Encroaching Govt. Control Poised to "Extinguish" Social Freedoms

Last year, on a chilly afternoon in November, I stood on the quad with some other college politikers, discussing the possible perils of re-electing Mayor Bloomberg for a third term. Everyone was wary of the other candidates, and Bloomberg had proven to be a strong leader. Yes, he had done much for NYC, and in the quagmire that was our economy, none was more qualified than he to lift us out of it. But, one key fact was being neglected; he was changing the framework of our constitution. Invoking a similar sentiment to FDR, his revoking of the two-term quota raised many an eyebrow. Although we hardly expect to be confronted by a NY Bloomberg dynasty, where was the line going to be drawn? He had already designated what oils could and couldn't be used in fast food restaurants (tri-glycerides fat ban), had tried to expunge Central park of its artists, restricted restaurants from making the decision on whether or not to have a smoking section, and had appointed himself head of NYC public education. And if that doesn't bring back fond memories of Jean Louis David's Coronation painting of Napoleon, then its time for a BC refresher core in art or classics. In concerted efforts to expand the powers of government by pervading into facets of our everyday life, the boundaries of our city Government, and federal as well, are becoming hazy and obscure at best.

Now, in association with Bloomberg, the CUNY chancellor is seeking to impose a smoking ban on all CUNY campuses, in a new government outreach program that breaches our trust in government and beckons questioning.

As reported by the BC Excelsior last week, the CUNY chancellor Mathew Goldstein has launched a proposal to try and ban students from smoking anywhere on campus, ranging from smoking on the steps of buildings and outdoor sports fields, all the way to the parking lots.

Done in accordance with Bloomberg's platform to "Take Care New York 2012", and his $31 million stimulus fund to eliminate 'chronic diseases', the proposal also bans all advertising of tobacco on campus.

Some might argue that restricting where we smoke is a small concession in the light that close to 400,000 people die a year due to smoking related illnesses, and that college kids can barely afford the habit anyway. Moreover, one might add, it does make the walkways smell fresher.

Yet, this smells like a violation of civil rights, laden with bright, neon colored flashing bulbs that the government is encroaching on a space that has very little room for regulation. Censoring media, and ads, is always a no-no, as it's a fundamental tenet of our expression and civil rights. Even more than this, dictating what a student can and can't do on front stoop of a college building! Can you imagine telling all those liberal arts majors that they must leave Boylan Hall, because they are violating a law, and are moreover, susceptible to receive a $100 ticket! If this is the way that the chancellor chooses to treat the leaders of tomorrow, then perhaps we should consider whether the lower tuition of CUNY is worth the price.

Not only is it immoral to restrict whether a college kid smokes, its illegal. A government official, let alone a Chancellor, has no legitimate claim to direct the traffic of smokers on an outdoor space. Yes, its CUNY property, but this is college territory, student life. A life that, at its very core, is rooted in the foundations and freedoms of choice, like the choice to study topics that one finds interesting, choice to express oneself and live as one sees fit, and yes, even the choice to smoke.

I doubt very much that a heavy smoker will rescind and change his ways because he can't smoke in front of the building. All it will do is make him late to class. And all it will do is hinder the morale of college students, whose rights will be impinged upon, by an ever-encroaching system.

If anyone still has any doubts, consider this. The smoking ban extends to the parking lot.

A parking lot, filled with moderate, to heavy levels of Carbon dioxide, and perhaps, for the students with the cheaper cars, Carbon Monoxide. By definition, a parking lot is not a place for clean breathing. Yet, if a student lights a cigarette, they will, if the law is passed, be liable to punishment. This is, outrageous.

Moreover, using us for fodder to improve the city's financial situation, by ticketing us, will come at a great expense. Where will it stop? Throughout our history, there have always been push-pull fluctuations of government influence, often times dependent upon the party in power. But this fluctuation invokes feelings of betrayal. Our chancellor is not supposed to make our lives more chaotic than they already are. His refusal to recognize that we are college students, not high school attending minors, is appalling, and verges on comedic. Perhaps he is confusing us with the adjacent high school, Brooklyn College Academy.

I am not blaming our Mayor for a law made by the chancellor, but his ethics and tendencies to impose his will on non-government institutions, has manifested itself into a culture where our figures of power think and feel they have legitimate claim to invade boundaries and dictate laws that they deem worthy. Telling a fast food joint what oils they can and cant cook with, or telling sidewalk artists they cant work in the park, may have seemed insignificant to us, but now, as the boundaries between government and daily life are becoming obscured with smoke and mirrors, one has to stop and consider, how far will this go?

President Obama says that as Americans, we are blessed with a, "healthy does of fear of government." But skepticism is a term closely associated with equivocal debates- like whether it's good or bad to have a government pay for your braces. This is more than a healthy case of skepticism, it's a cause for panic, and a steadfast understanding, that we as college students need to take a step back, and examine the damage that can be wrought by this ban, if accepted. A CUNY-wide petition, at least, should be taken up- and if this is passed, who knows what they'll pass next: perhaps a prohibition on coffee- because its bad for the heart. I, myself, am not a smoker, but I'd rather inhale the few extra puffs on the walkways than swallow a pill as dangerous as this one. I implore you to consider this as well, before it's too late.