Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Campus smoking ban up for vote

UT students given chance to vote on three smoking options

Published: Thursday, October 29, 2009

Updated: Thursday, October 29, 2009 06:10

Though the debate over UT’s Main Campus going smoke-free seemingly died down last year, the possibility of a smoking ban could soon be realized.

Members of the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Prevention Committee are planning to allow students to vote on what level of smoking they want to be allowed on UT’s Main Campus.

The vote will include three options for students to choose from, including a complete smoking ban anywhere on Main Campus, a partial ban where students can smoke only in designated areas or to continue to allow students to smoke on campus.

“The smoking debate was discussed last year during alcohol awareness week. It may have appeared to have been dropped because the school year ended, yet during the summer, … representatives from Residence Life researched other campuses’ policies as well as the policy at UTMC for anti-smoking,” said Erica Hughes, a sophomore majoring in psychology. “Now that there is more research done then the committee can move forward and get the opinions of the students.”

Hughes is a Student Government representative who sits on the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Committee.

“[The vote] will be posted up on the myUT page. It will be [similar to] voting for homecoming king and queen and student government president and vice president so that we get a general opinion,” Hughes said.

The American Lung Association does the Great American Smoke Out every year, and this year the Smoke Out is Nov. 19. Director of Residence Life Jo Campbell, who chairs the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Prevention Committee, said the committee’s goal is to have the vote in November to correlate with the smoke out.

Campbell said the goal is to have the vote available for students on the MyUT Web page sometime around Nov. 19 in correlation with the Great American Smoke Out.

Campbell said the no-smoking trend is becoming more common on college campuses across the country. According to the American Lung Association, 122 universities in the U.S. are smoke-free and more are debating the possibility of being smoke-free. The UT Health Science Campus is already a smoke-free campus.

Campbell said health concerns were the main motivator for members of the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Prevention Committee to rehash the smoking debate and give students three voting options.

Campbell and Hughes both agreed that the health of those affected by secondhand smoke is important and that allowing people on campus to smoke has caused problems for those who don’t, especially those affected by asthmatic symptoms.

“From talking with other students about this issue, I have personally heard about asthmatic symptoms increasing while walking on campus. Plus the risk of secondhand smoke is always out there,” Hughes said.

“Becoming more restrictive would be to look at designated areas. Not 30 feet from any building, but there are four areas where you can smoke,” Campbell said.

On Main Campus, smokers are not permitted to light up indoors and are supposed to smoke at least 30 feet from any building, but students like Gerry Seidel, a sophomore majoring in special education, are becoming fed up with those who aren’t following this rule.

“I’d definitely want campus to be smoke free. I hate walking out of class and getting hit in the face with smoke; people are constantly smoking around the buildings and it gets really annoying. But I think it would be better overall if the entire campus was no-smoking,” Seidel said.

Campbell said it is every student and faculty member’s responsibility to be an enforcer of the current rules regarding smoking and any changes that may come out of the vote.

“As I exit buildings and have to go through smoke from people who aren’t 30 feet away, I kindly ask them to move and remind them how far away they are supposed to be,” she said.

The committee is made up of students from Student Government, CAP and other organizations, and is open to everyone who wants to join.

Hughes said the committee used input from both smokers and non-smokers while discussing possible policy changes so the opinion would be as unbiased as possible.

The committee hopes for an overwhelming number of students to vote for the smoke free option, Campbell said.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

13 comments

Liz
Wed Nov 11 2009 22:13
I don't think completely banning smoking on campus would be very effective, and it does seem rather dictatorial. For my own sake, though, I wish it were practical. As it is, I am really hoping that we at least get stronger restrictions on where people can smoke. People don't seem to understand that some people have health conditions that make even a very small amount of smoke a serious problem. There are people with asthma, smoke allergies, or, in my case, cigarette smoke (even the scent of it on someone who has recently lit up) is a strong migraine trigger. I am sick and tired of walking behind someone smoking or coming out of a building to get a faceful of smoke from someone who doesn't follow the 30-foot rule. Ruin your own lungs, if you like, but please don't ruin my day as well.
Jared
Sat Oct 31 2009 14:43
they should ban it. and mcniel high school senior, UT is in OHIO. The University of Toledo. Not the University of Texas at Austin. Not talking about the Longhorns. Talking about the Rockets.
harleyrider1978
Sat Oct 31 2009 08:23
SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor..................thats right water..........you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made......thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons.......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ........they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science......... Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at:

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057

concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers.....

meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:

Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent " The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: 'There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.' " And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations.

