Smoking conspiracy?

Is the Surgeon General of the United States in league with Nevada's smoke-banners?

Because Dr. Richard Carmona could only have helped the group trying to ban smoking in most places in Nevada more if he'd released his new report, The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke, about two days before Election Day.

The report is devastating to the case for smoking. Among the findings: There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Even brief exposure adversely affects the heart and lungs. Secondhand smoke can cause premature death, even in nonsmokers. Children exposed to secondhand smoke can die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). Separating smokers and nonsmokers -- like in restaurants -- doesn't help eliminate risks. Even advanced air-cleaning systems don't help. The only real solution: eliminating all smoking in indoor spaces.

Which, as it turns out, is precisely what proponents of the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act are trying to do.

The group, which has adopted "Nevadans for Tobacco-Free Kids" as its name, in the time-honored tradition of using children as political human shields, has a ballot initiative to address the secondhand smoke issue. It would ban smoking in restaurants, bars, convenience stores, grocery stores, and, in an unintended interpretation rendered by a Carson City judge, in hotel rooms. Smoking would be legal in very few places, most notably the gambling areas of casinos.

"The report was very clear that while secondhand smoke harms all nonsmokers, certain populations, including infants and children, are especially susceptible to the health affects [sic] of secondhand smoke," said Michael Hackett, campaign manager for the so-called Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act, in a statement e-mailed the very same day the report was released. (The other "populations" that are especially vulnerable? Pregnant women, the elderly, and people with existing heart or lung problems.)

"Children are exposed to secondhand smoke at more than twice the rate as nonsmoking adults," Hackett continued. And, he added, the finding that air-cleaning technology can't keep up with tobacco isn't surprising. "It's consistent with the position of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers, which in 2005 officially recognized the limitations of engineering approaches to protecting nonsmokers from secondhand smoke." Yes, who could forget the day the ASHRAE issued that groundbreaking conclusion?

Finally, Hackett said, smoking bans don't hurt businesses. "All the research we've examined came to the same conclusion: These laws have a positive impact on sales, profits, tax receipts, patronage and employment," he said.

That last line is a sop to the casino industry, which has a lot at stake in the debate. Lee Haney, spokeswoman for a competing initiative put forward by convenience store owners that would essentially allow smoking only in places where children aren't allowed, said as much in the Review-Journal. "Our belief is that there should be set aside areas for nonsmokers and smokers. People should have that choice to choose one way or the other," she said. "We are so driven by tourists, and the fact of the matter is, we don't believe that Nevadans have an appetite to completely ban smoking."

Really? We're not so sure, in light of the surgeon general's report. If it's true that secondhand smoke is really that deadly, isn't it irresponsible not to ban smoking? In fact, shouldn't we just make tobacco a controlled substance, like cocaine or heroin? (And remember, this report was released by the Bush administration, which doesn't think that toxic emissions from factories are worth fixing.)

But, if we're not willing to go all the way and ban tobacco, we have to concede either that the surgeon general's report is wrong (and it was peer-reviewed) or that it was right, but that we're still going to let adults decide for themselves if they want to smoke, and do so places set aside for that purpose. Nobody alive today thinks smoking is healthy, and most people who are truly offended by smoke take steps to avoid it. That balance has held sway for a long time. It's only recently that nonsmokers have declared war on smokers, and demanded that they amend their lives for the common health.

Nevada voters will be on the front lines of this debate come Nov. 7. It's doubtful their appreciation for casino industry bottom lines will prompt a "no" vote on a measure that could drive away smoking tourists. Perhaps a vestigial sense of appreciation for personal freedom and choice will?

STEVE SEBELIUS IS EDITOR OF CITYLIFE. HE CAN BE REACHED AT 871-6780 EXT. 306 OR AT SSEBELIUS@LVCITYLIFE.COM.