Up in Smoke

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 came into being before I was born. And even though I was born a little later on in the 1960s, I obviously don’t recall the struggle of those who fought for equal rights during that crucial time in this country’s history.

Part of Civil Rights Act dealt with the federal government’s right to regulate interstate commerce in order to guarantee every individual’s equal rights under the fourteenth amendment. This gave the government license to enforce anti-discrimination laws in places of “public accommodation.” This applied to not only government facilities, but also to privately owned businesses.

I can only imagine what some Southern business owners thought of that. I’m guessing they feared it might mean the death of their businesses. Perhaps some would claim not to be bigots themselves, but would argue that if they were to allow non-whites to patronize their businesses then the “regulars” (e.g., the white people) would stop coming. I don’t doubt that many resented the government interference. I would guess that many claimed that these were their businesses and that they could operate them any way they desired.

So what happened to these business owners’ rights? Not that business owners don’t have rights. But in this case they were trumped by a need to serve the greater good – equal rights for all. It was simply the right thing to do.

This game of trumps actually happens all the time. Take food establishments. Government regulations prohibit them from serving rare hamburgers due to food safety issues. It seems if we lived in a totally libertarian society, a restaurant owner would be allowed to serve his food off the floor if he liked – as it’s his business. But again, the government regulates how food is prepared in food establishments not to deny the owners of their rights to run their businesses how they please, but to preserve the best interest (and safety) of the public.

I could argue that the government interferes too much in my life as well. For instance, I own a home. I should be allowed to put two or three junk cars up on cement blocks in my back yard, right? After all, it’s my property. But damn – the dad-blasted interfering government (in this case local government enforcing local zoning laws) tells me I can’t. Apparently the greater good here is the interests of my neighbors. If I junk up my yard it brings their property values down. Plus, they shouldn’t have to look at my eyesore of a back yard. So I do have rights, within limits. But if exercising my rights adversely impacts the greater good, then my rights are trumped. As they should be.

These points that I make bring me to my real reason for this post. This week the neighboring county, Kenton County, became the first area in Northern Kentucky to put into effect clean-air laws (or as those against them would call them, smoking bans). So with a few exceptions, all of the restaurants and businesses in Kenton County are now smoke-free. I say good for Kenton County for having the courage to make the hard choice in what became (but shouldn’t have become) such a controversial issue.

Initially the other two Northern Kentucky counties were also on board with the clean-air laws. Campbell County actually passed a comprehensive law in late December that would have gone into effect last week. Unfortunately it was overturned by a newly elected fiscal court earlier this year. And the county in which I live, Boone County, dropped out of the discussions the middle of last year. Apparently there was not enough support from the fiscal court to go forward with any clean-air laws here in Boone County.

To me it would be a no-brainer to institute clean-air laws, especially with what we know now about the effects of smoking and second-hand smoke. Also, even in Kentucky – the state with the highest rate of adult smokers – there are still approximately 75 percent of us who don’t smoke. So wouldn’t it be in the best interest of the majority to go ahead with these clean-air laws? Even Lexington and Louisville have them. But the politicians say no. And the reason: business owners’ rights. (Unless you ask the vocal public minority. They may say the issue is smokers’ rights.)

While many (of both politicians and business owners) may say that they themselves don’t smoke, they are concerned that to institute a “smoking ban” would keep the “regulars” (in this case, smokers) away, thus hurting business.

Perhaps there are those that feel it’s inappropriate for me to draw parallels between this law and the dictates of the Civil Rights Act. But I do spot some similarities. Just with Civil Rights, business owners do have rights. But there is a greater good here. We’re talking about a public health issue. It’s not about stepping on business owners’ rights. And it’s not a measure to force the 25 percent of people who are smokers to give up their cigarettes. Rather, it’s a measure to allow the rest of us (again, that’s the other 75 percent of us) to be able to breathe clean air instead of toxic pollutants. Where do the rights of nonsmokers come into this discussion?

The other side argues that nonsmokers don’t have to frequent places that allow smoking and that they have the choice to go to non-smoking establishments. The problem is that I have to physically travel to a place to find out if it allows smoking or not. What about children who accompany their parents into such places? Do they get to choose whether or not they want to be there?

To business owners who fear their businesses might perish due to such clean-air laws, I would say hey, you’re probably missing out on reaching a pretty significant clientele due to your smoking policies. That would be many of us within the 75 percent of nonsmokers. As for me, my husband and I will probably do a lot more eating out in Kenton County. I don’t doubt there are others like us who will do the same.

And to the business owners who worry that their base of Ohio customers will leave them (as Ohio is a nonsmoking state and the smokers come across the river to smoke) I would say hey, Ohio hasn’t been smoke-free that long – only since 2006. Where did your customers come from before 2006? Just start thinking of all the new non-smoking customers that you’re going to get when you go smoke-free.

As for me, I have to believe that I’m part of the silent majority on this one. Are my views snobby, or pious? Some might think that.  I would respond that even the silent majority should be heard every once in a while. I don’t disrespect those who choose to smoke. But why should the choice for me be one of patronizing a public facility or jeopardizing my health?  Honestly, even if I was a smoker I think I would feel this way. I may have the right to ruin my own body by consuming the all-fried sampler platter at the local hangout. But I would never have the right to put somebody else’s health at risk.

I’m calling trump on this one. The greater good (public health) should trump business owners’ rights. The politicians should recognize that and act to protect the majority. However, at least here, the argument appears to have ended up in smoke. Except for in Kenton County. At least for now.

Some day, though, I’m confident that the big, bad “gub-mint” will intervene (or interfere, as those who are against big government might think) throughout the rest of Northern Kentucky. Not today, maybe. But when it does happen, rest assured, the actions will be justified.

Why? Because of the greater good.  And it will simply be the right thing to do.