
ban smoking in restaurants, they need to make it a level playing
field and ban it in bars, pool halls and bowling allies too." Well,
they say misery loves company, and if J.P. really wants to level the
entire hospitality industry, Anti will gladly co-pilot his B-52.
Flak gunner Skrobarcek, and Corpus Christi groups such as Citizens
for Choice and Common Sense, have the well-aimed quality of sanity
on their side.
August 15
-
And you will love it -
A
housing authority in England forbade smoking from all its outdoor
premises. Smoking was already banned from indoor public places
and workplaces. Residents are still allowed, for now, to smoke
in their homes.
"I don't think smokers will resent this," says an
operative from an anti-tobacco pressure group.
The operative's delusion about smokers loving the
outdoor ban is matched by the inanity of the housing authority that
frankly admits the outdoor ban is not legally enforceable.
July 25 -
Divide and conquer -
While
Illinois doesn't strictly have a statewide smoking law that preempts
localities from banning smoking, there are only 21, including
Chicago, that are allowed to enact smoking bans stronger than the
state law. The state law permits smoking in restaurants and
bars.
One of anti-tobacco stated goals is
to end such statewide preemption. In reality its goal is to
make impose a statewide smoking ban that does preempt localities.
Preemption laws are the rule in New York, Delaware, California and
most of New England. Smoking has been banned in those state
and localities that wish to allow smoking are forbidden to do so.
The legislator recently passed a law
that ended the fairly smoker-friendly preemption by turning over
control of smoking bans to the localities. Should this law be
signed into law by the governor there will be an immediate rash of
smoking bans that will, in one or two years, lead to a statewide
smoking ban that removes all choice.
The governor had indicated he would
sign the new law but liquor and hospitality interests have protested
vehemently and he now says he is undecided. There are not
enough votes in the legislature to override his potential veto.
The American Lung Association, a purported health charity, is
expressing dismay in the governor's about face. Let's see.
On the one hand are businesses who rightly fear they will suffer if
smoking bans become the rule. On the other hand is a pressure
group that pays no taxes and is also financially supported by drug
company interests who have a financial interest in imposing smoking
bans. A governor who represents the people has no choice but
to veto the anti-preemption bill.
July 18 -
Da Coach Weighs In -
Although
the residents of Chicago have shown no inclination that they believe
their city needs a smoking ban, anti-smoking activists are poised to
transform that muscular city into a quavering risk adverse Sunday
School camp. Fortunately one of the city's favorite sons is
strenuously taking the call for freedom to the halls of power.
Former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka on
Tuesday became the public face of the opposition to a sweeping new
measure that would ban smoking inside almost all public places in
Chicago, from bars and restaurants to train platforms. As is
the fashion these days, the proposed law would ban smoking 25 feet
from any area where smoking is banned.
June 27 - How it works -
"The smoking ban lobby is, indeed, well-funded and
well-organized, and there is nothing wrong with that. It has done
its job and has made a big impression on some folks around here -
people who have not said a peep about banning smoking until the
foundation money flowed into this effort and the hired lobbyists
started lobbying.
The group is also cleverly
recruiting allies by touting worker safety as its goal. But let's be
honest. For a great many ban supporters, the true motivator is
simply their preference not to be around people who are smoking". -
From the website of Washington DC city council member
Carol Schwartz.
Rarely has a politician put it so
succinctly. Without the hundreds of millions of dollars at the
disposal of so-called grassroots anti-smoking groups, provided by
the pharmaceutical industry or extorted from smokers, the
anti-tobacco industry would be a handful of hateful but harmless
cranks. Councilmember Schwartz is fighting an uphill battle
but statements such as hers make it clear that big money, not
health, is the issue.
June 27 -
Property rights and liberty -
Last
week the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of municipalities that,
under eminent domain laws, take property away from one owner and
give to another. This practice, increasingly popular in these
days of chronic public budget shortfalls, is not the eminent domain
envisioned by the founders of this country. Back then eminent
domain was judged necessary to ensure that certain public benefits
took precedence over the conveniences of individual property owners.
Roads, airports, railway track, schools and hospitals were judged
necessary for a civil society so government has the right to
appropriate private property, at a fair market price, for the common
good.
The Supreme Court, however, has
expanded eminent domain to include the taking of property to benefit
private interests who want to make a buck. Government's
interest involves the presumed increase in taxes that occurs when
single family homes are exchanged for strip malls, luxury
condominiums or office buildings. Outrage over the Supreme
Court's ruling in favor of a Connecticut city looking to expand its
tax base at the expense of working class home owners has produced
outrage from all segments of society.
One could say that a society that
countenances smoking bans on private property gets what it deserves.
