The Stogie Guys

As the 2008 Presidential election gears up, some candidates are weighing in on an issue that could affect cigar smokers in a big way: a national smoking ban.

Leading Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, along with a majority of their Democratic peers, have already pledged to sign a national smoking ban for “public places” (by which they mean any space where the public is welcome, even if it is actually owned by a private citizen). Republican candidate Mike Huckabee, known for increasing tobacco taxes as governor of Arkansas, has also pledged to sign and push for a national ban.

But other than Huckabee, we haven’t seen much from the Republican candidates about smoking bans. It isn’t hard to imagine that Congressman Ron Paul – known as “Dr. No” for his votes against any federal law not explicitly authorized by the Constitution – is a strong opponent of smoking bans.

Talk on this important issue has been lacking so far in the campaign, but we’re hoping that changes tomorrow night at the CNN/YouTube debate where questions are submitted by anyone with a webcam.

Ultimately, while I’d like to see more in-depth talk about these senseless bans, the following question, submitted by a YouTuber from Minnesota, would be a good start:

–Patrick S

Call it luck or sheer frustration, but StogieGuys.com has gone almost one month without mentioning the words “smoking ban.” We’ve steered clear of the subject since September 28, to be exact. Between reviewing cigars and talking to industry leaders, we’ve kept ourselves pretty busy with the proposed SCHIP tobacco tax hike.

Unfortunately, our recent lack of reporting on senseless smoking bans doesn’t mean they’ve gone away. Quite the contrary. So, by way of an update, here are a few important items you may have missed. See if you can notice a menacing new trend.

1. In a move that underscores irrational big government intrusion, the Chicago Park District banned smoking in the city’s beaches and parks on October 17. The questionable ban took effect immediately. According to the Chicago Tribune, “If caught smoking within 15 feet of a beach or a playground, smokers can be fined up to $500. Park officials made their plans for the ban public Tuesday, saying the restriction would not only protect children from secondhand smoke but also keep beaches free of cigarette butts.”

2. Maine is proving that smoking bans are a slippery slope. Not satisfied with ominous control over the state’s workplaces and restaurants, anti-smoking zealots are turning their attention to citizens’ apartments and cars. As the Boston Globe reports, “Groups such as the Maine Civil Liberties Union have expressed concerns about the proposed smoking ban in cars, which involves traffic stops and $50 fines. ‘While we do not dispute that smoking has potentially severe health effects, the question is whether it’s appropriate for law enforcement to be given the power to stop and penalize people who engage in an otherwise legal activity,’ said Shenna Bellows, MCLU executive director.”

3. America’s cigar smoker in chief is showing some mixed results. Governor Schwarzenegger signed a law prohibiting Californians from smoking in cars with passengers under 18. But he also vetoed a radical bill that would strip the state’s smoking ban of many of its exemptions. According to Cigar Aficionado, Arnold said, “While more needs to be done to reduce smoking rates, I do not agree that placing further restrictions on business owners is the correct approach.”

It doesn’t take a public policy expert to realize that invasive smoking bans – once relegated to restaurants, workplaces, and bars – are moving closer to our homes, cars, and other private places. This trend is troubling for all cigar enthusiasts, especially those who value personal freedoms and individual rights.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

We often rail against smoking bans via abstract concepts like liberty, personal responsibility, property rights, and freedom, but sometimes an anecdote does an even better job of highlighting the absurdity of such Draconian laws.

I’m writing to you from California, home of one of the first statewide smoking bans for bars and restaurants. During a visit to one of the Golden State’s many bars, a friend lit up a cigarette in violation of the ban.

All the other patrons (there were only three not in our party) were fine with her smoking. But when the bartender (the only employee at the time) saw her smoking he ran over, grabbed the cigarette, and put it outside.

Did he not want to be exposed to second hand smoke or was he trying to protect the other patrons (all of whom approved of the smoking in their presence) from the cigarette smoke? No, that was not his objection at all.

When I asked him later he said he didn’t mind the smoking, but that he was scared if the police saw someone smoking in the bar he would get a $6,000 fine.

So there you have it. Every single person in the bar – all adults over 21 – consented to the smoking. Only the bartender objected, but only because he was scared of the government bursting though the door.Can there be any justification for police handing out excessive fines when there is no one to protect?

Of course not. But in California, and the many states and cities with senseless smoking bans, this type of scene plays out everyday. And when you see it firsthand it reminds you that the harm done by smoking bans isn’t solely abstract.

–Patrick S

Tags: Cigars

Exactly one month ago, I authored an alarming article about the spread of statewide smoking bans, including a breakdown of three states that seemed close to dropping the axe on individual rights: Illinois, Minnesota, and New Hampshire.

Since then, both the Illinois and Minnesota state legislatures have passed fascist smoking bans, effectively placing business owners and minority smokers under the thumb of the nanny state. Pathetic.

The Illinois ban shouldn’t be news to regular readers. We published a blurb about that in one of our recent Friday Samplers.

But the Minnesota ban is pretty fresh. Governor Tim Pawlenty just signed it into law last week, criminalizing smoking in bars, restaurants, and other workplaces throughout the Land of 10,000 Lakes starting October 1.

State Senator Tom Neuville, on the other hand, is one Minnesota politician who seems to have his head screwed on right. On his website, he explains why he voted against the ban:

Private business owners have a property right that government should not take away lightly. I still oppose smoking. But the statewide smoking ban is an overreaction to a problem which is more of a nuisance than public health issue. Adults can choose to enter or avoid a bar or restaurant that allows smoking.

