Voice For Liberty

Search results for: “smoking”

  • An inept Kansas smoking analogy

    From last March.

    In today’s Wichita Eagle, Wichita busybody Charlie Claycomb makes another inept analogy in an attempt to press his anti-smoking agenda statewide.

    A while back he tried to compare a smoking section in a restaurant with a urinating section in a swimming pool. This is ridiculous to the extreme, as I show in the post It’s not the same as pee in the swimming pool.

    Now in today’s letter in the Eagle, Claycomb says that although the United States Constitution gives us the right to bear arms, since that right is heavily regulated, government has license to regulate smoking, as smoking isn’t mentioned at all in the Constitution.

    Here’s why this is another ridiculous analogy (without conceding whether the regulations on arms are justified or effective): A person in, say, a bar that’s carrying a gun can’t be detected as you enter the bar. You just can’t tell upon entering an establishment whether someone has a concealed gun and intends to cause harm to patrons. This is the case even if there’s a law prohibiting carrying guns into bars, and even if the bar has a “no guns” sign.

    But you sure can tell if people are smoking.

    Smoking ban supporters might argue that since there may be smoking in some establishments, my rights are being infringed since I can’t patronize those places without exposing myself to harmful smoke.

    That’s true, except about rights being violated. There’s definitely no right in the Constitution to be able to go everywhere you want on your own terms.

    “Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” — John Stuart Mill

    “Whenever we depart from voluntary cooperation and try to do good by using force, the bad moral value of force triumphs over good intentions.” — Milton Friedman

  • Another inept Kansas smoking analogy

    In today’s Wichita Eagle, Wichita busybody Charlie Claycomb makes another inept analogy in an attempt to press his anti-smoking agenda statewide.

    A while back he tried to compare a smoking section in a restaurant with a urinating section in a swimming pool. This is ridiculous to the extreme, as I show in the post It’s Not the Same as Pee In the Swimming Pool.

    Now in today’s letter in the Eagle, Claycomb says that although the United States Constitution gives us the right to bear arms, since that right is heavily regulated, government has license to regulate smoking, as smoking isn’t mentioned at all in the Constitution.

    Here’s why this is another ridiculous analogy (without conceding the regulations on arms are justified or effective): A person in, say, a bar that’s carrying a gun can’t be detected as you enter the bar. You just can’t tell upon entering an establishment whether someone has a concealed gun and intends to cause harm to patrons. This is the case even if there’s a law prohibiting carrying guns into bars, and even if the bar has a “no guns” sign.

    But you sure can tell if people are smoking.

    Smoking ban supporters might argue that since there may be smoking in some establishments, my rights are being infringed since I can’t patronize those places without exposing myself to harmful smoke.

    That’s true. But there’s definitely no right in the Constitution to be able to go everywhere you want on your own terms.

    By the way, did you know that Claycomb is treasurer for Wichita city council candidate Janet Miller? Expect more nonsense like this if she is elected.

    “Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” — John Stuart Mill

    “Whenever we depart from voluntary cooperation and try to do good by using force, the bad moral value of force triumphs over good intentions.” — Milton Friedman

  • Smoking ban advocate says some claims just smoke

    In Kansas, accurate information is sometimes in short supply when talking about smoking bans. From Kansas Watchdog:

    Opponents to a statewide total smoking ban say anti-tobacco advocates are playing a little loose with their facts.

    They have an unlikely ally in Michael Siegel, a medical doctor and professor of community health sciences at Boston University’s School of Public Health. He’s a long-standing anti-tobacco advocate, a proponent of smoking bans and a strong critic of bad science.

    In a story published Feb. 18 on his weblog, “The rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary,” Seigel wrote, “It is irresponsible to disseminate conclusions that are not supported by any scientific evidence, especially if that information will be used to infringe upon the freedom, autonomy, and rights of individuals.”

    Read the entire story at Smoking Ban Advocate Says Some Claims Just Smoke.

    Additional coverage of recent legislative testimony on this issue is at Fuzzy “Facts” vs Freedom in Smoking Ban Debate and Smoking Ban Bill Causes Controversy in House Committee.

  • Wichita Smoking Ban: Authoritarian, Elitist?

    Here’s some good commentary I received from a citizen. Wichita’s smoking “ban” will take effect before too long.  Smoke ’em while you can, I guess.

    Wichita’s Smoking Ban and the latest authoritarian arrogance emitted by elitist professor

    University of Kansas School of Medicine professor Dr. Rick Kellerman is on the front page of the May 30 Wichita Eagle.  Kellerman is upset that a complete ban on smoking is not expected to be adopted by the city council at their June 3 meeting.