A better response, however, is to take the outrage generated by the
Supreme Court and focus it on legislation, such as the proposed
smoking ban in Washington, DC. The testimony at the above link
can be modified for any smoking ban hearing anywhere in the country.
It is excellent.
June 27 -
Bring on the Inquisition -
Screeching
that she is outraged, Michela Alioto-Pier is demanding that the
cash-strapped San Francisco Park & Rec Department cough up tens of
thousands of dollars to erect countless No Smoking signs to string
throughout the city's parks. Alioto-Pier is the rich Marina
District matron who wrote the law to ban smoking from every square
inch of San Francisco's parks. Labeling smokers "disgusting",
the hyphenated supervisor, as well as a majority of her colleagues
on the Board of Supervisors, decided that human feces on the
sidewalks, homeless camping out in store fronts, pot-holed streets,
evaporating middle-class, rising crime, unaffordable housing and a
ludicrous school system take second place to persecuting smokers.
Although the law banning smokers
takes effect this Friday, there are no signs warning residents that
they can't smoke on the land that they pay for and maintain.
Alioto-Pier's vision of an ocean of no smoking signs polluting the
parks will have to wait until Park & Rec rewards a contract to
somebody's relative to produce and install the signage.
Yesterday was the city's annual "Gay
Pride" parade, an event where progressive carpetbaggers such as
Alioto-Pier sing praises about the city's supposed tolerance.
With laws such as hers the order of the day it is no secret that San
Francisco is actually one of the most intolerant and bigoted places
on the planet.
June
24 -
Un-American
-
It
often takes a foreigner to point out the contradiction between
"America the great" rhetoric and the anti-freedom that is tobacco
prohibition. Christopher Hitchens, a classic left-winger is
dismayed and disgusted as this country, of which he is applying for
citizenship, cavalierly spits on liberty, enforces conformity and
appropriates businesses in the name of public health
June 23 -
Making a point -
Councilwoman
Carol Schwartz, R-At Large, introduced her bill in response to a
proposed ban on smoking in those same establishments. Her proposal
imitates the arguments for a smoking ban, citing health concerns,
worker safety and the nuisance of drinkers.
"I never thought I could ban drinking
just because I didn't like it, but now I know I can," Schwartz said.
"The impending smoking ban has empowered me."
This says it all. A
huge percentage of the politicians who vote for smoking bans do so
because they don't like smoking (actually it is smokers they don't
like, but that they never would admit). The bogus health risks
to nonsmokers is window dressing, especially now as nearly everyone
is aware that the evidence of harm is based on nothing by trash
studies.
We hope that Washington DC councilmember
Carol Schwartz's stunt made it clear that banning smoking from
private property such as restaurants and bars enshrines personal pet
peeves, ruins business and does nothing to protect anyone's health.
June 21 -
Thank You BBC! - Norman Kjono's pleasant Father's Day with
family and friends was made perfect when he received an invitation
to appear on a broadcast about a possible smoking ban in the United
Kingdom. The invite couldn't have come at a better time.
For the past few weeks anti-tobacco's shibboleths have been
crumbling before an onslaught of evidence.
In particular Kjono
focuses on the recent study from the National Cancer Institute which
indicates secondhand smoke is not a major factor in nonsmoker's lung
cancer. We've been saying this for years and most graciously
welcome the National Cancer Institute into our corner.
June 15 -
Virginia suburbs prepare to celebrate -
Indicating
that the grease has been applied to the right place, Anthony
Williams, the mayor of Washington, DC, announced that his adamant
opposition to a smoking ban has ended. Turning his back on the
all-important hypocrisy the mayor is willing to gamble the financial
future of his city on the lies of pharmaceutical front groups who
hope to make a killing on smoking cessation devices.
The people who will make a killing are
the restaurants and bars located right across the border in smoker
friendly Virginia. One doesn't need a study to know that when
a significant part of the population isn't treated with respect it
will take its business elsewhere. In the small city of
Washington, DC, respect is just a short drive away. Wherever
smoking bans erupt, smokers take a hike. It happened in
Montgomery County in Maryland. It is happening in Delaware.
Bans there have also benefited the Virginia hospitality industry.
This fight isn't over by a long way.
Many on the city council are opposed to interfering in the
marketplace, which has plenty of room, and demand, for both smoking
and non-smoking venues. To find out how to help kill the
smoking ban, contact
Ban the Ban.
