ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Letters to the Editor

Ban all smoking in restaurants To the Budgeteer: Recently, I moved to Duluth from a state that prohibits smoking in public areas. This measure to prohibit smoking was taken because of the overwhelming dangers associated with secondhand smoke. As ...

Ban all smoking in restaurants
To the Budgeteer:
Recently, I moved to Duluth from a state that prohibits smoking in public areas. This measure to prohibit smoking was taken because of the overwhelming dangers associated with secondhand smoke.
As early as 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency published research showing there is no safe level of secondhand smoke. Therefore, every time you eat in a restaurant where smoking is permitted, you are potentially endangering your health.
Another concern is that children are not protected. I, as an adult, have a choice not to frequent specific restaurants. Children do not have that choice. Each year, exposure to secondhand smoke causes between 150,000 to 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections in the United States among infants under 18 months of age.
Four chemicals in secondhand smoke are known carcinogens and 10 others are probable carcinogens. Isn't this enough evidence to prohibit smoking in all public places?
I understand that restaurant owners are reluctant to voluntarily go smoke free. They feel their livelihood is at stake. However, if you talk to restaurant owners in cities that have passed smoke-free ordinances, they have not lost business; they have gained it. When Madison, Wis., passed an ordinance banning smoking in restaurants, the village of Shorewood and the city of Middleton soon followed. Why? They began losing business to Madison because of Madison's availability of smoke-free dining options. It's up to the city of Duluth to pass an ordinance prohibiting smoking in dining establishments for smoke-free restaurants to become a reality in Duluth.
Kristin Hedges
Duluth
Much black history remains untaught
To the Budgeteer:
Here we go again. To be or not to be, or is it really, to keep or not to keep. That is the question. In reference to the letter to the editor (Feb. 26 issue) written by Eric Holmstrom, I have to say, he did not dig deep enough in his letter.
That is to say, the history lesson that I donated in the Feb. 20 issue is fact, except for a misprint, that should have read 1996 instead of 1986 for the beginning of the welfare to work plan.
My material is not found in public schools, for there is not much black history taught in the school system on slavery. There is a lot of history not mentioned, which is "the untold story."
Though my letter contained material which seemed to have drawn controversy, it is a fact that I do not have to reveal or prove anything to Mr. Holmstrom, if I choose not to. There is a difference between a letter and a research paper.
In fact, financial contributions in sizable amounts are appreciated and accepted. If he would like to learn more about my culture and black history, my office hours are from 9 to 5.
Derrick Parker
Duluth

What To Read Next
The system crashed earlier this month, grounding flights across the U.S.