Foundation for Economic Education
Fully Informed Jury Association
Separation of School and State
Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations
Property Rights Smoke Out
by Marc Guttman, MD
The recent unanimous city council vote in Belmont, CA to disallow smoking in residences in multi-unit apartment buildings is yet another example of government intrusion into our property rights.
In the free society protected by our constitution, it is illegal for the government to ban smoking or any personal behavior choices on private property, unless these activities are an initiation of force against either others’ rights or an indisputable public good. Second-hand smoke exposure in a space that one does not own and occupies by choice falls a little short of this very important distinctive line. Granted this is unfortunate for nonsmokers like me, but to live freely, we must ardently defend everyone’s right to live freely.
To libertarians this assault on our property rights is little different than the confiscation of our homes by eminent domain or the tax on our labor.
A friend recently bemoaned that the smoke in the hallway of her apartment building from her neighbor’s cigarette-smoking will likely encourage her to change residencies. She asks me whether she “should have to move,” because of someone else’s behavior. Approaching this scenario with the libertarian principles of self-ownership and nonaggression, I argue that the government has no right to enforce on my friend’s behalf her will on to her landlord nor her neighbor. Because the landlord has allowed smoking on his or her property, he or she will likely lose my friend as a customer, just as many bar owners have lost customers who are understandably less tolerant of noxious second-hand cigarette smoke. The important principle is that these are decisions only the property owner and the willing patrons can decide, not the voting majority.
In fact, did not Belmont’s City Council get it entirely backwards? According to an article at InsideBayArea.com, “Vice Mayor Coralin Feierbach said police won't be stopping people from smoking on the streets. It's really aimed at those who live in multi-family dwellings…” Would it not be more appropriate to ban smoking in our unavoidable and communally-invested public spaces, such as municipal buildings and public parks, and within public housing? Disregarding it being unlawful, does it make sense to ban smoking in private establishments, where people gather and associate by choice, and encourage smokers to smoke outside in public spaces?
An important clarification need be stated and if you have been upset by my position, read closely. If someone’s smoke were to invade your personally-owned private space, I believe you ought to have recourse in the law to protect yourself from their intrusion. Homeowner associations of private residence owners can help dictate building policy. Also, I do not believe people’s cigarette smoking is quantitative enough to affect one of our most important public goods, the air.
Cigarette smoke is hazardous to individuals’ health and I strongly advocate for tobacco avoidance. Our society would be significantly improved on several levels if people decreased their tobacco consumption. These facts do not in any way, however, allow citizens to pass laws preventing other citizens from smoking on private property.
Remember that the goal of our founders and first citizens in forming a government was to protect individual liberty. As freedom is the most moral and universally advantageous arrangement for men to govern themselves, we ought to endeavor to steer our country to it.