But that was before I talked to Calabasas, California, City Councilman Barry Groveman. It turns out all those English class analogies matter in municipal government.
As I wrote in the June issue of Governing, Calabasas has one of the most restrictive anti-smoking ordinances in the country. The law prohibits smoking in any public place--indoors or outdoors--where others can be exposed to secondhand smoke. Critics have called that policy unfair, extreme and unenforceable, but Groveman, who championed the law while serving as Calabasas' mayor, has a ready-made set of analogies to argue that its anything but.
Think that restricting outdoor smoking is an affront to personal liberty? Groveman notes that almost no one complains about seat-belt requirements, even though the harm to others caused by not wearing a seat belt is far more tangential than the harm caused by secondhand smoke.
Concerned that smokers won't be able to handle being in a place where they can't light up? Groveman says that that's already the case in airports without any problems.
Worried that a law that doesn't actually ban smoking in public places, but only when others who object are around, is so vague that it will be a non-stop headache for law enforcement? Groveman points out that the police are accustomed to using their judgment in enforcing speed limits, only pulling over the most egregious offenders.
Of course, opponents of smoking restrictions prefer their own set of analogies, arguing, for example, that smoking is a lot like eating fast food or drinking alcohol--bad habits, but ones the government shouldn't combat through prohibitions. This clash of analogies is precisely what makes English class, in retrospect, somewhat useful. Math class? That's another story entirely.
