Pro-Weed or “Smoke Free”—You Decide

Too many administrators fall in line with whatever idea is popular in the Higher Ed Echo Chamber.  Many seem to accept uncritically the latest Ed crusade for this or that agenda, irrespective of the consequences and without regard for the possibility of unintended consequences that could backfire in very damaging ways. This is all part of the Education Crusades that are not much different from the Temperance Crusades of the early 20th century.

On this campus, for example, we probably should have stopped to consider how the crusade pushing for a "smoke-free campus" would affect our retention of students from the Middle East. Certainly we gave very little thought toward the personal rights of faculty and students who will be unable to smoke anywhere on campus except for their cars (with the windows rolled up).  That has sure came back to bite us, as many students from the Middle East who smoke (thanks to the efforts of US tobacco companies) have decided to go elsewhere to get their degrees.  And we have lost a lot a lot of tuition money. A Lot.

Of course, if the truth were known, the whole "smoke-free campus" initiative is driven by worries about what will happen when weed becomes legal. That day is not far off for colleges and universities on the West Coast, which is why they want all the rest of us riding on the "smoke-free" bandwagon. They want to level the playing field in recruiting students. 

So what happens ten years from now?  If students from Western Kansas can go to the University of Colorado & smoke weed in their dorm rooms, will they choose to go to Colorado or to the University of Kansas where they can't smoke anything anywhere on campus? Will the potheads all congregate in West coast universities? Hard to say.

The issue of legalizing marijuana is largely what is driving the crusade for creating “smoke-free” campuses. That is why it is called a “smoke-free” campaign rather than a “tobacco-free” campaign.