The Anti-Smoking Slippery Slope on Capitol Hill

As goes Capitol Hill, so goes the nation? What started as a Pelosi-imposed smoking ban turns into a ban on even selling tobacco products in the hallowed halls of our precious democracy. The Politico explains.

Smoke 'em if you got 'em in reason's extensive tobacco archives. And read Jacob Sullum's breathtaking book on the anti-smoking movement.

Comments

[J sub D]

[jaw drops] I'm temporarily speechless.

[joe]

Smoking on the Senate side was banned under the Republicans in 94, but you could still smell the cigar smoke coming out of Rules Committee Chair Solomon's office, even with the door closed.

[sixstring]

Some enterprising young intern will see this as an opportunity to subsidize his stipend.

Hell, if this means staffers will have to take longer breaks to get their smokes instead of spending that time writing bad legislation, then I'm all for it.

[Guy Montag]

All the more reason to keep that bunch on their side of the river and I will stay on mine.

Come to think of it, we got scolded by a staffer at The Big Hunt for our cigar lighting method on their balcony last Friday. seems everything in DC is infected with this nonsense.

sixstring, I suspect that the staffers will be falling over each other trying to be the one who delivers smokes to the boss.

[Guy Montag]

BTW, I prefer genetically modified tobacco oveer that free-range stuff.

[Taktix?]

...has got Capitol Hill smokers - we hate to say it - smoking mad.

If you hate to say it, why did you say it again in the caption? Why the unnecessary comma?

You know some lackey in the Post newsroom is calling all his friends, telling them what a clever line he thought up and got in the paper...

[Taktix?]

...in the Politico newsroom...

Dammit, joe's rule strikes again...

[James]

If you look at the taxpayer funded healthcare plans that Congressmen and women get than I have no problem with any bans on tobacco or smoking at the Capitol.

[Lynda F]

Then James, since the cost of healthcare is your major concern, you would also have no problem with any ban on all sugars, fats, alcohol, sodas, etc.

Our elected officials should ONLY be consuming the foods and beverages that the health insurance companies deem acceptable. Right? Because basically that is exactly what you are saying.

While we're at it, what habits or activities do you engage in that might mean you require healthcare services that in the end may raise MY premiums?

[Gus]

"Our elected officials should ONLY be consuming the foods and beverages that the health insurance companies deem acceptable. Right? Because basically that is exactly what you are saying."

No, he didn't say that. Please take a logic course.

[zig zag man]

Psst, hey, want a ciggi? I got longs, lights, 100's, reds. $5.

[James]

My argument is that Gov't officials recieve TAXPAYER FUNDED healthcare, in fact they get about the best healthcare money can buy, now I work at a job where they will not hire you if you smoke because they provide healthcare (in this case private, but it costs the company a lot of money)...so I don't see the problem with keeping these people from smoking on the job.

[Ayn_Randian]

My argument is that Gov't officials recieve TAXPAYER FUNDED healthcare...I don't see the problem with keeping these people from smoking on the job

Awesome! So when we all get HillaryCare, that will mean the government has the right to keep everybody from smoking.

And eating shit that's bad for you. And drinking.

See, Gus, that is what he said, you just didn't know it. Try taking a course in common-sense, dude.

[prolefeed]

Seems like a business opportunity for some entrepreneur willing to defy Pelosi and smuggle smokes in and sell them to staff.

And an opportunity for representatives from tobacco states to defy the ban and get arrested for smoking in the place Pelosi banned, thus garnering lots of free publicity.