I feel demoralized by the whole smoking ban issue. It's probably foolish to respond, but since Dan has drawn attention to "arrows" from Tim and me, I guess I'll try one more time. The original proposal was unilateral and almost immediate. No discussion, no openness to input other than a standard public hearing, limited, if I remember correctly, to one hour. In the meantime there was so much sarcastic and contemptuous chatter on this and the Mpls. forum, that it took courage for anyone to object. I watched the first hearing and heard the reaction from the ban proponents in the audience. Apparently the next day all the rowdy radio shows talked about how rude the proponents had been, and proponents in this forum derided such base calumny. But I had heard the rudeness, too. The video didn't show audience faces, but when the one lone (non-business) citizen got up to speak against the ban, there were snickers from ban supporters when he testified that he hadn't been able to find original studies. My heart went out to him. Speaking before an audience is very hard for many people, and this audience was decidedly inhospitable. The doctor from Rochester had set the tone by dismissing anyone who disagreed with him as members of the Flat Earth Society. Thus the debate was firmly established as the Righteous versus the Ignorant and Venal.
I have felt so discouraged, so astonished by the resentment, that I am not participating as I expected to in this most crucial election year. I've taken my name off my party's email list because I've learned that people I'd expect to be fervent allies are first and foremost, non-smokers. The issue has come to dominate everything else. I know that I couldn't offer to drive my station wagon with a partner to deliver signs, because my car undoubtedly smells of smoke. If I show up to assemble said signs, will I be shunned by people who catch a whiff of tobacco smoke on my hair or clothes? I do see that those of you who believe you've been open to compromise are sincere. I wish we could go back to June and start over. It seems to me that the politics of the council and mayor have brought the issue to a stalemate. I think the ban proponents must accept responsibility for making this such a face-off. Kelly and the 3 dissenting council members have been openly disparaged in this forum. Even Jeanne, who seems to be a genuinely well-intentioned woman, wrote on September 1 that now we'd find out if Kelly was a man of his word. And then, most revealingly, instead of closing with hopes for healthier employees, she signed like this: Jeanne Weigum living and breathing in Merriam Park and *way eager to be able to go to music venues after they go smoke free.* (my emphasis) Gail O'Hare St. Paul _____________________________________________ To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