June 13 -
Back to the drawing board
-
In
a demonstration that the smoking ban proposal is proving to be far
more unpopular than anti-tobacco advertised, the city council is
starting all over. Despite intense negotiations the required
nine votes could not be obtained. Hearings will begin allover
in the fall. June
2
-
When politics is personal
-
Washington,
DC Councilwoman Carol Schwartz has historically been the principal
opponent of DC smoking bans, and Councilman David Catania long sided
with her. Three weeks ago at a Council session, Mr. Catania
attempted to add a series of "no-bid grants" to the Health
Department budget, and Ms. Schwartz questioned this.
We wonder about it ourselves, given that
Catania reacted with anger and defensiveness to Schwartz's
questions, then swiftly changed the subject to smoking bans.
Suddenly, he was all for a ban, and boldly proclaimed that he was
going to "move it out." Fellow councilors attest both to the
dramatic nature of his turnaround and to his potential political
ability to move the ban. Was
this simply a nasty fit of pique on Catania's part as the Washington
Post suggests? Perhaps, or perhaps support for no-bid grants related
to public health, a sudden love of smoking bans, and Mr. Catania's
odd explanation that "I felt I didn't need to be restrained
anymore," might suggest a growing closeness between David Catania
and what the Post calls "incessant" anti-smoker lobbyists. The
lobbyists' capacity for incessance is of course just one power
rooted in their deep pockets.
Catania still pleads lamely that he doesn't want to hurt the
hospitality industry, but we are left to wonder what industries he
means to help, or which might be helping him. Voters, including
smokers and bar owners who may previously have supported Catania,
can also make dramatic turnarounds. If they played a part in putting
Catania in his Council seat, they can tell him to take that crucial
part, and "move it out."
May 31
-
Last Call
-
A
one-time popular restaurant and bar in Columbus Ohio has shut its
doors, another victim of smoking bans. After the city
installed prohibition and the citizenry voted its approval, Julian
Sanfillipo sadly terminated the business that had been his life
since 1979. The wake for the restaurant attracted the
customers who had been driven away because they couldn't smoke.
One wonders how many of those who tearfully attended the farewell voted to uphold the smoking ban or
didn't bother to vote at all.
May 30
-
Screwing
their constituents -
Michael
Logan, the owner of Trumps Sports Bar and Grill in Lexington that is
expanding to Georgetown, said Lexington's ban has "devastated my
business." He asked the council to amend the ordinance to allow a
smoking section if 20 percent or more of a restaurant's sales are
from alcohol. Council members didn't respond.
The Lexington Kentucky smoking ban
has been such bad news for local restaurants and bars that one fed
up businessman is expanding to nearby Georgetown. Too bad for
him, and the Georgetown taxpayers, that the city council in that
city is "considering" an even more draconian smoking ban. In
these shaky economic times the politicians would rather cater to
anti-tobacco, an enterprise that pays no taxes and produces no goods
or services, than the business people who pay the city's bills.
May 25 -
Cancer Society Buying Smoking Ban
-
Rejected
by the state legislature and by the people last year, anti-tobacco
is again attempting to foist a statewide smoking ban upon the
citizens of Washington State. This time around the bulging
bank accounts of supposed health charities are financing the smoking
ban initiative that will ban smoking statewide, except in the
politically wired tribal establishments. This week the
American Cancer Society coughed up $275,000 to gather the signatures
to get the initiative on the November ballot.
The ACS, wasting money that should be
used to care for cancer victims or for research into cancer cures,
is instead buying a law that will bankrupt small businesses
throughout Washington, divide communities and poison relations among
citizens. It is outrageous that out-of-state money is being
injected into the state's political process
This development gives added weight
to the
boycott of non-profit outfits that spend their donors'
contributions on actions that discriminate against Americans.
Do not donate to these agitators. Keep their dirty money out
of politics.
May 23 -
What's this Republican been smoking? -
The
Washington Times takes a District of Columbia councilwoman to task
for abandoning the Republican Party's oft stated goal of removing
the heavy hand of government regulation. Instead of supporting
the city's hospitality industry, the councilwoman is offering a
"compromise" to a total smoking ban. Through a combination of
discriminatory tax penalties and onerous ventilation requirements
she is increasing the burden on the small businesses that are the
District's, minus of big government itself, only industry.
The secondhand smoke ventilation
standards as determined by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, the federal agency charged with workplace health,
are easily attainable without expensive ventilation systems.
Washington DC, as everywhere else, has plenty of restaurants and
bars that have voluntarily banned smoking with no prod from the city
government.
May 19
-
Stick to the Constitution -
Anti-tobacco
is active in Wisconsin, moving from city to city lobbying for bans
the people don't want or need. These days the operatives
hardly bother to premise the supposed need of smoking bans on
health, which is leading some to examine more closely the naked
property grab that is inherent when government bans a legal activity
from a private business. May
19 -
British smoking ban moves forward -
The
Labour Party's win in the recent elections means that plans for a
nationwide smoking ban will become a high priority item. The
plan is to phase it in over a few years so that the citizens can be
conditioned to prohibition in stages.