Good points. Too bad Senator Neuville’s sensible assessment of the law didn’t strike a chord with a majority of his colleagues in St. Paul.

So, in one month, two out of three have bitten the dust. Let’s hope New Hampshire – the so-called “Live Free or Die” state – can hold out a little longer.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

It’s been quite awhile since we last discussed smoking bans. March 27, to be exact. (OK, such nanny state legislation was mentioned in a few Friday Samplers since that post, but that doesn’t really count.)

In case you’re wondering, our 28-day hiatus was no mistake. Writing about the dangers of government-imposed smoking bans is no light subject, and the ferocity with which they grip the nation doesn’t make for pleasant reading – especially if you’re a fan of freedom. Besides, we recognize that many of you could care less about politics and policy.

Today, however, it’s time to break the silence. Take a look at the map below, which features states with some sort of statewide smoking ban highlighted in red, and you’ll see why.

(Please excuse the haphazardness of my map. No credible, updated map of statewide smoking bans could be found, so I had to make this from scratch.)

State legislature after state legislature is passing paternalistic smoking bans that prevent business owners from offering the amenities they so choose and criminalize consenting adults for engaging in a nonviolent behavior. All this based on bogus studies from the AFL-CIO and the Center for Disease Control.

Here’s a look at the latest states hoping to join the ranks of those already with fascist smoking bans.

Illinois

The state senate recently passed SB0500, a bill that would ban smoking in all public places and private clubs in the Land of Lincoln. On April 9 it was sent to the house, where it currently waits for approval. Nearly 40 Illinois towns have grown impatient of the delay and are implementing their own bans until the statewide law comes through.

Minnesota

St. Paul politicians are considering a slightly toned-down version of an all-out smoking ban that would allow bars and restaurants to apply to local municipalities for smoking licenses. This (arguably) more sensible proposition is drawing heavy criticism for being too lenient.

New Hampshire

A five-person house committee was recently convened to consider Senate Bill 42 – a statewide bar and restaurant smoking ban. Foster’s Daily Democrat wrote a good editorial on Monday stating that “after a string of efforts…to babysit New Hampshire residents…it is time to tell Granite Staters that they are responsible for their own health habits.”

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

When Maryland Senate Minority Leader David Brinkley – a politician who’s against the proposed statewide smoking ban – was asked if the law would finally come to fruition this year, he simply quipped, “It’ll happen.” The Republican from Frederick even went so far as to say “it’s inevitable.”

The dubiously-titled Clean Indoor Air Act of 2007 would place the entire (OK, it’s not that big, but it’s still a state) Old Line State in the freedom-squelching ranks of sixteen other states, not to mention over 250 local governments, who have already adopted fascist smoking bans.

Five Maryland counties – Howard, Charles, Prince George’s, Montgomery, and Talbot, for those of you keeping score at home – currently have their own bans in place. And the Baltimore City Council is currently considering a city-wide ban, which they may vote on by the end of this month.

This is the third time Annapolis has tried to pass through a statewide ban. While nothing is certain, those in favor of controlling the actions of consenting adults and violating the property rights of business owners are not-so-cautiously optimistic.

Will this bill pass? “Absolutely,” says Delegate Barbara Frush.

It’s enough to make freedom-oriented citizens like myself sick. Fortunately, as a Virginian, I try not to spend too much time north of the Potomac River as it is. (Maybe just an evening game at Camden Yards every once and a while.)

Sadly, even if the ban does not pass this year, a quick look at the overly intrusive policies of Maryland’s government suggest it will sooner or later.

My advice to Marylanders? For now, smoke ‘em while you’ve got ‘em. Once the ban passes, I’ll be happy to have a drink and a cigar with you in The Commonwealth.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

Here are a pair of news items that show how seriously dangerous, and at the same time how laughably absurd, smoking bans are.

Smoking Ban Takes a Life

Smoking ban advocates claim that such bans improve health because any minute exposure to second hand smoke could theoretically be the one that causes cancer. (Of course, by that reasoning, so could a sole char-broiled burger, a single glass of chlorinated water, being exposed to the sun’s rays for just a minute, or any one x-ray.)

Still, one thing is for sure: Smoking bans kill people. In the most recent incident, sixty-five year old Murray Miles Patterson caught hypothermia and later died because he was forced out of his long-term care facility in Toronto into sub-zero temperatures by the Smoke-Free Ontario Act.

But Patterson is not the only victim of smoking bans. Since 2001, three Kansas University students have fallen to their deaths while smoking. Kansas has a strict no smoking policy, despite requests from students for specific smoking rooms. And that’s just at Kansas University…

The Stogies Go Marching On

Meanwhile, in the nation’s capital, a group of high-ranking military officers and defense officials (including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) defied the district’s smoking ban while holding their traditional “Wallow of the Military Order of the Carabao” annual gala:

Hotel officials “tried to tell” guests “they couldn’t smoke cigars and they said, ‘Nope, you signed the contract before the law’ … so everyone lights up a cigar and the whole room is just thick with smoke,” the source told The Politico’s Amy Doolittle. For the record, we’re told it’s the last time the event will take place at the now smokeless venue.

Which begs the question: Does anyone seriously think these military men are criminals for breaking the smoking ban law? Doubtful.

–Patrick S