As reported earlier by The Statesman, the Chancellor’s Task Force for a Tobacco-Free SUNY (CTFTF SUNY) called last year for legislation to ban tobacco use across all SUNY property.  However, the legislation that got introduced into the state legislature took too long to vote, leading to the death of the bills.  This is a good turn of events, and no efforts should be made to revive the bills.  Chancellor Nancy Zimpher’s CTFTF SUNY, while well-intentioned, is wrong in its attempt to prohibit the use of tobacco in the schools that make up the SUNY system.  Rather than establishing the prohibition of tobacco, all of the Task Force’s efforts should be put toward treating nicotine addiction and getting help for tobacco users.

Prohibitionists generally make one of two claims.  First, they argue that SUNY-wide tobacco prohibition will help prevent tobacco use, thereby increasing the health of SUNY students.  This, however, flies in the face of evidence to the contrary on the national scale.  Our war on drugs has failed to stop both the demand and supply of drugs in America.  United Nations data shows that the drug trade is thriving despite years of international efforts to quell it.  Similarly, a SUNY-wide ban of tobacco use will not stop its users from consuming the substance.  They will simply be pushed underground, similar to our university’s numerous weed smokers.  The official proclamations of the SUNY Board of Trustees will not hold a candle to the urges of Stony Brook’s sufferers of nicotine addiction.  As the goal of this prohibition is to “improve the health of our academic and social communities,” according to the minutes of the first CTFTF SUNY meeting, prohibition should not be the Task Force’s goal, for users will just keep consuming the drug out of sight as is currently done by users of illegal drugs.  Marijuana, a non-physically addictive drug, is used by students regularly despite it being a Schedule I drug whose supply and demand are actively under attack by the DEA. How much more will the physically addictive drug tobacco continue to be used when it is only SUNY that is restricting it through only going after demand?

Second, they argue that non-smokers should not have to suffer the negative health effects of second-hand smoke around them.  They are right to state that; it is for that very reason that smoking is currently banned indoors at Stony Brook.  However, the few seconds spent walking past someone smoking a cigarette outside have not been proven to be harmful to human health.  In fact, the studies which rightfully label second-hand smoking as a health risk never studied the effects of outside second-hand smoke.   A few studies have considered outside second-hand smoke; two of those studies conducted by UC San Francisco and Stanford suggest that modest distances of three to six feet (depending on wind direction) can drastically reduce the effects of second-hand smoke. Also, these studies assume that one is spending time near the smoker while they are smoking instead of just walking past them.

Unless research can prove that outside second-hand smoke is harmful in minute quantities that are experienced for only a few seconds, the SUNY system should not be telling SUNY students what legal substances they can consume.  And if the research does prove this, or if some student wiser than I dismantles my argument and presents a compelling case for the smoking ban, it should be remembered that Stony Brook University already has some anti-smoking rules in place.  Despite the experiences of everyone on this campus, there is a nominal ban on smoking within 25 feet of university buildings.  Before creating any new anti-tobacco rules, Stony Brook needs to be able to properly enforce the laws it currently has on the books.

Prohibitionists mean well, and the goal of reducing the health risks that tobacco use causes is a laudable one.  But with only the most minimal of possible effects resulting from outside second-hand smoking, a culture of underground drug use at Stony Brook and the clear example of our failed national war on drugs, the reality is that prohibition just does not work when trying to eradicate a harmful drug.  Instead, we should be focusing on outreach to addicts, education on harmful effects and programs designed to help convince students to quit the habit.  Banning tobacco on SUNY campuses will not convince anyone to quit, and until there is research showing outside second-hand smoke harms others, the Task Force should change its focus to helping addicts, not pushing them underground.