News-Record.com

From this morning's story on tobacco under fire in North Carolina:

“The argument I’m getting is this thing about tobacco farmers and companies, that we owe some sort of debt to them because they built the state,” Haynes said. “Well, our country was also partially founded on slavery, and we’re not doing that any more. We woke up and got some common sense one day. … Why aren’t the farmers farming something else? They’ve had plenty of time to switch.”

Isley shakes his head when asked if there’s another crop that could yield as much money for his 100-acre farm as tobacco.

“Maybe one acre of strawberries, and if you could have a little stand up on the roadside, maybe that could sustain your family,” he said.

Really?

“No. I wish it was,” he said.

So why doesn’t he get out of farming altogether?

“It’s in my blood,” he said. “It must be. It sure wasn’t because I wanted to get up at 4 a.m. every day and go to bed at midnight every night and make less money than my classmates.”

Click here to read the whole thing.

Haynes is Holly Haynes, a Winston-Salem woman who is fighting cancer. Isley is John Isley, a fourth-generation tobacco farmer from Reidsville. Among others, the story also includes quotes from folks who work at Greensboro-based Lorillard.

What I hoped to do with this story is let you hear a little bit from folks who are deeply vested in the tobacco policy debate but whose voices aren't often heard.

My editors and I talked over several times whether we needed to include a smoker in the story and decided against it because we've heard from them on many occasions. If you're dying for that perspective, Mark Johnson's excellent piece from earlier this year can scratch that itch.

And I should thank N+R news librarian Diane Lamb, who helped me sort through figures from the ESC, BLS and Reynolds American regarding tobacco-related employment.

If you're looking for more on this story:

• * Click here for H2, the smoking ban bill sponsored by Rep. Hugh Holliman. And Click here for background.

• * Click here to read the 2006 Surgeon General's report that declared:

  "Research reviewed in this report indicates that smoke-free policies are the most economic and effective approach for providing protection from exposure to secondhand smoke. But do they provide the greatest health impact. Separating smokers and nonsmokers in the same airspace is not effective, nor is air cleaning or a greater exchange of indoor with outdoor air. Additionally, having separately ventilated areas for smoking may not offer a satisfactory solution to reducing workplace exposures. Policies prohibiting smoking in the workplace have multiple benefits. Besides reducing exposure of nonsmokers to secondhand smoke, these policies reduce tobacco use by smokers and change public attitudes about tobacco use from acceptable to unacceptable."

• * You can read details of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement on tobacco here. Good resources that help explain more include here, here, and here.

• * The Fort Worth Star-Telegram recently did a good story on the pending federal tobacco tax hike, while McClatchy's Washington Bureau put out this story about the ongoing conflict over FDA regulation of tobacco.

• * For those interested in public opinion, a March 2009 Elon University Poll showed that "A strong majority support local or state laws that ban smoking in all public places, including public buildings, offices, restaurants and bars. Seventy percent support local laws and 67 percent support state laws."(PDF)

So, does your opinion line up with the public's? The comment link is open.