Voice of the People - January 29, 2009

Questions about smoking ban

Here are some thoughts on the proposed smoking ban in York County: If passed, could people smoke in their houses but not in their private businesses? If someone has a catered party, home or elsewhere, could they or their guests smoke?

What is the average age of persons dying with secondhand-smoke-related causes as opposed to those without these causes? How many people died in the past year in York County of secondhand smoke? How many of the "toxic" elements in secondhand smoke are in the air we breathe every day? If the idea is to protect the general public, shouldn't signs that "smoking isn't allowed here" be sufficient? If there is no "safe" level of secondhand smoke exposure, shouldn't smoking be banned completely? Would the water we drink be acceptable if held to a similar standard?

It has been reported that only about 20 percent of our population still smokes cigarettes. Hasn't this reduction been voluntary, as has the increase in "no smoking" businesses? Isn't this preferable to government intrusion into private property rights? The "market" is working without this intrusion.

Do insurance companies reduce premiums for businesses that go smoke-free?

Will patrons of impacted businesses, particularly those close to non-restricted areas, go to areas allowing smoking? York County recently gave patrons the opportunity to stay in the county if they desired an adult beverage with their meals on Sunday. Would this proposed ban influence customers to go elsewhere?

It has been reported by supporters of the ban that studies show businesses' bottom lines improve as a result. Shouldn't that be incentive enough to voluntarily ban smoking? Or, perhaps the owners' business plan was to open a place just so people would have a place to smoke -- making a living would be secondary. Perhaps, this would be a great time to open a smoke-free bar. However, if the ban passes, then competition alone would decide the "bottom line." But, isn't that preferable to mandated restrictions on smoking -- which is, after all, still legal?

It has been reported that Ireland has a smoking ban, even in the pubs. Has the report been published that nearly 20 percent of those family-owned businesses no longer are in business? Are there other studies reporting similar findings?

I believe that restricting what is currently a legal activity in the manner described is not in the long-term best interest of the citizens of this country. The United States of America, I believe, stands for, among other things, the protection of private property rights and the freedom of association. These and other thoughts compel me to stand with those who oppose passage of this ordinance. Let your council representative know where you stand.

Joe Versen

Clover

Chipping away at our freedoms

Our freedoms that we have enjoyed and defended with American lives will not be lost overnight as many think. The overnight dictator will not emerge as many expect as the style in which this would happen. Instead, there will be many years of slowly chipping away the stone that we will call freedom here. This process has been ongoing for at least the last 40 years, more likely since the 1930s.

The chipping away comes under the guise of social agendas such as environmental issues, the woman's right to choose (deliberate murdering of babies), same-sex marriages and the destruction of Christianity and moral values. And, yes, racism will continue. The "political correctness" also plays a large part in the destruction of the America we all know.

You will seldom hear the word "communism" mentioned unless you are in conversation with true conservatives such as myself. Because of this, we are painted as ultra-right-wing conservative bigots and racists. If the love of God, country and family is best described this way, then I am proud of this identity.

The key words to look for in this process to change our country to a communist society are "progressive" and, "progressive Democrats." The communist Progressive Party began in England many years ago. It spread to this country when a New York congressman took up the cause. Because of the Vietnam and Korean Wars, the word "communist" has been toned down since many people relate to it as being evil. So enters new terminology.

Many say socialism is not communism, and therefore, it is OK to be a socialist. After all, who does not want to help the poor and the working class? Well, guess what? The U.S. Supreme Court is our dictator. The court carries out the agenda of the liberals who are in sympathy with the communist theory. Many of the appellate court judges are standing ready to rule the liberal communist agenda. It makes no difference what the Constitution says.

Most of what is mentioned here will fall on deaf ears. Human nature is not to strike at anything that doesn't strike you. As long as we have a lavish lifestyle, we won't resist the "small" chipping away of the stone that represents our freedom.

Rembert Howell

York

What do people see in Obama?

I simply don't understand why Obama is getting all this hype. First and most important, the man has never accomplished anything. He is united with some of the most crooked people Washington has ever seen. He will be learning on the job during a time when we need someone who is not scared to make a decision, someone who really cares about our country.

I have not seen one thing to convince me he does. I know this man will screw up so badly that he will never make two terms, but the libs will find a way to blame Bush even after he has been removed from office for four years. Libs do not like responsibility put on themselves. Always looking to put the blame on someone else.

The economy was doing well until the libs took control of Congress. Look it up if you don't believe me. The gas prices went through the roof 31 days after the libs took Congress.

Remember, they do not like taking responsibility for anything! Bush was no conservative, but he kept our country safe, which is something Obama will fail to do.

Obama followers, be careful what you wish for. I am so glad I live in a red conservative state like South Carolina.

Steve Lewis

Rock Hill

Sanford should hold commission accountable

Re: The Jan. 23 story, "State's Jobless," on the Employment Security Commission:

I support and hope Gov. Mark Sanford is successful in trying to hold the S.C. Employment Security Commission accountable for its role and responsibilities. The commission appears to be operated like many other independent state departments, with little expertise or accountability.

For example, Commissioner Becky Richardson of Fort Mill, an ex-schoolteacher and an ex-decorator, campaigned for the commissioner slot when she was still serving in the state House of Representatives. Her background had little to do with either the management skills or financial acumen needed to oversee an organization of that size and complexity. However, because of the relationships she had built up over 20 years in the House, she garnered the votes needed in the Legislature to be appointed to the highly lucrative job of commissioner. Once a commissioner, her implied obligations would be to protect the position, since her fellow representatives would be biding their time until they could have a shot at that very desirable position. Regardless of how senseless the process and how very few legislators actually benefit, the legislators obviously find it hard to change the status quo.

As a state representative, Ms. Richardson earned approximately $10,000 annually. As a commissioner, she is paid nearly $100,000 annually. More importantly, her retirement benefits are no longer be based on $10,000, but on $100,000. Should she retire after only two years as commissioner and then live to age 80, her retirement package would increase by approximately $1,100,000. Not a bad appointment, especially considering that the commissioners meet only a couple of days a week. No experience necessary.

Commissioners with little or no experience have to rely on and, in turn, protect the staff who, in order to keep their jobs, have to rely on and protect the commissioners. And human nature being what it is, the whole process must be staunchly defended regardless of how weak the system and how mismanaged the tax dollars.

Multiply that scenario by many departments in state government, and it's no wonder that we pay about 30 cents more on the dollar to run our state than does Florida, California or New York, none of which are paragons of efficiency. Multiply that scenario by the number of people in the bureaucracies who benefit or have friends who benefit, and it's no wonder that Gov. Sanford and we, the taxpayers, chalk up more losses than wins. If there is any silver lining to this dark economic cloud, it is that the legislators might see the wisdom in listening to our governor. If the Wall Street Journal respects his views enough to quote him often, surely our legislators will as well.

Peggy Upchurch

Lake Wylie

This story was originally published January 29, 2009 at 1:31 AM with the headline "Voice of the People - January 29, 2009."