    Who appointed Dr. Kellerman to be Wichita’s doctor?  The doctor’s elitist and authoritarian statement in today’s Wichita Eagle indicates that he is either trying to become the 21st century version of the Prohibition era’s Carrie Nation or the 20th century’s version of the infamous Nurse Ratched (see Ken Kesey’s classic One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest) for improper behavior.  The arguments that Kellerman uses could also be used to ban everything from firearms, cars, risky behaviors from hang gliding to bungee jumping, and a host of activities that free people exercising their freedom in a responsible way may decide to engage in performing.

    While it is a common leftist trait to call their political opponents, “fascists” it is a historical fact that the most famous anti-tobacco and anti-smoking advocate in the first half of the 20th century was Adolf Hitler who was happy to use his tyrannical powers to impose his will upon his subjects.  This was (and is) part of the authoritarian elitism that underlies all totalitarian ideologies.

    Dr. Kellerman’s desire to follow in these footsteps here in Wichita as part of his campaign to destroy invidual liberty, property rights for individuals and business owners, as well as broadly restrict select human freedom.  Dr. Kellerman knows better than the peasants what is good for us.

    Obviously this arrogant professor has never read Thomas Sowell‘s The Vision of the Anointed Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy, a book that describes Kellerman’s ideology and elitist arrogance perfectly.  The same issue of the Wichita Eagle has a small story about California’s state senate has passed a ban on smoking within one’s own apartment.  Friendly fascism of the nanny state elitists like Dr. Kellerman are active all across this country.

  • The myth of the smoking ban ‘miracle’

    Supporters of comprehensive bans on smoking often point to research findings that heart attacks decrease when smoking bans are implemented. But is this true? Christopher Snowdon reports in Spiked online:

    Tales of heart attacks being “slashed” by smoking bans have appeared with such regularity in recent years that it is easy to forget that there is a conspicuous lack of reliable evidence to support them. It is almost as if the sheer number of column inches is a substitute for proof.

    Later on he concludes:

    What is abundantly clear in each case is that the number of heart attack admissions has been falling for some time. Far from causing further dramatic cuts in heart attack rates, the bans had no discernible effect.

    If we’re going to cite public health as a reason for smoking bans, let’s make sure we’re working with complete and reliable scientific evidence. Snowdon’s full article is The myth of the smoking ban ‘miracle’.

  • Smoking is healthier than fascism

    There’s a Facebook group named Vote NO on Statewide Smoking Ban (Smoking is healthier than fascism). Started by Wichita activist Wendy Aylworth, the description of the group starts with the rallying cry “We must stop this tyranny of the majority!”

    Yes, we must.

    I’m tempted to tell you — like many people do when discussing matters of public policy — whether I smoke cigarettes. But does that matter?

    It shouldn’t, because if it does, we shift the basis of policy decisions from “what is right and just and promotes freedom and liberty” to “what is my personal preference.” And there’s too much of that going on.

    Smoking bans are only the start of increased government regulation of more and more aspects of our lives. These things can backfire. As government control becomes more pervasive, smoking ban busybodies may well find themselves coming under onerous regulation that they don’t like. Once started, it’s hard for government to stop.

    We ought to remember the words of C.S. Lewis: “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

    For more articles from this site on smoking bans and the harm they cause, click here.

  • Kansas smoking ban discussed on Kansas Week

    On the KPTS public affairs television program Kansas Week, the recently-passed Kansas smoking ban was at issue. Bob Weeks is in the Wichita studio along with host Tim Brown. Stephen Koranda, Kansas Public Radio Statehouse Bureau Chief, is in the Topeka studio.

    Additional coverage of the meeting of smoking ban opponents is at Kansas smoking ban opponents meet in Wichita. More coverage of smoking bans is here.

  • The smoking ban in Wichita

    Some commentary regarding Wichita’s half-passed smoking ban that I received.

    University of Kansas School of Medicine professor Dr. Rick Kellerman is on the front page of the May 30 Wichita Eagle. Kellerman is upset that a complete ban on smoking is not expected to be adopted by the city council at their June 3 meeting.

    Who appointed Dr. Kellerman to be Wichita’s doctor? The doctor’s elitist and authoritarian statement in today’s Wichita Eagle indicates that he is either trying to become the 21st century version of the Prohibition era’s Carrie Nation or the 20th century’s version of the infamous Nurse Ratched (see Ken Kesey’s classic One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest) for improper behavior. The arguments that Kellerman uses could also be used to ban everything from firearms, cars, risky behaviors from hang gliding to bungee jumping, and a host of activities that free people exercising their freedom in a responsible way may decide to engage in performing.

