Where were all the vapers?

Yesterday I again made the trek out to Sacramento attend the California State Assembly Appropriations Committee hearing on AB 1500.

I was originally going to write about the actual hearing, and I may still do that later, but right now I keep getting distracted by a frustration… where the heck was everybody?
A number of businesses came out: CultiVapors, Grand Vapor Station, Luxe Liquid Vapor, Tasty Vapor, and The Vapor Spot, as well as representatives from VMR Products (V2 Cigs) and NJoy.
Jim Root from California Vapor Association was present
And 4 individuals… 2 vapers and 2 spouses of vapers.

Only 2 vapers.

Yes, the number of vaping business that showed up to oppose AB 1500 was disappointingly small when compared to the total number of such businesses in California (and let us all remember to send our business, and money, to those that did participate), but we, the consumers outnumber the businesses by a very wide margin. so where were we?

How many of us are there in California? There does not seem to be any reliable statistic available, so I’m going to fudge it a little to come up with an estimate… according to the CDC over 3,839,000 individual adults smoke in California, and as of 2011, one in five of those had tried electronic cigarettes or roughly 767,800 adults. We can safely assume that many more have tried electronic cigarettes since then, but we can also assume that not everyone that ‘tries’ becomes a regular consumer, so we’ll stick with 767,800 as a reasonable estimate for now. 2 out of 767,800… That gives us a whopping .0002% of California vapers showing up to the hearing. Shameful

It’s true that , as of now, AB 1500 has failed passage. It’s true that there is currently no indication that the legislation will be proposed again anytime soon. It’s also true that we, as a community, can’t sit on our butts and hope that these things work out. If we care about the continued viability of the vaping industry, if we care about the continued availability of vaping products for our own continued use, and for use by others that may switch from smoking to vaping in the future, then we need to stand up against restrictive legislation.

California is a big place, and Sacramento certainly isn't geographically accessible to everyone in the state. Travel time, travel cost, and the need to maintain other aspects of our lives (like jobs) mean that we can’t expect some arbitrary percentage of California vapers to show up to these things, but there are enough of us that we should be able to make a better showing than just two people. Next time, and inevitably there will be a next time as some bill or other attempts to squash e-cigs, next time we should aspire to fill the hearing room to capacity with vapers.

A quick update on AB 1500

For those of you planning on heading to Sacramento tomorrow for the hearing on AB 1500… You are going? Right? If for no other reason than to show support for both the vaping industry and vaping community… For those of you planning on attending the AB 1500 hearing, plan on it being a long day. Word is that, while the committee meets at 9:00AM, AB 1500 won’t be heard until it’s sponsor, Dickinson, arrives… and he has another hearing that’s scheduled to run till 12:00. Since items are heard in the order that their sponsor signs in, this could push AB 1500 to last in line, or at least near it, for the day.

With the next hearing rapidly approaching AB 1500 has been on my mind

Quick note: the AB 1500 hearing has been re-scheduled for next week... 05/21/2014

AB 1500:  Dickinson wants to make online purchasing so onerous that consumers would effectively be forced to buy from local stores rather than online, all so that the state can raise an additional estimated $24 million in tax revenue.

Or at least that’s where things started.

Somewhere along the way the target of the bill ‘Cigarettes, tobacco products, and electronic cigarettes” became just “Electronic cigarettes” And the individuals restricted from purchasing online changed from “persons in California” to “person under 18 years of age”

I wonder how much tax revenue Dickinson expects to raise by forcing persons “under 18 years of age” to buy their electronic cigarettes from local stores rather than online?...

None? Wait! What? Oh, that’s right, because a “person under 18 years of age” can’t legally purchase electronic cigarettes in California in the first place. So it’s clear that Dickinson isn't after tax revenue any more. Right? So what is he up to?

According to comments from the Assembly Committee on Governmental Organization hearing April 30, 2014 the purpose of the bill is to extend age verification procedures that are already in place for the delivery of tobacco products to e-cigarettes, and that “This will help safeguard against minors having access to e-cigarettes.”

Keeping electronic cigarettes out of the hands of minors is a laudable goal, but…Is Dickinson saying that adult consumers should be forced to buy from local stores rather than online in order to make it harder for minors to get e-cigarettes? Is he really suggesting restricting the options of adults… of voters to lawfully purchase a legal product just so that he can make the dubious claim that his bill has helped keep electronic cigarettes away from minors?

Well, maybe, but that ignores the fact that SB 882, Chapter 310, Statutes of 2010 made it unlawful for a person to sell or otherwise furnish an e-cigarette to a person under 18 years of age… Anyone currently providing e-cigarettes to minors is already breaking the law, and adding another layer of law isn’t likely to dissuade them from continuing. It also ignores the fact that anyone purchasing electronic cigarettes online is using a credit card…  

Let’s just stop and think about that for a moment. If your child is using your credit card, with or without your knowledge and permission, then, to be blunt, it’s an issue of bad parenting. And if your child is making online purchases with a stolen credit card then electronic cigarettes are the least of your worries.

So where does that leave AB 1500?  Well, I’m not inside Dickinson’s head, which is probably a good thing for my personal sanity, but it seems to me that to understand AB 1500  we need only go back to the beginning. Dickinson wants to make online purchasing so onerous that consumers would effectively be forced to buy from local stores rather than online.  Not to raise revenue, and not to keep e-cigs from minors, but to make it harder for anyone to purchase electronic cigarettes at all, because, you know, that vague sense that anything with even a passing resemblance to smoking, must somehow be bad… unless it’s marijuana, complete with its higher than cigarette tar, carbon monoxide, benzene and toluene levels,  THAT get’s legalized.

A Call to Action!

How silly is this? I’m posting a call to action on a blog that isn’t even a day old yet… as if it will have some huge impact right? But that’s not the point. The point is, that if even one person sees this and is motivated to take action to support the vaping community and industry, it will be worth the minor effort to post this here.

AB 1500: An act to add Section 22963.5 to the Business and Professions Code relating to electronic cigarettes.

The latest bill text can be read here.

While the bill has been amended to no longer ban online sales outright, and additional amendments are in the works, it will sill impose a substantial hardship on vendors and consumers.

The next hearing is scheduled for May 14^th, 2014 at 9:00 am at the Capitol building in Sacramento (Room 4202). If you can, show up! The more people that the Assembly Appropriations Committee sees supporting the vaping community and vendors, the more seriously they will take us. So put on your job interview clothes and come out to oppose AB 1500 by attending the hearing on Wednesday, May 14^th 2014.

More on why we should oppose AB 1500 later… for now, the day job demands my attention.