I find the workers' rights argument against smoking to be disingenuous. Most service-sector workers don't have unions because U.S. labor law is stacked against organizing in the workplace. The conservative agenda brought us right-to-work to prevent unions (under the rational that workers should have a choice to join a union); by the same token, they should give workers the right of choice on other workplace matters, such as the issue of smoking. But consistency is not really part of the program, is it?

Better yet, the government should get out of the business of regulating smoking all together, and liberalize union organizing laws so that employees in these local service establishments can decide democratically, as part of an empowered bargaining unit, how they want to deal with such issues.

(And I'm talking about local control in this vision of unions, that is, power must flow from the workers, not down from the top, where corruption tends to take root.)

If such dramatic reform were to occur, I bet smoking wouldn't be the first issue taken up by these truely empowered workers. I suspect wages, benefits and job security would be what really strikes the match.

You can't pretend to speak for the workers on selective issues, such as smoking, and ignore the larger battles faced daily by the working class in  this, and every country. Those who do, in my opinion, are simply blowing smoke.