The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.)

The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It's not true. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/

As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
-harleyrider1978

McNeil HS Senior
Fri Oct 30 2009 16:26
Students should be able to smoke on campus, when they please. Now, where they please is different, because it is unfair for the other half of society who choose not to smoke to get second hand smoking, but Its a college campus, you know, full of adults. NOT a middle school campus or a high school campus. Smoking is an adult choice. If they are going to ban it at UT, they might as well ban it at everyother campus in the State of Texas and we all know that won't happen.
Jake
Fri Oct 30 2009 14:49
It should be up to the students if they want to smoke...This is america! land of the FREE...This is just one more way that the government has control of our lives. Smoking has never been that big of deal till now... THIS IS SOCIALISM!!!! If students really want to smoke they should check out the newest alternative...www.Crown7.com
Paul
Fri Oct 30 2009 07:49
I hope that they either ban smoking everywhere or severely limit areas where people can smoke on campus. There are still many occasions where non-smokers are exposed to secondhand smoke. The rights of the majority who want to have their health respected ought to prevail.
Dani
Fri Oct 30 2009 02:05
some people don't understand that the only time that these people have a chance to have a cigarette between classes is walking from class to class! why should we have to stay in one spot just to have a cigarette.we aren't smoking outside, if you don't want to smell it then walk around us. don't make a big deal about it. we're the ones that are taking the risk. you've already taken it away in restraunts and other public places don't take it away for us at school we already pay the same amount you all do. don't punish us unless you're going to help us quit. its not easy and for those of you nonsmokers you obviously don't realize that
Jeanette
Thu Oct 29 2009 21:45
I'm not sure I'd consider smoking a "right", more like a privilege. Besides, don't non-smokers have "rights" as well? I guess putting it to a vote is better than a ban simply being declared, though.
Evan Smith
Thu Oct 29 2009 17:45
I agree with what everyone has to say. I would also like to say that there are many other problems that UT faces, all of which are bigger than a smoking ban. Like parking or safety on and off campus, so before we try and change something that is NOT a problem, why don't we fix things that need to be fixed as soon as possible.
Brittany
Thu Oct 29 2009 16:15
As far as the 30 feet rule goes, campus is already thinking about that for next semester. They are hoping to put some kind of marking to indicate where 30 feet is and to put the ash trays 30 feet away instead or directly in front of the door.

I am a nonsmoker but do not agree with the smoking ban at all. It will repel students in the future to come to UT and it will make more students want to live off campus. I have been well aware of this since last year and pay attention to how it affects me. It does not. Just yesterday i was walking behind someone smoking, the wind took it away and I could not even smell it. I still live on campus as a second year student and have never encountered unbearable amounts of smoke as a I left or entered any residence hall.

Anthony
Thu Oct 29 2009 16:10
I agree with Zach and Greg. If the 30 foot rule cannot be enforced to its capacity then why continue putting restrictions on our rights that will be even more difficult to enforce? There are far greater evils in the world than cigarette smoke. It would be a bad move by UT to ban smoking. Many students may leave because of it, not to mention the fact that prospective students will consider other university options that allow smoking on campus. Smoking on UT campus is a right that many students use to full effect and if that right is stripped away there will be consequences.
zach
Thu Oct 29 2009 15:42
maybe before we even start talking about any kind of campus ban, we should figure out a way to enforce the measures already in place. I do not see any real enforcement of the thirty feet rule, where smokers must be 30 feet away from all doorways of buildings. so, we can make ourselves feel better and ban smoking on campus, but if there is no real measure to back it up, and there wont be, then arent we blowing as much useless hot air as the smokers? perhaps SG could focus on something more important. like taking down their promotion sign by Snyder Memorial that reads, "Your Voice counts! Become a Student Government!"
Greg Fillous
Thu Oct 29 2009 15:24
Students should be able to smoke on campus! Its outside we live in America, why does everyone always try to take away all of our freedom? If people want to smoke on campus they should be able to. If smoking gets banned from the University of Toledo Campus myself and many others might just drop out and transfer to another college. The students who smoke might go crazy as well and all decide to smoke at certain places at certain times to prove a point that we should be able to smoke where we want outside. If this campus wants to do anything they need to worry about putting in more parking spots then banning smoking!






log out