Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

Home /  Archives / Search / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar

A Smoking Ban

By Guillermo Camoriano

          A smoking ban has been passed by some cities and is now being studied here in Louisville.  The ban is being pitched as a “rights of non-smokers” issue and as a health issue.  Claims that it is an economic issue are dismissed, stating that the smoking ban will have an insignificant impact on the area’s economy.  I very much disagree with this dismissal, having been there, done that!

          I was born and raised in Honduras, a third world country, a democracy which has been unable to pull itself up by its bootstraps despite (or because of) massive financial assistance from the USA and huge loans from the international community.  The crux of the problem, which I see clearly now, but which the local politicians and population of Honduras refuse to see, is the lack of respect for private property.  In a democracy, the will of the majority wins, even over the rights of the minority (this may also be referred to as the rule of the many over the few, or in its worst embodiment, as mob rule).

          In Honduras there is no rule of law that respects private property.  The latest group to come into power passes its own legislation, which invariably lines the pockets of those in power and their supporters at the expense of the population at large.  Naturally, this legislation is billed as being supported by, and for the benefit of, the majority, even though, in the end, it benefits only a very select few.  Thus, as a businessman, it behooves you to put your energy into influencing (read “corrupting”) those in power so they will at least leave you alone, or preferably pass legislation to benefit you at the expense of your competitors or of the population at large.

          Putting your energy into being a low cost producer only invites attention to you, offering you no protection or advantage.  These being the rules of the game, you do not invest in Honduras.  If you do invest, you do so with the understanding that your efforts must be to become the most influential producer, not the most efficient producer.  You must plan on recovering your investment, and any returns on that investment, as quickly as possible, as the players are likely to change at the next presidential election, and you will no longer enjoy the benefit of the influence you have curried with the current crop of legislators.  Thus, legitimate businessmen are scared from investing in Honduras, and the country sinks into ever deeper poverty, with the poorest people suffering the most.

          Unfortunately, it is clear to me that we are headed in this same direction in the USA.  A business owner should have the freedom to do as he wishes in his business establishment, and the legislators should respect this right to private property.  A smoking ban does not respect this right.  Even if the majority of the people were in favor of such a ban (polls indicate that at least 56% of the people oppose the smoking ban), that would not make it right, as it is still an infringement on individuals’ property rights.  All things being equal, intelligent businessmen would shy away from investing in Louisville if a precedent is set for not respecting property rights.

          In any event, by passing a smoking ban regulation, we would be treating the symptoms, not the real problem.  People feel justified in restricting smoking, because they claim it is a health issue.  As taxpayers paying into a mismanaged health care system, we are forced to financially support programs such as Medicaid and Medicare.  People using these programs are no longer financially liable for the abuse of their own health and well being, since the state (namely the taxpayers) will foot the bill for their health care.  The state then feels justified in dictating healthy lifestyles to the people in order to minimize the financial burden of caring for them.  The result is legislation, such as the smoking ban, to force people into what are deemed to be healthier lifestyles. 

          The problem with this bandaid approach is that there is no end to the government intrusion into people’s lives if this is deemed reasonable and acceptable, and any means will justify the ends.  It is not inconceivable to foresee a state that regulates every aspect of human activity, all in the guise of what is good for the majority.  From conception (if you have sex you may bring forth a child which will be a burden to the system so, before you can engage in sex, you must have documented evidence, filed in triplicate with the appropriate bureau of procreation, of your and your partner’s genealogical background, attesting to your families’ being free of genetically transmitted diseases) to death (by taking those pills you are extending your life beyond the expectations of the actuaries and thus imposing a larger financial burden on the system when you are no longer very productive anyway, so no pills for you!), the state will be justified in interfering and curtailing individual rights and property rights in the name of the common good.

          In the words of Benjamin Franklin, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”  May we learn from these words before we pass a smoking ban!

Weather (Louisville) / Mapquest / Search / White Pages / Business Search / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN