Conflict in the air

A recent Spectator news article states that the culmination of a three-year-long epic discourse might be a total ban of smoking on campus (“Senate under mandate to end smoking debate,” Jan. 26). University President Lee Bollinger’s recent call requires USenate to make a final decision on the fate of smoking on campus by the end of this semester, effectively bringing this interminable discussion to the forefront of campus politics. I am not a smoker, and never plan on being one, but an all-out smoking ban is the worst way to deal with this issue. I firmly believe the University Senate should have a policy for smoking on campus, but not one that completely prohibits it. Columbia, in effect, would be harming its reputation and image by banning smoking on campus.

I am by no means an advocate for smoking, but I do believe that everyone has the right to choose his or her own lifestyle. One of the main issues with people smoking on campus is the fear for personal health. The risks of secondhand smoke, as well as other negative side effects that can occur from smoking, are concerns that nonsmokers have when they walk past students smoking on campus. Of course their concerns are valid. After all, the surgeon general warns against smoking. Yet, the University has implemented a policy that tries to resolve the issue while still recognizing its students’ decisions. A complete ban of smoking on campus would unjustly penalize these student smokers for their liberty of choice.

It would be even worse to punish smokers for a choice that doesn’t harm anyone besides themselves. I know quite a few people who choose to smoke cigarettes here at Columbia. I also know that they all choose to do so for many different reasons. Some of them smoke to calm their nerves, or to relax after a very stressful day, or just because they like to smoke. They have every right to smoke on this campus because they aren’t harming anyone. Walking by a smoker outside a building, while a small annoyance if you are anti-smoking, won’t do anything harmful besides irking you. The secondhand smoke won’t damage your lungs—it will dissipate into the air. Call me idealistic, but I believe that the University Senate can truly come to a better solution than one that would totally prohibit smoking on the campus. The current smoking policy on campus is rather vague, but it is still in its early phases and has time to become something better. I believe that it is time to finally end a debate that most would agree has taken too long. In order to do so, the senate needs to realize that the current plan is a step in the right direction. It creates a zone 20 feet away from buildings for smokers, a step in the right direction. Also, it doesn’t penalize any group—it creates a space (which should be defined in clearer terms than it is now) out of the way of busy doorways for people to smoke.

The smoking issue on campus is an important dialogue to have because it promotes discussion between groups in a democratic manner. Banning smoking from campus does not promote anything but a strict regime by the University and a bunch of angry protests occupying smoke-free spaces on campus, which would obviously be the whole campus at that point. I would be severely disappointed in the University Senate if it allowed an all-out smoking ban to occur. I believe that the ban would not be in favor of the student body’s popular opinion—it would only serve to please a certain demographic of nonsmokers. There are better solutions, including the current policy, which would have a far more positive impact on the Columbia community as a whole as well as resolve the issue for good. I strongly encourage nonsmokers and smokers to make sure the ban of smoking on campus doesn’t come to fruition. It would serve only to create more problems worse than the one it was intended to resolve.

The author is a Columbia College junior majoring in English.