Should Baytown relight the smoking lamp?

There are few events that can divide a city like voting on controversial subjects. Citizens feel passionate about their preferences and I think the whole democratic process is wonderful. Politics and policies should be heartfelt - heartfelt enough to get folks arguing and ultimately, to voting. The more information a person digests, the better their decision will be.

Well, after much soul searching, I early voted on E. Baker at Remington Park. I voted FOR Proposition One concerning revoking the ban on cigarette smoking inside businesses. I hate smoking, let me make that clear, but I had to vote in favor of Free Enterprise, or as it’s better known - Capitalism.

My daughter questioned me on why I voted for the proposition and intends to vote against it. I laid out the concept of business ownership in America and she suddenly could see it made sense. It will be up to her on how she votes though and after making my argument; I did not attempt to dictate how she should vote.

One person spoke out in defense of the present ban, claiming property owners at one time used free enterprise rights to exclude black people from using their facilities. Allowing a business owner to operate their business within the laws is NOT the same as violating civil rights based on color, creed or sexual preference and the civil rights act of 1964 corrected the bias’ they were referring to.

Let’s take a look at Capitalism and Free Enterprise. What is it exactly and how does it apply to the situation we have in Baytown?

Free Enterprise is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and operated for profit, and in which investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are determined through the operation of a market where all decisions regarding transfer of money, goods and services are voluntary rather than commanded by government. It is usually considered to involve the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as "legal persons" or corporations to trade capital goods, labor, land and money.

Free Enterprise is the freedom to operate a business (within the law) without government interference. Our system of sales and barter is set up on this system and it works quite well. Frankly, the less government interference, the better it works.

Smoking is not illegal for Americans of legal age and government(s) should not dictate when a private business owner allows legal smoking. Obviously, marijuana falls into illegal smoking. They can however, dictate a proper ventilation system to protect non-smokers. It should be a no-brainer, but the current obsession with politically correctness, has made smoking (period) controversial. I am against criminalizing smoking/using tobacco, but I am for more education on the subject.

I can't remember the last time I walked into a restaurant and smelled cigarette smoke, but I have had fajita smoke all over me. For the love of god folks, I smelled like fajitas for about an hour after I left the place. In fact...it was second-hand fajita smoke! There was an infant child in that restaurant and I’d be willing to wager, they had smoke on them too! Where is a lawyer when you need one?

See where this could go? To me, the whole subject of banning tobacco could set off a domino block of smell and supposed health concerns in future litigation and business establishment restrictions, rules and ultimately, yes…fines. Here’s another exaggerated scenario:

An entrepreneur opens up a Pakistani restaurant and the pungent odor of curry fills the air. Someone complains and starts a movement to rid the town of curry-laced restaurant air. I have the actual solution and it’s common sense. If curry bothers you (it's not illegal), don't go in there, or appeal to the owner. What if .00014 per cent of the population is allergic to curry? Should the local government get involved and attempt to ban it? Wouldn’t it be better for the business owner to post a sign that plainly states that “curry sniffing” is allowed and in fact, encouraged at the establishment? Savvy sign-reading patrons could then make an educated choice about dining at this particular restaurant.

If the business owner decides to allow cigarette smoking inside their establishment, then THEY should be allowed to do so, even if it means conforming to the Health/Safety regulations at great cost to them and even if it means keeping a certain portion smoke-free. And yes, even if it means alienating every person who cannot abide, even a small amount of second hand smoke and losing their business. On the other hand, a business owner should have the final say on posting NO Smoking signs for their business, without fear of litigation.

It's their problem, not mine, or even the city of Baytown’s. It's free enterprise and said business is competing with other businesses for my business. If I don't like their decisions concerning their smoking policy, I can exercise my option to boycott and take my business elsewhere.

I’ve said from the very beginning of this entire anti-smoking hubbub, that there is more at stake here than just smoking. The responsible thing to do, is become and stay informed - and then vote your conscience.