Smoking ban boldness

Since the announcement of former IU President Adam Herbert’s plan to ban smoking on all IU campuses, the IU community has been at odds, taking up sides drawn along a smoke-blurred line. On Thursday Provost Karen Hanson sent by e-mail the policy that students, faculty and staff will be required to follow as of January 2008. The policy itself will be beneficial if it rids the IU campus of smoking – preventing the harm caused by second-hand smoke, without hampering the rights of individuals. But as many times as this sentiment has been portrayed, the number of questions about the enforceability of IUB’s new policy grow with every dissenter – and now with at least one supporter.\nThe policy calls on the students, faculty and staff to assist in the enforcement of the policy and to encourage compliance among their peers and other campus inhabitants. Those found in violation of the rule that bans smoking on all IU owned or leased property will be referred to the appropriate disciplinary office, depending on the violator’s standing with the University. Students will be referred to the Office of the Dean of Students (I would know, having been referred there myself after violating the 30-feet rule my freshman year). The policy also outlines cessation programs available to all for little or no cost.\nEnforcing this ban seems unlikely – an admittance, that on the surface, seems like a blow to supporters of the policy. However, in reading the new rules outlined in the smoking ban, it is clear that the policy is not, and possibly never was, about enforcement. By calling on members of the IU community to compel smokers to operate within the bounds of the rule, the policy seeks to embolden those who support the policy to request others to cease smoking. With the weight of the University behind people who do not wish to be in the vicinity of cigarettes, social pressure to stop smoking will hopefully cause smokers to avoid the habit on campus. Add in the possibility of a penalty assessment that would accompany a discovered violation of the rule and the “I’m gonna tell on you” approach actually has some force, even though it seems unlikely that initially people will employ that tactic. And while smokers will complain that they are not children to be chastised in such a manner, the ban is based on their health, and, more importantly, those they rob of that choice inhale the carcinogens in second-hand smoke.\nSo, although it will be difficult for the university to actually enforce the rule, the ban may still accomplish the goal it sets out to do, by backing those who do not wish to inhale second-hand smoke. In addition, the cessation programs won’t simply hang addicted smokers out to dry but will assist them in kicking the habit. If this effect comes to fruition, then the health of the entire University will benefit.