Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

Here’s an interesting bit of politics this week. The Clinton City Council in South Carolina was told by city staff that it should extend local smoking bans to include electronic cigarettes. According to local coverage there, the council often backs the recommendations of city administrative staff and passes bills with almost no discussion whatsoever.

But apparently electronic cigarettes were a different case there. City Manager Frank Stovall argued that the products cause similar health complications to that of tobacco cigarettes. A council member argued that he had seen studies showing e-cigs produce secondhand smoke.

Both of these arguments are mostly invalid — e-cigs are said to be 99% less harmful than tobacco cigarettes and the secondhand effects appear to be completely harmless according to various studies and experts. However, it is common to see these arguments lead to quick bills that treat electronic cigarettes as tobacco for the purposes of smoking bans, sales restrictions, and even advertising controls.

The council went a different way, however. Mayor Bob McLean argued that without the precedent of other South Carolina cities passing similar regulation, it was not his wish to be caught up in trailblazing an issue that might lead to courtroom costs defending the bill. What’s more, the city manager stated that city staff had yet to receive any complaints about electronic cigarette use. So it certainly didn’t appear to be an issue worth digging in on just yet.

Another council member argued that without more information, a vote might be premature.

You can read about the debate here. It’s good to see people approaching the issue with at least a little rationality. Presumably, the issue will be revisited in November.