Abstract This paper examines the anti-smoking bylaw in Toronto, Ontario. It examines the growth of the issue of public smoking. It focuses on the interest groups, arguments and lobbying used in support of, and opposition to, the public smoking bylaw.
Abstract The paper analyzes the book, which looks at the U.S. government's involvement in the tobacco industry. It discusses shifts in policy making with regard to tobacco and the influence and power of the tobacco industry to fight anti-smoking policies. The effect of federalism on product regulation is discussed, as is the release of the report by the Surgeon General, Luther Terry, in 1964; claiming smoking as a health risk. The Federal Trade Commission's role in regulating cigarettes is looked at and the interference of politics in neutral, scientific, and impartial regulation is raised. The paper concludes with recommendations for the future, such as the rationalization of public policy and the monitoring of policy changes.
From the Paper "The tobacco issue has been a difficult one in the American political system from the beginning of tobacco as a cash crop. The issue has become even more complex in recent years, with one arm of the government offering subsidies and other support to tobacco growers while another is challenging the health risks involved and still another is seeking legal redress. The government has for some time in effect been on both sides of the issue at the same time. Many of the reasons for this can be found in the book Smoking and Politics: Policy Making and the Federal Bureaucracy by A. Lee Fritschler and James M. Hoefler, most recently in its 5th Edition as the authors update their analysis every few years."
Abstract The paper explains the position of proponents of anti-smoking legislation who believe that nonsmokers have a right not to be exposed involuntarily to second-hand tobacco smoke in public. The paper then considers the view of those who work in the food and drink service industry, because they are exposed to second-hand smoke continually, as well as the perspective of the health issues regarding minor children inhaling second-hand smoke. The paper offers counter-arguments that highlight how ultimately, the issue boils down to how much governmental regulation is appropriate in a free society. The paper contends that in a culture than permits other equally dangerous involuntary exposures, smoking bans violate the principle of freedom and autonomous choice.
Outline:
Introduction
The Argument For and Against Smoking Bans
From the Paper "Five years ago, New York City became the first large American city to enact anti-smoking ordinances in restaurants and bars. Since then, anti-smoking legislation has spread to many other American and European cities alike. In 2006, a New York City civil court judge ruled that second-hand smoke between apartments violates the implied warranty of habitability of nonsmokers and several dozen residential buildings in the city have prohibited smoking anywhere inside their buildings, including inside private apartments. (O'Neill & Light 2008)"
Abstract This paper examines the issue of second-hand smoke exposure and how it violates the rights of non-smokers. Through this examination, the paper shows some of the potential health hazards to non-smokers, and discusses what anti-smoking groups are doing to safeguard the rights of non-smokers.
From the Paper "A billboard sponsored by the California Department of Health Services shows a man with a cigarette in his mouth asking a woman, "Mind if I smoke"? She responds, "Care if I die"? (CDHS 5/97). Although the ad seems to be amusing, its message is very serious. As the Department points out, second-hand smoke is not only a health hazard to smokers, it poses health problems to those who share the same environment with those who smoke. This assumption has been proven in countless studies. In recent weeks, the media has presented the findings of researchers from Harvard, UC San Francisco, and the Center for Disease Control that conclusively determine that cigarette smoking poses health threats for non-smokers that are almost as great as for those who smoke. Anti-smoking groups theorize that non-smokers experience an increase in heart disease, respiratory problems, and high blood pressure because of their exposure to secondhand smoke. The argument that presents itself is that smoking is not just a bad habit that is a health hazard to smokers; secondhand tobacco smoke impacts the lives of non-smokers, too."
Abstract This paper discusses how Canada's hospitality industry is expecting the implementation of another round of patchwork anti-smoking laws that will inevitably lead to a lopsided playing field, while further punishing establishments in municipalities such as Toronto that had made significant investments glassed-in ventilated smoking areas, as per earlier rounds of municipal legislation. Along with different approaches to enforcement and arguments over exceptions, the hospitality industry continues to pay the price in this game of political football that fails to recognize international realities.
Abstract This paper discusses the effects of second-hand smoke and the debate over protecting non-smokers. The paper attempts to address the question of protecting non-smokers from the the inadvertent negative health effects of passive smoke. To answer this issue, the paper provides an overview of the development of anti-smoking regulations in America and impediments to changing the smoking culture. The paper concludes that because of the health threat second-hand smoke poses to the non-smoking public, smoking should be prohibited from all public places.
Outline
Can the Tobacco Industry Keep Doubt Alive?
