I’m a firm believer that it is not the government’s place to tell people that they cannot choose to put themselves in harm’s way.

In light of that, one of the major factors I take into consideration when supporting or voting for a candidate is my perception of their stance on paternalism in government.  I do not wish to support someone who feels that it is their place as a legislator to act as a parent towards their constituency.

Given that, and given that everyone who walks into a smoking establishment does so with informed consent to expose themselves to second-hand smoke, I think the health argument is specious.

Practically speaking, 30 years ago it was nearly impossible to find an establishment that even had a non-smoking section.  Today, the opposite is true.  More and more restaurants are choosing to not allow smoking in their at all.  In Anna I count seven dine-in restaurants that disallow smoking to one that does. The issue of non-smokers not having dining choices is off the table. This is yet another example of the market self-regulating without government intervention.

Choice is good.  Choice is great for business.  Where Liberty is concerned, Choice is essential.

The city council has an astonishing power at their fingertips:  The power to take away choice.  I urge them to exercise that power judiciously and with great restraint.