By Laura Stuart
Second of Two Parts
Re “The Coming Smoking Ban Will Be More Than a Failure”
I am also concerned about the definition of smoking. Many people have medical marijuana prescriptions for medical reasons. Are they not allowed to take their “prescription” at home because the government is trying to regulate their lives? Is that not a violation of the law to keep someone from taking their doctor prescribed medication because they don’t like it?
In reading about the social-economic status of smokers versus non-smokers (http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0260.pdf) It seems to me that this is a form of discrimination against the poorest of our citizens. The report says:
• In the past, the highest income Americans smoked at levels even greater than the poorest; now they smoke at barely half the rate of those with the lowest income.
• 27.9 percent of adults who are below the poverty level smoke, compared to 17 percent of adults who are at or above the poverty level.
• Among adults under age 65, 30 percent of Medicaid enrollees and 30 percent of uninsured
individuals smoke, compared to 15 percent with private insurance coverage.
• 24.7 percent of adults who do not graduate from high school smoke, compared to just 9.1 percent of those with a college education and 5.9 percent of those with a graduate degree.
• Smoking among non-college bound high school seniors more than twice that of college bound
high school seniors (28.9% vs. 13%, respectively).
Before the Council decides to enact this law, I would suggest to them that they consider the ramifications, from bringing “ big brother” into people’s homes, to discrimination against the poor in our community. Please consider the broader ramifications before enacting a law that will surely get the city sued.
