Tobacco Is Not On the Children's Menu
Children, particularly under the age of 12, should not be exposed to second-hand smoke under any circumstances, no matter where they are. It should be a state legislature, U.S. Congress and parental priority to guarantee this minimal protection.
New Westchester County, NY sanitary code regulations that were to have gone into effect July 1, 1996 and that will allow smoke-free dining in the dining rooms of all Westchester restaurants successfully withstood a legal challenge by Westchester restaurant and tavern owners. The judge did set the effective date at Sept. 1, 1996 giving restaurant owners additional time to prepare for the new regulations.
The New York State legislature has been working on passing legislation that would prohibit local governments from imposing stricter health regulations than state regulations. As yet, this legislation has not been passed. There is now a movement afoot in Albany to grandfather laws by local municipalities but still have state control over future laws. Anything that permits the state to weaken local health regulations is unacceptable.
The consequences of this legislation would not only exacerbate the well-known, gross catastrophic penalties of smoking - summed up by deaths from tobacco-related diseases at well over a thousand people each day (440,000 annually) - but would also re-create two significant dangers specific to Westchester County's children.
First: the legislation makes no provision for protecting children of any age against second-hand smoke. The inherently dangerous implications are obvious.
Second and much more important: because it would accustom children to the mixed odor of tobacco smoke and food, the proposal would insidiously acclimate and predispose children to smoking later on, themselves. And not so much later on, at that. (In addition, passage would give restaurant employees the choice of a job that exposes them to carcinogens, or no job at all.)
If this legislation passes it would be the first time the state weakened local health regulations. The proposal ignores rising health care costs and the many people who worked for Clean Indoor Air Legislation.
It is not worth losing another chunk of another generation to premature death from tobacco smoke. Children are worth more than a few puffs of smoke.
Response
1: Hypocrisy and Disempowerment in the Tobacco Debate
Response 2: Ban Smoking at Building
Entrances