Email this page
Print this page
del.icio.us
digg
Comments
Smoking is no longer allowed in most public places in Maine. We’re taxing cigarettes $2 a pack. In Bangor, we banned smoking in the car with kids. Maybe we should just say no to smoking in Maine, period.
Q: If smoking is so bad, why not just ban it altogether in Maine?
Sean Faircloth
Last year Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee signed a law allowing police to issue tickets to drivers who smoke with a child under six in their car. Governor Huckabee is a Republican, and Republican Arkansas legislators overwhelmingly supported this law. Louisiana, a state (like Arkansas) with high smoking rates, passed a similar law.
Recently, Bangor’s city council also passed a similar law. The new ordinance allows police to, potentially, issue tickets for smoking in a car if a passenger is under 18.
I believe in libertarian principles, but when someone’s behavior hurts others (e.g., smoking with a minor in the confined space of a car), that is a restriction of freedom (the freedom not to be force-fed carcinogens). The argument that a smoker’s freedom is restricted is based on the belief that a child is not fully human. A child trapped in a smoky car is the one whose freedom has been invaded.
Still, Bangor’s ordinance got Rush Limbaugh upset. Limbaugh argues Bangor’s ordinance is too tough. First a warning!? Ouch! If you’re caught twice smoking with kids in the car, maybe (drum roll) . . . a small fine!! It’s the Spanish Inquisition! Ironically, Limbaugh once argued that criminal penalties for drug crimes should be much tougher—before Limbaugh was caught falsely obtaining “medications.” Limbaugh is now a big leniency advocate.
Limbaugh disagrees with the Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce—which supported the ordinance. Police Chief Don Winslow foresaw no problems with enforcement. Two city councilors who are cigarette smokers supported the measure, as did Republican councilor Richard Stone.
Councilor Geoff Gratwick, a physician, led passage of the ordinance along with pediatric dentist Jonathan Shenkin. Gratwick views the ordinance primarily as educational. Officers issue mostly warnings, not tickets. Police officers, school nurses, and health educators often teach Bangor children about laws affecting them, so when Dad asks how school went, Joey might reply, “Dad, smoking in cars is unhealthy for you—and me. How about stopping?”
The U.S. surgeon general has concluded that, despite antismoking efforts, one age group has experienced the least reduction in exposure to secondhand smoke: kids age 4–11. Where do children get a large portion of smoke exposure? Yep, confined spaces called . . . cars. Harvard studies have shown that cars are particularly more harmful to children than other secondhand smoke sources, such as a restaurant or home setting.
It seems Republicans such as Governor Huckabee and Councilor Stone find the surgeon general more persuasive than Mr. Limbaugh.
Children have their “freedom” diminished by laws against consumption of alcohol by minors, but these laws are no “ban.” Children can wait until adulthood to decide whether or not to ingest booze. Similarly, ingesting cigarette smoke in a confined space is a choice best left until adulthood.
A smoker’s freedom is not diminished one iota if they are fully allowed to smoke—in reasonable locations. A car with a child aboard is not a reasonable location.
Should smoking be banned in Maine? No. Smokers should be free to smoke as they choose wherever they choose—up to the point their chosen carcinogen significantly diminishes the freedom of other people. Children are people.
Rep. Sean Faircloth is Majority Whip of the Maine House. Faircloth has successfully sponsored numerous pieces of legislation affecting children in Maine.
Tobacco is making Mainers sick and killing them. Maine’s Human Services commissioner says over 43,000 Mainers have serious illnesses due to tobacco. Each year tobacco kills almost 2,000 Mainers. Last year, to deter smoking and offset health costs, said state politicians, they raised the tax per pack of cigarettes to $2. This year Governor Baldacci wants $3 per pack—the nation’s highest.
Before smokers smoke themselves to death, the governor/legislature want to tax them to death? Why don’t these altruistic politicians outlaw the sale/use of tobacco? Be done with it!
