I'd just like to chime in from the left as someone who is very much opposed to anything like this. If it's a privately owned building, the government should not have any authority to dictate what anyone can and can't do in that building (besides things that are illegal everywhere, of course). I normally hate "slippery slope" arguments, but this is a case where I feel that they're appropriate, because there is no difference whatsoever between banning smoking in a privately owned building where business occurs and banning smoking in someone's home.
Very well stated.
