Ammara Ansari CAS 138T Persuasion Essay Anne Kretsinger-Harries April 1st, 2013 Smoking in PA - Let's Start with

h State Schools According to Americas Health Rankings of 2012, 22.4% - roughly a quarter of the adult population of Pennsylvania is addicted to smoking the cigarette that rests between their index and middle fingers (Americas Health Rankings). They are addicted to the sight of the fumes, the smell of the toxins, and the feeling of relaxation they believe comes with smoking. This figure does not take into account the minors who smoke tobacco. Imagine! More than a quarter of the entire population of just one state is hooked on smoking! What is not surprising is that it causes problems such as cancers, weak immune systems, health risks for unborn children, and second-hand smoke which is just as dangerous. The government has tried to overcome this smoking problem in Pennsylvania by implementing certain policies. This legislation, nonetheless, has proven to be relatively ineffective. In order to reduce the number of heavy smokers in Pennsylvania, the government should completely ban smoking on every college campus in the state with six months prior notice. Yes, cigarette businesses will be hurt. People will feel that their liberties are being curtailed. People will be forced to stop smoking even though they are addicted to it. This solution, nonetheless, is practical. It would mean fewer people would be addicted to smoking or second-hand smoke. The environment will be cleaner. Ultimately, there will be fewer preventable deaths. Everyone knows that nicotine negatively affects smokers. What people do not take into consideration is that everybody else around them is harmed as well. Those who are prone to

second-hand smoke also face many health problems. Second-hand smoke also affects unborn children. It causes many of the same types of cancers as regular smoking as well. Furthermore, the American Cancer Society mentions that those children who are asthmatic can incur further breathing problems (EPA; CDCP). According to the World Health Organization, "scientific evidence has firmly established that there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke, a pollutant that causes serious illness in adults and children, and that implementing 100% smoke-free environments is the only effective way to protect the population from the harmful effects of exposure to secondhand smoke (Americans for Nonsmokers Rights). Those who do not smoke, then, are not given the opportunity to breathe the clean air that everyone deserves to inhale. Children grow up living with smoke in the air. They start college and it is normal to see people smoking in a corner. Oftentimes, those who are addicted to second-hand smoke start smoking themselves. In addition, it is during the years one spends at a university that smoking becomes a real long life addiction. In fact, about 99 percent of adults who smoke every day started when they were 26 or younger, according to the surgeon general s 2012 report to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Bangor Daily News). It is during the first four years of college that people actually become more addicted to nicotine and tobacco. Moreover, out of every three young smokers, "one will quit and one will die of tobacco-related causes" (Bangor Daily News). These facts are extremely outrageous and can make one wonder why so much of our population still smokes. The government has indeed taken action, but the evidence previously mentioned indicates that there is still more work to be done. The state of Pennsylvania has implemented certain legislation in order to reduce the number of heavy smokers. In September 2008, for example, Pennsylvania banned smoking

across 14 different state campuses (The Associated Press; Schackner). This bans jurisdiction included outside areas and parking lots. The attempt at improving the health of the environment and the human population is commendable. It would seem that this sort of legislation would gain much support and actually help to fight smoking. Surprisingly, however, this particular policy actually caused much protest for three main reasons. Firstly, the ban itself was spontaneous and did not give smokers the chance to adjust to the new policy. Those who smoked would be breaking the law because they could not immediately give up their addiction. In fact, Steve Dugan, a college student from Pittsburg, reportedly said it would have been better if there were more warning given (Associated Press). Those who were addicted to smoking had no way of changing their habits in such a short notice. It would seem extreme to expect anyone to abandon cigarette consumption in such a short period of time. Secondly, there were no designated smoking areas. There was no specific place on campus where students, faculty, or staff could smoke (Schackner). Many did not appreciate that the Pennsylvania government did not try to reach a middle ground, especially since the policy was enforced in such an abrupt fashion. Thirdly, Pennsylvanias Labor Relations Board felt that the government had no right to implement such a ban without consulting or negotiating with its unions (Beja Marc). It was so strange that the Pennsylvania government threw a bomb over the heads of all those who stepped foot into university campuses. The government actually failed to implement a policy through which it could gain support even though its intentions were pure. In protest to the ban, those on college campuses humorously gathered at certain times just to smoke and release fumes into the air in front of everyone. Nobody was charged with any offense. All of these factors eventually led to the overturning of the ban in all fourteen universities by the Pennsylvanias Labor