Because it’s addicts taxing addicts! Each $1 tax per cigarette pack is an estimated $65 million for politicians to dole out on vote-getting pet projects. You think it’s tough quitting smoking? Try getting Maine politicians to quit taxing. Since it’s fashionable to pig-pile on smokers nowadays, politicians have been able to exact harsh taxes on smokers without paying a political price.
In January ’07 the Bangor City Council agreed: If you’re in Bangor smoking in your truck with a 17-year-old on board, cops can stop and fine you $600!
You may think punitive taxes on smokers are okay. But here’s the rub. Maine’s political tax addicts are close to killing the goose laying the golden eggs. High taxes are forcing Mainers to quit smoking, to not start smoking, to buy tobacco products outside Maine. The more that happens, the less tax addicts can count on tobacco addicts supporting tax addicts. Tax addicts will look elsewhere for money. I’m guessing Big Fat is where political tax addicts go next to quell their insatiable habit.
It’s already started. Think of the ban on trans-fatty acids, the assaults on fast-food restaurants. Think how simple it is to apply the successful campaign against smokers to fat people: Fat is unhealthy, unattractive, and adds to Maine’s healthcare costs. Taxing junk food would deter people from buying it, and cause fat people to quit eating it. Imagine! A $3 tax on moon pies, fried dough, cheeseburgers, hot dogs, ice cream.
Do you think tax addicts can resist all the millions and millions of dollars available to them just by being nice guys and taxing fat people for their own good? Think again. Consider this 2/7/07 news story:
“Vermont lawmakers are considering a measure to ban eating, drinking, smoking, reading, writing, personal grooming, playing an instrument, interacting with pets or cargo, talking on a cell phone, or using any other personal communication device while driving. The punishment: a fine of up to $600. Similar bills are under consideration in Maryland, Texas.”
That will never happen here, you say? Why not? Rewarding bad behavior gets more bad behavior. Reward politicians’ tax addiction with power/money for devising/implementing schemes, i.e., “It’s a public good to fine you $600 for talking to your dog while driving,” and you get a steady stream of such nannyism.
Outlaw tobacco in Maine? No. We have a more pressing health challenge with our tax addicts.
Scott K Fish is a political analyst, writer, and owner/editor of www.asmainegoes.com, a conservative political forum that has been keeping Mainers talking since 1998.
Q: If smoking is so bad, why not just ban it altogether in Maine?
Sean Faircloth
Last year Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee signed a law allowing police to issue tickets to drivers who smoke with a child under six in their car. Governor Huckabee is a Republican, and Republican Arkansas legislators overwhelmingly supported this law. Louisiana, a state (like Arkansas) with high smoking rates, passed a similar law.Recently, Bangor’s city council also passed a similar law. The new ordinance allows police to, potentially, issue tickets for smoking in a car if a passenger is under 18.
I believe in libertarian principles, but when someone’s behavior hurts others (e
Advertisement
Still, Bangor’s ordinance got Rush Limbaugh upset. Limbaugh argues Bangor’s ordinance is too tough. First a warning!? Ouch! If you’re caught twice smoking with kids in the car, maybe (drum roll) . . . a small fine!! It’s the Spanish Inquisition! Ironically, Limbaugh once argued that criminal penalties for drug crimes should be much tougher—before Limbaugh was caught falsely obtaining “medications.” Limbaugh is now a big leniency advocate.
Limbaugh disagrees with the Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce—which supported the ordinance. Police Chief Don Winslow foresaw no problems with enforcement. Two city councilors who are cigarette smokers supported the measure, as did Republican councilor Richard Stone.
Councilor Geoff Gratwick, a physician, led passage of the ordinance along with pediatric dentist Jonathan Shenkin. Gratwick views the ordinance primarily as educational. Officers issue mostly warnings, not tickets. Police officers, school nurses, and health educators often teach Bangor children about laws affecting them, so when Dad asks how school went, Joey might reply, “Dad, smoking in cars is unhealthy for you—and me. How about stopping?”
