Gambling and smoking legislation have long been contentious issues and and have been responsible for igniting some of the most heated discussion of recent years. Now a Michigan law which exempts licensed casinos from the esxisting state smoking ban has revived interest in the debate with libertarians throughout the US at large arguing that both gamblers and smokers share a common interest in defending individual choice and freedom. Famous names including Barney Frank have argued that the US was founded on the principle of self determination and has consistently defended the right of individuals to take responsibility for their own actions.

Ne w statistic have revealed that states which impose smoking bans on casinos incite enormous opposition from operators anxious to defend their businesses. Smoking bans, they argue, are a serious threat to their income and revenue. They are responsible for imposing unfair restrictions on the activities of their patrons and seriously compromise the quality of their gaming experience.

Constitutional experts arue that government intervention has gone too far in imposing a healthy lifetsyle on those who may not want it. Activists argue that individuals have a right to reject such impositions should they choose and opt for less healthy alternatives in spite of the consequences. Such sentiments have likewise been championed by gaming enthusiasts who assert their democratic right to use their money as they wish. Whatever the outcome accross the US, it is clear that such discussions raise some key questions concerning the fundamental role of government. With a great deal at stake for all those concerned, debates will no doubt continue to rage throughout the world at large.