Vote upholding smoking ban might show Joplin’s future

Last week I wrote about things in Springfield that I’d love to see take root in Joplin. Add a smoking ban to that list( For more info visit: http://www.tobacco-news.net/smoking-speeds-up-male-cognitive-decline/). Even though I don’t live in Springfield anymore, I’m absolutely ecstatic about the results of a recent election, because the best of Springfield eventually makes it to Joplin. (Examples: Cashew chicken, downtown revitalization, monthly art walk, Target, Andy’s Frozen Custard.) Last week Springfield voters rebuffed an effort to pass a smoking ban that voters approved about a year ago. I’ve discussed the merits of bans and the illogical fears of opponents in past columns.

But Tuesday’s election results in Springfield featured some interesting details: The initiative petition that proposed overturning Springfield’s current ban failed by an almost two-thirds margin. Opponents of overturning the ban outraised and outspent supporters significantly, according to a report in the Springfield News-Leader (I’m guessing because the opponents weren’t wasting money on cigs). One Air Alliance and Springfield Doctors for Clean Air, two groups assembled to oppose the repeal, raised about $72,000 (including a $41,856 donation from the American Cancer Socitey’s Cancer Action Netowrk).

But Live Free Springfield, the group pushing to overturn the smoking ban, raised about $14,000. The ban that petitioners tried to overturn was put in place in April of last year by the same kind of initiative petition. But that ban passed barely -- with a 53-percent majority. Last week’s election drew a turnout as high as 30 percent in some precincts. Joplin and Springfield are similar in a lot of ways. I often compare Joplin to the way Springfield was 10 years ago. Part of the reason I love Third Thursday so much is that’s when Joplin feels alive with energy, creative spirit and a general great vibe -- the exact same vibe I felt when working at 417 Magazine and for a top 40 radio station downtown. Springfield businesses are doing just fine with a ban -- it isn’t killing the city’s economy.

Voters are fine with the ban, enough to give it firm support in a reaffirmation of a vote. However, city governments have been hesitant to act courageously in favor of public health: Webb City voters in an election told their city council that they wanted a ban, but council members didn’t have the fortitude to enact the will of the people. In Joplin, the council considered a proposal from Smoke-Free Joplin, but monkeyed with the language so much that the organization couldn’t support it anymore. One of the arguments against a smoking ban is that businesses should make the decision themselves.

Joplin’s nightlife scene suggests that would work: The non-smoking JB’s and smoking-permitted Blackthorn both do just fine each weekend. Blackthorn has also experimented with smoke-free nights, based on interaction with their customers. And ordinarily, I’d be in favor of letting markets decide issues like this. But the health dangers from second-hand smoke haven’t changed. And if Springfield voters can support a smoking ban so strongly, it makes me wonder how Joplin voters would react to such a vote.