Thanks to Senate Bill 571, lighting up in bars and restaurants is about to become against the law. The bill has all ready passed the Oregon State
Senate; now it has to pass the House of Representatives.
Unsurprisingly, Democrats rallied around the legislation, while Republicans balked at what they argued was a usurpation of individual rights. The legislation provides minor exemptions to cigar bars, tobacco shops and, strangely, the Portland Meadows racetrack. Oregon’s Native American casinos will not be affected by the legislation.
Although the state of Oregon is set to lose an estimated $25 million from reduced lottery play and a potential reduction in alcohol and cigarette consumption, Kulongoski appears to support the legislation and will sign it when it crosses his desk. Likely, over the long run, the lost revenue will become insignificant – a mere, transitory blip, before people become accustomed to lighting up outdoors.
Some Oregon communities, Eugene included, have already passed similar legislation. City smoking bans in the region date back to July 2001, when then-Gov. John Kitzhaber struck a deal with the state Legislature to ban smoking in workplaces and restaurants. Since then, smokers have seen their options severely pinched, with smoke-designated areas limited to bars, taverns, and other areas restricted to minors.
Smokers and individual rights activists argue that in areas where admission is restricted to adults, people should be treated as such. This includes being able to smoke if one so chooses. But supporters of the anti-smoking bill point to secondhand smoke, and the hazards associated with it, as reason for toughening the state’s stance on smoking.
But this logic doesn’t hold up considering that the collateral damage of that “adult behavior” is responsible for killing 8,000 Oregonians each year, according to the American Lung Association of Oregon. Inhalation of secondhand smoke has been revealed to cause many of the same physiological impairments as direct smoking. Because the dangers of secondhand smoke extend beyond the individual performing the act, it is in the collective interest of Oregonians to ban smoking indoors – even in local watering holes.
It’s a logic lost on some. How can smoking be banned in a place where people come to drink alcohol? People in bars are aware that what they’re doing is harmful to them, but they are mature enough to weigh the consequences of their actions. Why, then, can’t they do the same with cigarettes?
The answer may lie in neighboring states. California and Washington are among the sixteen states with smoking bans that extend to bars. Add to that Idaho’s and Nevada’s stricter secondhand smoke ordinances, and it would appear that Oregon is merely struggling to keep pace with its health-conscious neighbors.
The bill is sure to prove divisive. In lieu of Governor Kulongoski’s apparent conviction to sign the bill, smokers will certainly continue to argue for their individual freedoms. Health advocates, meanwhile, will just as surely be there to rebuke with data and stories of the unfortunate victims of secondhand smoke. In the meantime, bar patrons craving a drag will just have to take their act outside – or pay the price.
Second-hand killer
342,000 Americans die each year
35 million suffer from chronic lung disease
There are more than 4,000 carcinogens in second hand smoke
– Source: Mayo Clinic and America Lung Association