Relations Board in May 2009 (Beja). This was definitely a pragmatic decision, since the legislation was deemed too harsh. Since 2009s incident, there have been some changes. According to the American Nonsmokers Rights Foundation, there are some schools across the US starting in 2013 that have forbidden smoke across campuses. In the foundation's report of January 2nd, 2013, there are a total of eight universities/colleges in Pennsylvania that have banned smoking across their campuses. Four of them are public universities whereas the rest are private. These include The Community College of Beaver County, Lehigh Carbon Community College, Montgomery Country Community College, and Reading Area Community College. Each of them gave warning to students, faculty, and staff that the rule would be administered in three months. This allowed for heavy smokers to ease it off without being completely cut off at the beginning. Moreover, the government did not enforce these sanctions upon the universities since it did not work out the first time. The act of these eight universities was voluntary (American Nonsmokers Rights Foundation). However, one must note that there are a total of thirty-four colleges and state-related/-owned schools in total in Pennsylvania. The colleges that have accepted a smokefree environment are not even the biggest schools. For example, Pennsylvania State University, one of the largest state schools in the United States, has not ratified the policy in any one of its 25 campuses (Pennsylvania State University). This is shocking indeed. It is obvious that the good deed of a few schools is not going to be enough to reduce the threat of second-hand smoke and the greater chance of addiction for college students and future generations. We cannot rely on pure will and determination of a few people to relieve nicotinerelated habits. Desire is not enough. Real action is needed. If around 2,230,045 of the approximately 9,955,588 people over eighteen in Pennsylvania smoke, vast changes need to be

made (Google; Annie E. Casey Foundation). The Pennsylvania government needs to enforce a complete ban on smoking across all state universities with a six-month prior notice starting at the beginning of the academic year. Government intervention is necessary. Indeed, this sort of policy might induce some opposition, but overall it is practical and robust enough to solve the situation in the best way. There are definitely some counter-arguments to this sort of legislation. First of all, it can be seen as restricting ones liberties to do as one chooses. For instance, when the ban was implemented in 2008 across fourteen universities, many on Facebook groups were calling the whole situation fascist (Schackner). Many would feel that this sort of rule would limit personal freedoms that are part of American culture. If I want to smoke, I can smoke. There should be no rules that cut me off from doing what I think is necessary or pleasurable. And there is not even a hint of rebuttal against smoking in either the Constitution or the Amendments. When college officials were discussing a smoke-ban in George Washington University, it was said that kicking out smokers would destroy the basic freedom of everyone; from the student, to the worker, to the faculty, to the woman walking by, to the man working in a food truck (Johnson). Furthermore, this law would generally be inconvenient for smokers. They would have to go offcampus either by car or by foot if they wanted to smoke at all. This is because there would be no designated smoking areas at all across campuses (Bangor Daily News). Plus businesses revenues would be hurt because fewer people would be buying the cigarettes. However, despite this counter-argument, this policy is probably the most practical way to deal with the situation. A ban such as this would definitely eliminate the exposure to second-hand smoke, create a culture that encourages users to quit and set the smoke-free and tobacco-free campus as the social norm in our society (Johnson). The citizens of Pennsylvania would learn to adjust to a

