The lobbying that mattered most (in an immediate and practical sense) was all done during the public comment period that just ended a few days ago. For, at this point, it will be the FDA that decides the fate of the ecig; and how the FDA sees and understands its role in implementing the FSPTCA will be the deciding factor that will determine how the ecig will ultimately be regulated.
If the FDA opts to regulate the ecig as a tobacco product (which is, contrary to the misunderstanding of many, the BEST case scenario), then there will likely be some measure of problems for suppliers without a tobacco retailers license, (and/or without an FDA-approved tobacco product to sell), but the worst that ecig users would likely face is a short-term difficulty in obtaining supplies. Thus, in this best case scenario (which is still possible to occur), the need for lobbying would relate to such issues like taxes, flavors, nicotine strength, and where an ecig can and cannot be legally used.
If the FDA opts to regulate the ecig as a drug/device product in a manner similar to NRTs (which is definitely what would have occurred in a pre-FSPTCA world, and is still quite possible to occur now), then the perceived need for lobbying will ultimately, and perhaps even soon, be trumped by profoundly more urgent matters than forming some sort of vapers PAC. Suppliers will need attorneys, and users will need new solutions; but, in either case, resources will be needed somewhere other than in a PAC.
