Steve Rodich – 6/25/07

This page was last updated on July 1, 2007.

No exemptions to smoking ban; Steve Rodich; Beaver County Times; June 25, 2007.

To begin, I need to disclose I’ve always been a non-smoker, find tobacco smoke objectionable, and don’t permit smoking in either my home or car.

This is at least the second letter from Mr. Rodich supporting a smoking ban on private property.

Given Mr. Rodich’s background and letter-writing history, I was tempted to write something like, “What do you expect from a liberal?” The problem is, too many people regardless of underlying beliefs check their principles at the door when it comes to tobacco smoke.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“I was pleased to read that the state House Health and Human Services Committee has approved the House version of anti-smoking legislation sponsored by Rep. Michael Gerber.

“Hopefully, a vote by the House will soon take place.

“I urge local lawmakers to oppose any effort to allow exemptions for clubs, taverns and casinos. Exemptions would provide those exempted with an unfair advantage and disadvantage those that are required to conform to anti-smoking legislation.

“In addition, one must ask, ‘Are employees and patrons of clubs, taverns and casinos not entitled to breathe clean air?’”

[RWC] Here’s a better question, Mr. Rodich. Do you believe we the people aren’t astute enough to make “proper” choices on an individual basis?

“The entire issue is the health and welfare of Pennsylvania citizens and employees of all public venues.”

[RWC] Mr. Rodich, bars, clubs, restaurants, et cetera are not “public venues.” They are private property just like your home. A public venue is a place owned by taxpayers, like a courthouse or an airport terminal.

“I’d like to remind lawmakers that not too long ago airlines allowed smoking in the rear section of aircraft. This was a farce because the same air was re-circulated.

“When the airlines finally banned smoking on all flights, there was some grumbling; however, people did not stop flying because they could no longer smoke.”

[RWC] Nothing like comparing apple and oranges, is there? Effectively, people had no choice when they flew. That’s not the case with bars, restaurants, et cetera.

“If all public places are subjected to the same restrictions then no establishment is affected adversely.”

[RWC] Again, Mr. Rodich isn’t really talking about “public places.” He’s talking about private property.

“Last, but not least, loss of revenue has been mentioned as a concern by various lawmakers. That is understandable. However, but it should not take precedence over public health and welfare.

“I will not support or vote for any lawmaker who fails to support and vote for the Gerber bill or the Greenleaf bill in the Senate, without exemptions.”

[RWC] I believe smoking bans on private property are every bit as bad for private property rights and freedom as was the 2005 Supreme Court ruling (Kelo v. New London) that taking private property (eminent domain) and giving it to another private citizen is OK when it results in increased tax receipts.

Why not let we the people decide the issue via freedom of choice in the marketplace? If eliminating smoking on private property is truly the will of the people, we’ll stop patronizing and seeking employment at businesses that don’t provide reasonable accommodations for non-smokers. Businesses, clubs, etc. that don’t adapt will go under.

Ban proponents apparently assume we the people aren’t astute enough to make “proper” choices. What’s the next choice we won’t be smart enough to make on our own?