Incredibly the
government claims that it is striking a balance between the rights
of smokers and the need to protect the public from passive smoke.
Considering there is no need to protect anyone from secondhand
smoke, the government's pious assurances are as phony as a three
pound bill. May 19 -
Ban is back -
After
sending a fairly stringent smoking ban back to the drawing board,
the Marion County (Indianapolis) City-County council announced a
somewhat watered down version. Anti-tobacco says the proposed
ban is too week. Businesses are confused and apprehensive.
Smokers are relieved, perhaps prematurely.
May 19 -
DC ban a costly distraction -
It's
no secret that Washington DC is one of the worst run, troubled
cities in the country. The population is declining rapidly
while those citizens who remain are ill served by all aspects of
their city government. So what are the politicians wasting
their time with? Imposing a smoking ban.
One level-headed councilmember has
been valiantly holding off the ban so the anti-tobacco politicians
are going to enact a tricky maneuver to neutralize her opposition.
In turn she is suggesting a system of tax reductions and penalties
to help businesses "voluntarily" ban smoking. It's a mess and
a shame that such nonsense is consuming a city on the brink of
disaster.
May 19
-
Beginning of the end? -
The
Illinois legislature passed a bill that would give localities the
power to enact smoking prohibition. Currently policies
affecting smoking in private property is the purview of the state
legislature. Anti-tobacco has been lobbying for years to end
that protection of private property rights. Illinois, if it
follows the California pattern, will endure several years of frantic
activity by "progressive" localities to be the first to ban smoking.
May 18 -
Ban Post Mortem - Indianapolis
rejected a smoking ban and sent the measure back to the Children's
Health and Environment Committee for "more study." Columnist
Ruth Holladay lists the flaws of the proposed legislation and
pronounces its death as well deserved.
Although its encouraging that more
people, including a rare mainstream columnist or two, are turned off
by smoking bans and the tactics used to pass them, we wish that they
were less circumspect in their disapproval. Smoking is
a "responsible habit" and there is absolutely no need for the
government to involve itself in what is lawful behavior on private
property. Restaurants, bars and even health clubs can make
their own smoking policies based upon customer demand.
Government intervention is unneeded, unwanted and un-American.
May 18 -
Belgians opposed to smoking ban -
A
large survey reveals that both smokers and nonsmokers see no need
for the government to forbid smoking in restaurants and bars.
Business owners overwhelmingly opposed smoking ban legislation
because they would have to lay off workers to stay in business.
The survey also reveals that smokers, on average, spend more money
eating out than do nonsmokers. Undeterred by the facts, the
health minister still plans to put forward a proposal to ban smoking
despite citizen and business opposition. He should look at the
havoc caused by smoking bans in other European countries.
May 17 -
Ban Canned - A draconian smoking ban for Ohio County in West
Virginia was struck down. Ruling that the makeup of the
county's health board was unconstitutional, Judge Ronald Wilson also
found ambiguities in the smoking ban legislation. This
decision is a victory for the small businesses that will be ruined
should this smoking ban be enacted.
May 16 -
Profits down because of smoking ban -
After
politicians assured businesses in New Zealand that profits would
soar if smoking was banned, the businesses used as petrie dishes for
anti-tobacco's social engineering experiment are watching their
profits decline. Such is always the case when a large segment
of the customer base is told to take a hike. The politicians
are at fault for catering to the special interests at the expense of
the businesses that pay government's bills. When will they
ever learn?
May 9
-
Smoking ordinance passes
Austin smokers will soon have to
butt out in restaurants and bars.
A smoking ordinance
passed with 52 percent of the vote.
The referendum bans
smoking in all bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and billiard hall
on Sept 1.
Keep Austin Free
organized people to vote against the smoking ban, while the group
Onward Austin mounted the
effort to pass the ordinance.
Once again the usual
suspects backed the smoking ban.
May 3 -
Pols admit smoking bans are costly
In
a sop to the tobacco control industry Shreveport Louisiana now has a
smoking ban that pretty much leaves smokers alone. The ban
applies, with some troubling exceptions, to actual public property
like city buildings. Keeping an eye on the bottom line, one
city establishment where smoking will continue to be encouraged is
the stadium. If smoking were banned there the politicians fear
that the upcoming Cajun festival would be a bust. Once again
the hypocrisy of politicians believing they can have their cake
right while they are eating it rears its ugly head.
BACK TO FORCES MAIN
PAGE
|
