Common Council Vendetta Against Big Tobacco Takes a Step Back

The Madison Common Council finally stepped down from the pulpit yesterday and passed some exceptions to the draconian anti-smoking laws.

In a debate Tuesday that ranged from stogies to spittoons, the Madison City Council voted 12-8 to allow cigar and pipe smoking in cigar bars and smokeless tobacco in public places.

The exemption would allow cigar- and pipe-smoking in "tobacco bars," defined as bars that get 10 percent or more of their income from on-site sales of non-cigarette tobacco products. The only current bar that would qualify is Maduro, 117 E. Main St., in Verveer's district.

While I'm against the ban in taverns, I was especially incensed by the ban on smokeless tobacco and the fact that tobacco bars were not exempted. These aspects of the law showed that the ulterior motive behind the it was actually government-sponsored behavior modificiation and that the law wasn't a pure act of altruism towards bartenders, the majority of whom, see favor smoking in taverns. That the Common Council justified the prohibition of smokeless tobacco products in taverns by saying that their use constitutes a health risk to servers was just positively Orwellian. And failing to provide an exemption for tobacco or cigar bars was merely an act of contempt on the part of the City Council for these types of establishments. It was about the government deciding that it did not like a particular kind of business and ratifying a law which would, for all intents and purposes, ensure the closure of such businesses in the city and the prevention of them opening in the future.

Ald. Judy Compton took issue with the allowance of the use of chewing tobacco and said:

"I'm picturing a little inebriated (person) with a stubbed toe kicking a spittoon by accident and all that sloshing over it into an open wound," Compton said. She added that a giant bucket of spit could be considered a greater hazard than tobacco smoke.

Does anyone have access to Nexus/Lexus? Can someone scan the medical literature and find an example of chew spit spilling into an open wound and bringing dire consequences? Is this a new concern or was it taken into consideration when the tobacco ban was passed? I'm thinking that the new law isn't going to increase the use of chewing tobacco in taverns far beyond what it was prior to the ban. Were spitoons considered a hazard before? I think the city ought to open a multi-million dollar investigation into the potential armageddon we face here with the possibility of tobacco-laden saliva entering a papercut. I demand to know the effects of infection via fine cut vs. long cut. Does Copenhagen pose a greater risk than Skoal?

Here's a quote from Ald. Brian Benford:

"I believe that when you look at the health issues, yes, there are those dangers, but overall in our attempt to stop big tobacco, we’ve hurt small businesses. I don’t want to hurt this small business.”

I feel stupid now because I missed the whole thing about the Common Council's mission to stop big tobacco in the last election. Is this what we elect alderpeople for? To go after big tobacco? You see, the ban wasn't merely in aid of bartenders, it was about exacting revenge on an industry. What industry will the Common Council set its sites on next?