On April 17, 2009, a representative from the Alice! Health Promotion Program sent an e-mail to the members of the Columbia community, informing them of a “proposal to prohibit smoking within the gated areas” on campus. This proposal was developed by a workgroup comprised of student and staff representatives. In order to respond to the proposal, all Columbia students were allowed to submit an online survey providing feedback, and four meetings were scheduled in order to solicit conversation between the administration and any members of the University community.
During a CCSC meeting on April 26, 2009, Scott Wright, the vice president of Student Auxiliary and Business Services, clarified some of the intentions behind the survey. As far as we can tell, the workgroup has no specific power to enact this proposal, so no changes are imminent on our campus (you won’t return to campus in the fall to find that every ashtray has been junked). Nonetheless, CCSC found it necessary to draft a response to the workgroup’s recommendations. We appreciate the efforts of the workgroup to gain student opinion, but we recognize that not every student has the time or inclination to respond to a survey or attend a meeting during this busy time of year.
If the administration wishes to seek student opinion, we encourage them to reach out to the student councils and to the Student Affairs Caucus of the University Senate. It is our job to protect students’ interests, and remain cognizant of any policy discussions that could impact student life.
The CCSC voted nearly unanimously against the spirit of the proposal to ban smoking from campus. Our proposal rested on a series of concerns about the efficacy of such a ban in actually decreasing smoking on campus, and about the ramifications of a successful ban on campus life.
If smoking were theoretically banned entirely from campus (defined as all areas within the gates), the ban might simply be ignored. There are already rules in place governing the area immediately outside of locations such as Carman Hall, yet these locations also feature giant ashtrays. Regulations that are already in place should be enforced before a more restrictive set of rules comes into place. The workgroup did not clarify how students or guests who violated the ban might be punished.
Even if the administration were to successfully enforce such a ban, all of the members of the Columbia community who smoke would congregate outside the gates. The most convenient locations, especially in the evening hours when only the main gates of campus remain open, would be the entrances to campus on 116th and Broadway and 116th and Amsterdam. As most visitors to campus enter through these gates, this ban would provide an especially unappetizing first glimpse of Columbia University, especially for prospective students.
In their rationale for change, the smoking workgroup advanced the argument that the “healthier behaviors” of non-smoking would produce “workplace benefits,” especially insofar as staff members would use their time more effectively were they not taking smoking breaks. We find this argument unconvincing, partly because anyone who wishes to smoke will be forced to spend time looking for a location where he or she is permitted to do so. Furthermore, we resist the idea that staff members or students should be coerced into healthier modes of behavior.
Of course we appreciate all the efforts made by Health Services on behalf of all members of the Columbia community. Second-hand smoke also represents an important concern that should be addressed by Alice!, and no student should have his or her health compromised by second-hand smoking. The policies implemented at buildings such as Lewisohn, which have encouraged smokers to move away from the entrance, should be extended to the areas outside of Butler Library, Carman Hall, etc., so that non-smokers are not needlessly exposed to second-hand smoke. Additionally, the smoking cessation programs are a valuable resource that should be fully advertised for any student who wishes to take advantage of them.
However, there are students who do not smoke on a regular basis, but who may yet enjoy the occasional round of hookah on the steps of Low Library. The administration has already taken a number of steps to limit student participation in traditional collegiate activities. If students remain at a distance from others while they smoke, they should certainly be allowed to make decisions for themselves regarding tobacco.
CCSC did overwhelmingly vote against the spirit of the proposal to ban smoking from campus. We acknowledge, however, that there are divergent opinions, and CCSC hopes to represent the broad range of views on our campus. We encourage students to weigh in on decisions such as these, both through individual surveys released by the administration and by reaching out to the CCSC, so that we may actively work to express student opinion.
Billy Freeland is a Columbia College senior majoring in political science. He is a University Senator. Learned Foote is a Columbia College sophomore. He is president of the Columbia College class of 2011. “We” in this op-ed refers to the authors, not CCSC. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of CCSC.