Will Legislation Prevail Over the Industry?
Is Evidence Enough to Prove Them Right?
Does the Media Play a Role in Keeping Smoking Alive?
Do Nonsmokers Have the Right to Protection?
From the Paper "Many states, especially California and Washington, have now enacted strict controls on workplace and public smoking (Robinson, 1996). Is it right to enforce such controls over a person's right to smoke? This issue has become a well-debated topic, debated by your average person on the street to your local law maker. OSHA since has put restrictions on workplace smoking, making it only possible in well-ventilated areas (Browner, 1993). Smoking is no longer allowed in your average office cubicle or lunch room. The courts are filled with lawsuits from nonsmokers who died of lung cancer after long-time exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplace. Can such accusations be validated? On a positive note, all of these developments have helped persuade many smokers to cut back or even quit all together. This new "awareness" has cut deeply into the tobacco industry's profits, but has not made enough of an impact to convince the population to quit smoking all together. In response to this change in behavior, the industry is fighting back, including Federal court hearings in an effort to overturn the EPA's decision (Morain, 1993). They have spent millions trying to block local public smoking restrictions, and in many cases, have succeeded in their fight. Most visible were advertising campaigns focused on spreading doubt and turning the EPA's decision into a government control issue. These efforts have worked, but only to a certain point."
Abstract Anti-smoking campaigns have led to a wave of smoking bans across the country during recent years. Whether one is for or against them, smoking bans are apparently here to stay, at least for a while. The paper shows that one of the national health objectives for the year 2010 is to establish laws, in all 50 states, that prohibit or restrict smoking in public places and work sites.
From the Paper "The United States Constitution contains a Bill of Rights, which protects individuals from the power of government, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868, guarantees all citizens of the United Sates equal protection, and due process, under the law (Levin pp). With this dedication to freedom, one would assume that Americans would have the ability, the right, to perform a perfectly legal act in a private establishment, however one would be mistaken (Levin pp)."
Abstract This paper states that, while there is a lot of evidence supporting both sides of the debate, it is obvious that there is not necessarily rock-solid evidence showing that smoking is, in all cases, completely harmful to the health of the smoker. The paper argues that there is, in fact, some very compelling evidence pointing to the possibility of positive applications in the medical field for cigarettes.
From the Paper "Smoking has become a national issue almost overnight. From antismoking laws to wrongful death lawsuits, America is fighting back against their new cigarette enemy. It was only a few decades ago that the general public did not even begin to consider the health risks of tobacco. Today, every classroom and public service announcement preaches the harmful effects of smoking and recruiting a new generation to live up to the desirable "cool not to smoke" image. We now look back upon the time before cigarette carton warning labels as the modern Dark Ages. However, for a moment consider another perspective, one where Joe Camel is not synonymous with Satan, and "smoker" is not another word for baby-killer. Although it seems impossible in today's educated world, could it be possible that smoking is not the great evil it has been made out to be? There are many smoker's rights activists and scientists alike who are trying to get the word out that smoking might very well be OK."
This paper discusses, in the form of a memo, the initiation of a company-wide smoking ban by presenting background material and an outline for each department to prepare for this ban.
Abstract This paper notifies all employees of the company that, beginning one month from today, the company will follow the guide-lines of federal and state requirements and institute a ban on smoking in the company buildings. The author stresses that the idea of a smoke-free environment is not only to encourage those employees who smoke to quit but also to protect the non-smokers from being affected by second-hand smoke, scientifically called Environmental Tobacco Smoke- ETS, which can do as much damage to persons nearby a smoker as if they themselves were smoking. The paper includes discussion points for each department about this No-Smoking rule including, although the company is offering financial assistance for a "Stop Smoking" course to encouraged stop smoking anywhere, designating a "Smoking Area" outside the building .
From the Paper "It is important for all of you to realize that this was not a sudden, hap-hazard decision, but the statistics were so overwhelmingly negative that we felt we had to do something to protect all our employees and to guarantee them, at least while on the job, a smoke-free environment. Later in this memo, we will explain some of the potential "solutions" to the smoking problem, but, as you will see, they simply did not solve that second-hand smoke situation. But, let me begin by a little background that alerted us to the dangers of second hand smoke."
Abstract This paper discusses the claim that smoking should not be allowed in public places. The problem of second-hand smoking as a result of smoking in public, is raised. The hazards of second-hand smoke are presented in the paper. The issue is addressed from a legislative point of view as well as from the business/company perspective. The paper provides a number of reasons why a company should endeavor to prevent smoking within its boundaries. The media's influence on public awareness of smoking and passive smoking hazards is examined.