The U.S. surgeon general has concluded that, despite antismoking efforts, one age group has experienced the least reduction in exposure to secondhand smoke: kids age 4–11. Where do children get a large portion of smoke exposure? Yep, confined spaces called . . . cars. Harvard studies have shown that cars are particularly more harmful to children than other secondhand smoke sources, such as a restaurant or home setting.
It seems Republicans such as Governor Huckabee and Councilor Stone find the surgeon general more persuasive than Mr. Limbaugh.
Children have their “freedom” diminished by laws against consumption of alcohol by minors, but these laws are no “ban.” Children can wait until adulthood to decide whether or not to ingest booze. Similarly, ingesting cigarette smoke in a confined space is a choice best left until adulthood.
A smoker’s freedom is not diminished one iota if they are fully allowed to smoke—in reasonable locations. A car with a child aboard is not a reasonable location.
Should smoking be banned in Maine? No. Smokers should be free to smoke as they choose wherever they choose—up to the point their chosen carcinogen significantly diminishes the freedom of other people. Children are people.
Rep. Sean Faircloth is Majority Whip of the Maine House. Faircloth has successfully sponsored numerous pieces of legislation affecting children in Maine.
Scott K Fish
Tobacco is making Mainers sick and killing them. Maine’s Human Services commissioner says over 43,000 Mainers have serious illnesses due to tobacco. Each year tobacco kills almost 2,000 Mainers. Last year, to deter smoking and offset health costs, said state politicians, they raised the tax per pack of cigarettes to $2. This year Governor Baldacci wants $3 per pack—the nation’s highest.Before smokers smoke themselves to death, the governor/legislature want to tax them to death? Why don’t these altruistic politicians outlaw the sale/use of tobacco? Be done with it!
Because it’s addicts taxing addicts! Each $1 tax per cigarette pack is an estimated $65 million for politicians to dole out on vote-getting pet projects. You think it’s tough quitting smoking? Try getting Maine politicians to quit taxing. Since it’s fashionable to pig-pile on smokers nowadays, politicians have been able to exact harsh taxes on smokers without paying a political price.
In January ’07 the Bangor City Council agreed: If you’re in Bangor smoking in your truck with a 17-year-old on board, cops can stop and fine you $600!
You may think punitive taxes on smokers are okay. But here’s the rub. Maine’s political tax addicts are close to killing the goose laying the golden eggs. High taxes are forcing Mainers to quit smoking, to not start smoking, to buy tobacco products outside Maine. The more that happens, the less tax addicts can count on tobacco addicts supporting tax addicts. Tax addicts will look elsewhere for money. I’m guessing Big Fat is where political tax addicts go next to quell their insatiable habit.
It’s already started. Think of the ban on trans-fatty acids, the assaults on fast-food restaurants. Think how simple it is to apply the successful campaign against smokers to fat people: Fat is unhealthy, unattractive, and adds to Maine’s healthcare costs. Taxing junk food would deter people from buying it, and cause fat people to quit eating it. Imagine! A $3 tax on moon pies, fried dough, cheeseburgers, hot dogs, ice cream.
Do you think tax addicts can resist all the millions and millions of dollars available to them just by being nice guys and taxing fat people for their own good? Think again. Consider this 2/7/07 news story:
“Vermont lawmakers are considering a measure to ban eating, drinking, smoking, reading, writing, personal grooming, playing an instrument, interacting with pets or cargo, talking on a cell phone, or using any other personal communication device while driving. The punishment: a fine of up to $600. Similar bills are under consideration in Maryland, Texas.”
That will never happen here, you say? Why not? Rewarding bad behavior gets more bad behavior. Reward politicians’ tax addiction with power/money for devising/implementing schemes, i.e., “It’s a public good to fine you $600 for talking to your dog while driving,” and you get a steady stream of such nannyism.
Outlaw tobacco in Maine? No. We have a more pressing health challenge with our tax addicts.
Scott K Fish is a political analyst, writer, and owner/editor of www.asmainegoes.com, a conservative political forum that has been keeping Mainers talking since 1998.
Reader Comments: