Smoke-Free Eating

Weak state law should at least let cities decide

May 11, 2002

The Michigan Supreme Court dealt the final blow this week to Marquette's attempt to ban smoking in all its restaurants. By letting a lower court ruling stand, the court in effect agreed that cities must stay aligned with state law on smoking in restaurants. Which means: It's time to change state law.

Most restaurants already have gone way beyond the state's wimpy standards, which say restaurants "may" have "up to" a half or three-quarters of their tables available to smokers, depending on the size of the restaurant. Many a restaurant already has gone nonsmoking, and the law would seem to have room for Marquette to say that establishments within the city limits may have none of their seats available for smoking. Alas, it was not to be.

If the Legislature doesn't have the guts to go for a statewide ban on smoking where food is served, it can at least specifically permit municipalities to do so. Lawmakers should also cut back on the ratio of smoking tables allowed; these days, the idea that up to 75 percent of tables can be for smokers seems downright foul.

The experience in California, which has a statewide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, has been positive for citizens in general and waitstaff in particular. Considering Michigan's ratings at or near the top of almost every bad health list that comes out, it's well worth trying here -- city by city, if necessary.

And thanks, Marquette, for fighting the good fight to the end.

Am I crazy or what?

You do not trust the owner of property to do what he thinks best, you want the owner of the property to do what you think best.

You fail to appreciate that a restaurant is private property. That customers are guests of the owner of the property. You fail to realize that as you can make the rules for your guests, others can make the rules for theirs. You want the Police to force your rules on others.

People have a choice in where they chose to spend their money. If they do not want to spend it in a smoky bar the answer is simple to those who value freedom. People are free to spend your money else where. If you despise freedom, and chose the tyranny of the majority to do your bidding, the answer is obvious, take the freedom of choice, away from the property owner, and impose your will.

The Free Press thanked Marquette, for trying to ban smoking in all of it's restaurants. Marquette does not own any restaurants. Citizens who own property do.