Finding a place to light up a cigarette can be difficult these days, but for public housing residents, smoking may soon be close to impossible.
Following the wave of recent anti-smoking laws, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development recently sent a memo strongly encouraging public housing authorities nationwide to “implement non-smoking policies in some or all of their public housing units.” Although the New York City Housing Authority has yet to institute any laws locally, the memo has sparked a heated debate about the merits of such policies.
For some, this legislation is a direct infringement on privacy and other basic freedoms. But others see this as an opportunity to encourage healthy environments and mitigate persistent problems of asthma.
“You can’t smoke anywhere, now you can’t smoke at home?” said Audrey Silk, founder of the smokers’ rights group New York City Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment.
Though Silk is opposed to any ban on smoking in the home—at a private or public development—she said there will inevitably be more flexibility in a private building. “Whoever owns it can make their own rules,” she explained.
Public housing, though, is a different story, she said. “Your home should be your castle, no matter whether you own it or not,” she said. “The city here is creating a divide in classes. People in housing are there because they can’t afford anything else. Now these people would be punished for their personal situation by having their right to smoke taken away. This is an intolerance campaign.”
Joanne Koldare, director of the New York City Coalition for a Smoke Free City, also said she sees smoking in public housing projects as an issue of individual rights. But for her, this is the right to be free from the harms of secondhand smoke.
“Those people living in low income housing should be able to live in a complex that doesn’t have smoking,” Koldare said. “Ask the mother with the 3-year-old who is suffering from asthma and has secondhand smoke pouring down his throat. Ask the man whose wife is suffering with cancer and going through chemotherapy and has to be subjected to secondhand smoke coming into their room.
This isn’t just a noxious odor—it’s a poisonous gas.”
Koldare noted that, despite her strong feelings, she understands the limited feasibility of instituting a blanket ban on smoking for all public housing developments. “Public housing is housing of last resort, and we don’t want to send folks to homeless shelters. We are talking about ending a behavior that is unhealthy for neighbors, not evicting people.”
Tenants are also divided at the Frederick Douglass Houses on Columbus Avenue from 100th to 104th streets.
Derek Pinedo, a resident of the houses, said that he would favor the ban. “I don’t smoke, and although secondhand smoke doesn’t bother me, I don’t like it,” he said.
“For older people though, who have been smoking for 30 or 40 years, that’s a whole different story,” Pinedo said. “They’re from a different generation, and I don’t think you can tell them not to smoke.”
“If they don’t want smoking, then put up a sign that says ‘Please don’t smoke, consider people with asthma’ or something like that, but you can’t just ban smoking,” said Charlia Hout, a former resident.
Her frustration has built up: “You can’t smoke in bars and restaurants, and now I can’t smoke in my home? And Bloomberg is up there smoking his own cigars the whole time.”
She added, “It’s bullshit.”
Comments
We're looking for comments that are interesting and substantial. If your comments are excessively self-promotional or obnoxious you will be banned from commenting. Consult the comment FAQ and legal terms.