From the Paper "Smoking should not be allowed in public places. This is based primarily on the fact that second-hand smoke is a health hazard, but it can also be argued that allowing people to smoke in public only perpetuates the habit and encourages others to take it up, thus adding to the health hazard in the long run. The private sector is already addressing the issue on a case-by-case basis, banning smoking in the workplace in many companies. Those who believe there is a problem may create a smoke-free area for customers or workers, or workers can demand that their place of business be entirely smoke free. Still, the government should take further action to protect the public where companies do not, including in shopping areas, workplaces, theaters, restaurants, and anywhere the public gathers. Allowing smoking on the street in fact encourages smoking, and discouraging smoking should be a primary effort for the public and private sectors to reduce the health costs paid by both."
Abstract In this essay the writer points out that statistics show that second-hand smoke is harmful to children. The writer also notes that few parents realize that when they smoke, their children are also smoking. It is important to look at the definition of second-hand smoke, the statistics about second-hand smoke, and specifically the health risks involved in children who inhale second-hand smoke. The writer maintains that parents should not smoke around their children because it endangers their children's health.
From the Paper "Why is the government so worried about smoking? Should smokers not have the freedom to smoke wherever they want? Why are they putting bans on smoking in public places? The answers is due to the facts and statistics that show that cigarette smoking is harmful to a person's health and even second-hand smoke is harmful to those who breathe it. Statistics show that second-hand smoke is harmful to children. Few parents realize that when they smoke, their children are also smoking. It is important to look at the definition of second-hand smoke, the statistics about second-hand smoke, and specifically the health risks involved in children who inhale second-hand smoke."
Abstract The following paper discusses the abundance of medical and scientific evidence in support of the damage caused by Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS), or second-hand smoke. This paper proposes that, there is now sufficient medical evidence to support a legal ban of smoking in public places.
From the Paper "One of the major functions of our country's legislation is to protect all Americans from being injured or killed as a result of the irresponsible and illegal behavior of others. There are specific laws in place to protect us from someone who drives recklessly or under the influence of alcohol and there are laws designed to shield us from those who may wish to harm us with violence."
Abstract Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death. Men who smoke are most at risk of death from lung cancer. The author argues that smokers are in great danger of dangerous health effects from smoking and discusses the various impacts caused by smoking.
From the Paper 'Causing more than 400,000 deaths each year, tobacco usage is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. Additionally, the direct medical costs amount more than $50 billion per year. More people are harmed and killed by smoking every year than they die of alcohol, drug abuse, AIDS, murders, car crashes, fires, and suicides. Nationally, more than 5 million years of potential life are lost each year as a result of smoking. Every day, nearly 3,000 young people under the age of 18 become regular smokers. Approximately 80% of adult smokers start smoking before the age of 18. Furthermore, approximately five million children presently living will die prematurely because of the decision to smoke cigarettes at adolescence."
Abstract The smoking of cigarettes is a huge problem throughout our society. The leading causes of preventable death result from smoking. The purpose of this discussion is to explain why smoking cessation programs should be sponsored by the government. It attempts to understand why the smoking habit is so difficult to conquer. In addition, the writer discusses the cessation programs that already exist and the ways in which they benefit smokers. It also explains why many smokers cannot afford a cessation program and need government assistance.
From the Paper "The teens featured in this article admit that there is a great deal of peer pressure associated with smoking. In addition, the nicotine found in smoke is highly addictive and it is the main reason why it is so difficult for teens and adults to quit once they have a habit. The article goes on to explain that through the Centers for Disease Control the government has spent a great deal of money attempting to keep teenagers from ever developing this habit."
Abstract This paper explains the effects of smoking cigarettes and tobacco especially the addictive quality of nicotine, physically and psychologically. The author points out health concerns of smoking and passive (second-hand) smoke. The paper relates the effect of smoking on the fetus and young people.
From the Paper "The effects of smoking tobacco are irreversible and may cause severe health conditions. In spite of this, individuals addicted to tobacco and smoking often cannot or will not stop smoking because the nicotine in tobacco smoke is so addictive both physically and psychologically. Being addicted does not mean that individuals cannot stop smoking but that it will be as difficult as with hard drugs. Nicotine is as highly addictive as heroin and cocaine. Like those drugs, a smoking addiction is marked by an uncontrollable dependence ..."
