There are few topics as controversial as politics and religion. Secondhand smoke is one such topic. Although people get passionate about all three subjects, the main difference between them is that the former are based on promises and beliefs, while the latter is based on science.
Unfortunately, the science of secondhand smoke often is less reliable than the promises of politics and the beliefs of religion.
As the Wisconsin Legislature considers a statewide ban on smoking in restaurants and bars, it should look behind and beyond the numbers to determine their validity and viability which is what my organization - the International Premium Cigar Pipe Retailers Association - tries to help legislators and consumers do.
Anti-smoking forces throw statistics around like ping pong balls. People believe most of them because, after all, who is going to question a source like the American Cancer Society? They take whatever numbers are printed in the ACS news releases and accept them as if they came from the Bible. Before we deny more people of their rights, we should analyze the data and statements to be sure they reflect reality.
For example, the Surgeon General's 2006 Report actually says throughout that the evidence regarding health effects of secondhand smoke is inconclusive. Unfortunately, most folks only quote from the executive summary which skews the results to support the anti-smoking force's false agenda.
Another example of misrepresented data would be the report on secondhand smoke produced by the Environmental Protection Agency. The science quoted in the EPA report was so badly conceived and poorly executed that a federal court condemned it as being deliberately biased and declared it null and void.
On the other hand, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration gets it. It established what it considers to be safe parameters for secondhand smoke. Those parameters are well outside of the range that anyone would find in an average restaurant or bar according to scientific testing done by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Other than that, OSHA does not regard secondhand smoke to be a workplace issue.
Finally, history has shown that legislatively-imposed smoking bans can lead to lower tax revenues from businesses like restaurants and bars plus widespread layoffs and even forced closings. In Wisconsin, businesses potentially affected by a smoking ban could include the 30 of IPCPR's 2,000 members who are owners of neighborhood smoke shops that pay millions of dollars annually in payroll, sales and excise taxes.
The bottom line is that government does not have the right to impose smoking bans on private businesses. Our nation's founders clearly opposed government intervention into matters of private property - like businesses, including bars and restaurants - where owners have the right to decide whether or not to allow smoking on their premises. Customers and employees then have the right to patronize or work at those businesses.
Legislators should spend their time on serious matters instead of on matters of dubious representation.
- Chris McCalla is legislative director for the International Premium Cigar Pipe Retailers Association in Columbus, Ga.
Unfortunately, the science of secondhand smoke often is less reliable than the promises of politics and the beliefs of religion.
As the Wisconsin Legislature considers a statewide ban on smoking in restaurants and bars, it should look behind and beyond the numbers to determine their validity and viability which is what my organization - the International Premium Cigar Pipe Retailers Association - tries to help legislators and consumers do.
Anti-smoking forces throw statistics around like ping pong balls. People believe most of them because, after all, who is going to question a source like the American Cancer Society? They take whatever numbers are printed in the ACS news releases and accept them as if they came from the Bible. Before we deny more people of their rights, we should analyze the data and statements to be sure they reflect reality.
For example, the Surgeon General's 2006 Report actually says throughout that the evidence regarding health effects of secondhand smoke is inconclusive. Unfortunately, most folks only quote from the executive summary which skews the results to support the anti-smoking force's false agenda.
Another example of misrepresented data would be the report on secondhand smoke produced by the Environmental Protection Agency. The science quoted in the EPA report was so badly conceived and poorly executed that a federal court condemned it as being deliberately biased and declared it null and void.
On the other hand, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration gets it. It established what it considers to be safe parameters for secondhand smoke. Those parameters are well outside of the range that anyone would find in an average restaurant or bar according to scientific testing done by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Other than that, OSHA does not regard secondhand smoke to be a workplace issue.
Finally, history has shown that legislatively-imposed smoking bans can lead to lower tax revenues from businesses like restaurants and bars plus widespread layoffs and even forced closings. In Wisconsin, businesses potentially affected by a smoking ban could include the 30 of IPCPR's 2,000 members who are owners of neighborhood smoke shops that pay millions of dollars annually in payroll, sales and excise taxes.
The bottom line is that government does not have the right to impose smoking bans on private businesses. Our nation's founders clearly opposed government intervention into matters of private property - like businesses, including bars and restaurants - where owners have the right to decide whether or not to allow smoking on their premises. Customers and employees then have the right to patronize or work at those businesses.
Legislators should spend their time on serious matters instead of on matters of dubious representation.
- Chris McCalla is legislative director for the International Premium Cigar Pipe Retailers Association in Columbus, Ga.
