Last week, the SGA Senate soundly rejected a resolution supporting a campuswide tobacco ban, sending a strong message to the administration against such measures. This message was belied by the Faculty Senate, which passed a resolution in strong support of the ban.
The proposal itself is quite simple: The University of Alabama should ban the use of all tobacco products from all locations on campus, including greek and residential areas. The debate surrounding it, however, is as complex as it is controversial.
It pits the freedom of students, faculty and staff to make their own decisions against their own health. It brings into question the true role of the University’s administration in shaping the collegiate experience of students and the work environment of employees, particularly when it requires students without vehicles to live on campus.
The decision to not only ban smoking but also include all tobacco products indicates that the ban’s proponents are intent on more than just stopping secondhand smoke and other public nuisances. Rather, by banning chewing tobacco and other instruments that do not affect others, it seems ban proponents are seeking to look after the health of the tobacco-users themselves, raising more questions as to what extent the University should regulate health.
Other universities have taken varying approaches. Some have left the choice to use tobacco to each individual, while others have completely banned its use. Still others have found middle ground by creating tobacco zones or limiting tobacco use to residential areas on campus.
The jury is still out for all of these methods. Each has been met with its own issues, from enforcement and penalty problems to secondhand smoke and campus aesthetics. The solution is not entirely clear.
Which approach would work best on The University of Alabama’s campus? What is fair to both tobacco users and non-smokers? If the University decides to regulate the health of its students and faculty, then how will the University’s strong greek system and vibrant living learning communities respond to this ban?
These questions are not easily answered.
Click the links  below to read the opposing viewpoints:
Go-to arguments lack substance as soon as ‘personal choice’ puts other students at risk
Administrators banning use of tobacco would only be self-serving, ineffective
Leading in today’s Crimson White:
Student organization to host 5k to raise scholarship funds
