"Pressing problems" are often hard to address and fraught problems with regard to reelection. Smoking regulations are easy to address as the vast majority of voters oppose smoking and being around smokers. If you are a politician and worry about reelection, go with the flow. It's easier and safer as far as one's political career is concerned.
It's a matter of getting used to the current social climate rather than wasting energy opposing it. Simply accept that there are too few of us smoking to make a change and withdraw from social activity, or accept the situation and enjoy your smoke where it is allowed.
With regard to over imbibing, most jurisdictions have laws and rules in place prohibiting serving drunks and encourage "healthy" (however that is defined)drinking. It is illegal to drink in your own car, usually illegal to be drunk in public, driving while intoxicated is proscribed, etc. Drinking is almost as heavily relegated as smoking. Liquor is as heavily taxed as tobacco, more so in some locations.
Many locales prohibit drinking in parks while allowing smoking. You can smoke in your car, but woe be to the driver with an open container in their vehicle. Imagine the restrictions on liquor if the percentage of the drinking public was as miniscule as the smoking population. If you drink and smoke you are paying a heck of a lot of moneys into the government tax coffers.
No matter your choice of vice(s), society will extract what it considers to be its due with respect to taxes. Society will further show its displeasure with your choices in any manner open to it. Getting all tense and upset over societal changes is probably counteracting the perceived relaxing benefits of pipe smoking. One has to pick their battles, and at this point in time, tobacco proponents probably can't approach the level of public support that the marijuana crowd can.