State smoking bans are too extreme

On Tuesday, 70 percent of Florida voters cast their ballots in favor of a state… On Tuesday, 70 percent of Florida voters cast their ballots in favor of a state constitutional amendment that bans smoking in all restaurants. Florida now joins California in a smoke-banning movement that is gaining momentum across the United States. Cities such as New York and Boston are also considering a smoking ban for their restaurants, and there is even a push for it in Pittsburgh – www.nosmokedining.org.

But while a blanket ban sounds wonderful to nonsmokers, it sounds painful to the rest, and it fails to consider a restaurant’s right to handle its own affairs – for better or worse.

The push for clean air in restaurants is certainly a worthy concern. The dangers presented by cigarette smoke have been well-documented in recent years, and there is no reason why a nonsmoking customer at any restaurant should be subject to secondhand smoke and the health risks it poses.

But smoking is legal in the United States, and smokers do eat. Those who regularly enjoy a cigarette during the evening meal should not be barred from restaurants, especially if the proprietor would love to have them.

At many restaurants, the nonsmoking section is kind of a joke – the dining room is divided into two sections with nothing to prevent smoke from drifting into the lungs of everyone present. A compromise can be reached by improving the divide.

Restaurants should be able to maintain their clientele – smoking and nonsmoking – but they must accommodate them to do so. Proprietors should be required to obtain a smoking license ensuring that smokers are offered an area – such as a separate room – that will keep smoke from reaching customers who wish to avoid it.

A blanket ban is too extreme, especially in a city such as Pittsburgh, where tastes and styles differ between neighborhoods. While a smoking ban may receive support in Shadyside, it would be much more contested in Oakland. If any action is taken to keep smoking out of restaurants, the viewpoints of customers in different areas must be considered accordingly.

No American smoker should be penalized for participating in a legal activity. But it is also true that those who are averse to smoke should not be forced to endure it or stay home. State and local governments can solve this problem without forcing either side out of the building. By raising the standard for clean air in restaurants, the government can meet the demands of customers and owners alike.