    While it is a common leftist trait to call their political opponents “fascists” it is a historical fact that the most famous anti-tobacco and anti-smoking advocate in the first half of the 20th century was Adolf Hitler, who was happy to use his tyrannical powers to impose his will upon his subjects. This was (and is) part of the authoritarian elitism that underlies all totalitarian ideologies.

    Dr. Kellerman’s desire to follow in these footsteps here in Wichita as part of his campaign to destroy individual liberty, property rights for individuals and business owners, as well as broadly restrict human freedom. Dr. Kellerman knows better than the peasants what is good for us.

    Obviously this arrogant professor has never read Thomas Sowell’s the Vision of the Anointed, a book that describes Kellerman’s ideology and elitist arrogance perfectly. The same issue of The Wichita Eagle has a small story about how California’s state senate has passed a ban on smoking within one’s own apartment. Friendly fascism of the nanny state elitists like Dr. Kellerman are active all across this country.

  • Kansas governor proposes taxes, smoking ban, green energy projects

    Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson‘s State of the State address Monday proposed two new taxes, a comprehensive statewide smoking ban, and a cabinet team to promote green energy projects. He didn’t propose closing tax exemptions, and he made no mention of an available method that could help Kansas make it through a fiscal shortfall.

    The complete text of the governor’s address, as prepared for delivery, is available at Protecting What We Have, Building for the Future.

    What’s missing from the governor’s address is recognition that the state is sitting on hundreds of millions of unused cash that could be tapped to get the state through a tough spot. The Kansas Policy Institute has performed research and analysis that indicates that by spending down these fund balances, Kansas schools and agencies could continue delivering services without requiring a tax increase.

    In his response to the governor, which was recorded before the governor spoke, Speaker of the House Mike O’Neil opposed tax increases. He didn’t mention the fund balances.

    Instead of making use of an untapped resource, the governor proposed tax increases. In particular, the governor proposed taxes that fall hardest on poor and low income people.

    His proposed cigarette tax falls hardest on low-income people, as they smoke proportionally more than high-income people, and spend proportionally more of their income on cigarettes.

    The increase in sales tax again falls most harshly on low income people, as they spend nearly all their income. Wealthier people may save a lot of their income, and saving isn’t subject to sales taxes, at least not for now. Purchasers of stocks and bonds don’t pay sales tax.

    Although the sales tax is proposed to last just three years (the bulk of it, anyway; two-tenths of a cent is proposed as a permanent tax to fund a highway plan), there is a definite risk that these taxes become permanent. The Intrust Bank Arena, which just opened in downtown Wichita, was funded by a temporary sales tax. That tax ended as scheduled, but there were those — including at least one officeholder — who wanted the tax to continue.

    At the same time the governor proposes to raise money through increased taxation of cigarettes, he also proposes a comprehensive statewide smoking ban. This is at cross purposes. Does the governor want people to smoke or not?

    It will also be interesting to see how comprehensive any proposed smoking ban legislation will be. The ban proposed last year exempted state-owned casinos like the one that recently opened in Dodge City.

    The governor didn’t address eliminating the many tax exemptions, which the Secretary of Revenue is promoting as a way to raise perhaps $200 million per year in revenue.

    The governor didn’t mention Schools for Fair Funding’s decision to sue the state for more school spending.

    In his address, O’Neil said that Kansas families and businesses are struggling and making sacrifices.

    While tax revenue to the state has fallen, demand for government spending has continued. Raising taxes now near the end of a recession, he said, is short-sighted and counterproductive. It is not prudent to raise taxes. “Raising taxes now in the middle of a severe recession would mean losing tax-paying businesses that are already struggling to survive.” Loss of these businesses and their employees would make the fiscal situation worse, he said.

    This applies to either new taxes or to the elimination of tax incentives. Either would harm growth and reduce capital that businesses need. “Simply put: Kansas businesses can’t pay more unless they make more.” While a tax hike may be attractive in the sort term, increasing taxes is harmful in the long run.

    O’Neil said it’s a false choice to either allow business to keep its money or fund government’s obligations. Business must be strong if government is to be fiscally sound. If business grows and prospers, the state’s fiscal situation will improve.

    O’Neil said the 2010 legislature will thoroughly examine all spending to make sure that government is operating efficiently, and is spending only on those things necessary to fulfill the legitimate role of government.

    He supported a budget stabilization process — by constitutional amendment if necessary. He said we should work towards using zero-based budgeting. More audits are needed, and he reminded us that Kansas used to have a state auditor.

    On education funding, O’Neil said that when all sources of funding are considered, schools have been cut less than 1.5% on average, and schools are receiving more funding than in fiscal year 2008. The school funding lawsuit is irresponsible, he said. K through 12 education cuts have not been as severe as cuts to other state agencies.

More posts