ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL BLOGS

"This is no longer some crazy, California, Left Coast way of thinking"...maybe not, but the thinking still strains logic

     As I said in my previous post. "here we go...."  So, are the police, sheriffs and highway patrol  eventually going to be diverted from such minor things as, say, responding to accidents, murders and rapes in order to bring smokers to justice? Given the already-severe lack of affordable housing in California, how much strain on affordability will separate ventilation systems create?  From today's KTVU (TV station in the Bay Area) website:

"This [i.e., Sacramento's decision to regulate second-hand smoke] is no longer some crazy, California, Left Coast way of thinking," said Cynthia Hallett, executive director of Berkeley-based Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. She cited smoking bans that have been enacted or are being considered across the nation and in other countries.

The association unsuccessfully pushed legislation in 2003 that would have banned smoking in motor vehicles containing young children, and could try for a similar law next year, Knepprath said.

The association may also push for nonsmoking floors or wings in apartment buildings, much as hotels offer smoke-free areas, Knepprath said.

***

"People live in apartments all across California who are exposed to secondhand smoke on a daily basis," Knepprath said. "It drifts from a common area or another apartment."

Hallett said that could one day force regulations requiring separate ventilation systems for smoking and nonsmoking apartments.

CALIFORNIA DESIGNATES SECOND-HAND SMOKE AS A "TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANT"

     The California Air Resources Board made the following press release yesterday:

          California Identifies Second-Hand Smoke as a "Toxic Air Contaminant"

SACRAMENTO: Today the California Air Resources Board (ARB) identified environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), or second-hand smoke, as a Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC). ETS is now formally identified as an airborne toxic substance that may cause and/or contribute to death or serious illness. ARB's action to list ETS as a TAC was based on a comprehensive report on exposure and health effects of ETS.

"This new report reaffirms many of the adverse health effects associated with ETS, especially in children who live in homes where smoking occurs," said ARB Chairman, Dr. Robert Sawyer. "It also raises new concerns about its effects on women. All this strongly supported the need for the Air Board to identify ETS as a serious health threat."

***

Now that ETS is identified as a toxic air contaminant, the ARB must evaluate the need for action to reduce exposures. In this risk management step, ARB conducts an analysis that includes a review of measures already in place, available options and the costs for reducing the health risks from ETS exposure. The analysis is conducted using an open public process.

     So, here we go:  with a continuing budget deficit, complaints about already-underfunded programs and already high tax rates, the State of California is about to embark on yet a new (undoubtedly expensive) regulatory program.

     This is not to gainsay that second-hand smoke may well be the health hazard that the Air Resources Board claims such smoke to be-- however, it would seem that the marketplace takes care of the issue far more effectively (and less expensively) than government.  If people don't want to be around second-hand smoke, don't patronize the places that allow smoking!  What a concept.

     It is true that children living in the homes of parents who smoke don't have the choice as to whether or not to be around the smoke.  However, it is also true that children don't have a lot of choices which are instead made for them by their parents.  For example, parents choose (or, arguably, should choose) what television programs their minor children are allowed to watch.

     Just as it is highly unlikely that the government is going to attempt to send "television police" into private homes to ensure kids' minds are not being polluted by the shows they watch, it is equally unlikely that the Air Resources Board is going to propose measures authorizing the "smoking police" to invade private homes to check on kids' physical pollution from smoking.  That being the case, where there is a legitimate social regulatory interest (i.e., the public square), I say again-the market will take care of the problem much better than will the bureaucrats in Sacramento.