new healthier lifestyle. An article in the Washington Post mentions college is a time in life when young smokers cement their addictions, experts say, and the bans make it more difficult for smokers to light up (Johnson). If the ban were not throughout entire campuses, then smokers would still be allowed the choice to smoke in certain areas, therefore defeating the purpose of the ban. If we actually were concerned for the environment and the health of the people, we would make sure that smoking is not allowed at all (at least in college campuses). Furthermore, consider the issue of freedom and rights once more. Smokers feel that it is their right to choose whether they can smoke or not. However, breathing in clean air is more than just a right - it is a necessity without which we cannot live. Lastly, if the ban were to be implemented at the beginning of the school year, there are extra benefits. People would be given a little between two to three months before the end of the school year to ease off the tobacco. The senior undergraduates would be preparing for another life beyond university, whether as future participants in the labor force or future graduate students. It would be good to make sure that these students stopped smoking before they had to continue with their lives. In the end, there would be fewer adult smoke-addicts. There would be fewer people feeling the urge to smoke a pack of cigarettes before they fall asleep at night. Overall, smoking cigarettes in Pennsylvania is a serious epidemic that needs to be taken into consideration by the government. And although Pennsylvanias legislation has passed policies that include the banning of smoking across fourteen different state colleges, it seems like there is not enough being done. There are many who still smoke, and the effects are horrible on both those who smoke at a young age and those who are susceptible to second-hand smoke. Therefore, it is imperative for Pennsylvania to prohibit smoking across all state schools with a six-month prior notice. There will be clashes. People will feel that their liberty is being taken

away from them, and those who are smoking will not necessarily want to give it up. Yet many people would reduce their intake of nicotine. Second-hand smoke will become less of a problem. We must take into consideration not just our own health, but also the health of our communities and the environment. If we were to reduce the number of heavy smokers in Pennsylvania, it would become a safer and happier place to live for those who smoke and those who do not.

Works Cited American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation. American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation. U.S. Colleges and Universities with Smokefree and Tobacco-Free Policies. 2 Jan. 2013. Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. Model Policy for a Smokefree College/University. Feb. 2013. Annie E. Casey Foundation, The. "Total population by child and adult populations (Percent) 2011." The Annie E. Casey Foundation: Data center kids count. May 2012. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossstates/Rankings.aspx?ind=99>. The Associated Press. "Pennsylvania first to ban smoking at all state universities." USA Today. 16 Sept. 2008. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-0916-smoking-pa-universities_N.htm>. Beja, Marc. "Labor Board Overrules Campus-Smoking Ban at 14 Pennsylvania Universities." The Chronicle of Higher Education. 27 May 2009. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://chronicle.com/article/Labor-Board-Overrules/47645>. "Campuses should get rid of designated smoking areas, ban tobacco entirely." Bangor Daily News Opinion. 27 Sept. 2012. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://bangordailynews.com/2012/09/27/opinion/editorials/campuses-should-get-rid-ofdesignated-smoking-areas-ban-tobacco-entirely/>. Google. "Popultaion of Pennsylvania." Google. 31 Mar. 2013 <https://www.google.com/search?client=safari>. "Health Effects of Cigarette Smoking." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 10 Jan. 2012. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 31 Mar. 2013

<http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/effects_cig_smoki ng/>. "Health Effects of Exposure to Secondhand Smoke." EPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Protection Agency. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://www.epa.gov/smokefre/healtheffects.html>. Johnson, Jenna. "Smoking bans pick up momentum on college campuses, despite protests." Washington Post. 25 Nov. 2012. Washington Post. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-11-25/local/35508172_1_americannonsmokers-tobacco-ban-ban-advocates>. "Pennsylvania Smoking (1990 - 2012)." America's Health Rankings. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://www.americashealthrankings.org/PA/Smoking/2012>. Pennsylvania State University. "Penn State." Penn State Campuses. <http://www.psu.edu/academics/campuses>. Schackner, Bill. "Smoking banned entirely at colleges." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 13 Sept. 2008. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/education/smoking-bannedentirely-at-colleges-410131/>. "Secondhand Smoke: What is secondhand smoke?" American Cancer Society. 31 Mar. 2013 <http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke>.