Hawaii hearings scheduled for 2/7: Testimony is due today on SB2029, SB2495 and SB2472

[dr g]

Hawaii vapers and any allies anywhere, here are the next hearings. Testimony is supposed to be submitted 24-48 hours before the hearing, anything after 24 hours before is considered late and may not be dispersed to the committee. The hearing is at 9 AM HST on friday, so testimony should be submitted by 9AM today, which is in 3 hours.

Hawaii vapers would appreciate support from anyone who can take the time to submit testimony, even if it's just to register an "oppose". What happens in Hawaii is not irrelevant in other states, consider that the entire nationwide debate on same-sex marriage started with legislation in Hawaii.

SB2029 - Raise legal age to 21, IMO this is bad in general but there is zero justification for raising it for vaping

Report Title:	tobacco Sales; Age Restriction
Description:	Increases the minimum age to purchase tobacco products, including electronic smoking devices, from eighteen to twenty-one. Makes conforming amendments.

Measure Status

SB2495 - This is the big one I think

Report Title:

Electronic Smoking Device; License; Smoking; Cigarettes; Tobacco Products; Restrictions; Ban; Permit

Description:

Requires persons engaged as wholesalers and dealers of electronic smoking devices and retailers of electronic smoking devices to obtain a license from the department of health. Limits the retail sale of electronic smoking devices to those retailers who also hold a retail tobacco permit. Specifies that the revenue from electronic smoking device license fees shall be used to support smoking cessation programs in the State. Amends Hawaii's anti-smoking statute to prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in places open to the public and places of employment. Clarifies that the sale, distribution, or display of electronic smoking devices is restricted in the same manner as cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Measure Status

SB 2572 - Tax on vaping products

Report Title:	Health; Electronic Smoking Devices; Tax; Excise Tax
Description:	Establishes an excise tax on electronic smoking devices.

Measure Status

 

[dr g]

If you need ideas, here is what I wrote:

SB2495

Dear Chairs Green and Baker, Vice-Chair Taniguchi, and Members of the Committees,

Thank you for the opportunity to speak out STRONGLY AGAINST SB2495, which would impose tobacco regulations on businesses involving e-liquid and e-liquid vaporization equipment (AKA e-cigarettes or vaping products); regulate vaping as tobacco smoking; and appropriate fees levied on the industry to “smoking cessation programs.” There is no justification for conflating tobacco and vaping, and doing so is against the interests of businesses and the public alike. Directing fees levied on vaping business to “smoking cessation programs” is practically Orwellian, since vaping is an effective smoking cessation tool.

Vaping is not smoking. There is a large and growing body of science showing that vaping produces little to none of the exposure to harmful substances found in tobacco smoke. This is in absolute terms, not just as compared to smoking. Studies have also shown that “secondhand vapor” is effectively nonexistent – no dangerous substances are detectable in room air, and even nicotine is undetectable.

Forcing vaping businesses to become tobacco businesses is bad. I am the proprietor of an e-liquid vaporizer manufacturing business, and it is important for the committees to know that Hawaii has a strong and burgeoning vaping industry. There are at least 3 hardware manufacturers and at least a half-dozen e-liquid manufacturers, in addition to the many retail outlets. Speaking for my business, we have no need or desire to market or sell tobacco products, however if we were required to get a retail tobacco license, we would be tempted to add tobacco products to our lineup to mitigate costs associated with such licensing. In other words this could increase the prevalence of tobacco products in Hawaii, while not having such licensing requirements keeps vaping businesses out of the tobacco business.

Businesses should be able to allow vaping if they choose. Indoor smoking bans are ostensibly based on the potential for harm to all people in the enclosed space from secondhand smoke. The downside is economic harm to businesses that would otherwise have chosen to allow their patrons to smoke. Since studies have shown there is no effective risk from “secondhand vapor,” this eliminates any justification for an indoor ban. This is a win-win situation. Recreational use of nicotine per se is legal and unregulated; people are free to choose to do it and businesses should be able to serve that when there is no compelling reason to disallow it.

Vaping is smoking cessation. Studies have also shown that vaping is as effective, and likely more effective a tool for quitting smoking as other commonly accepted therapies. Anecdotally, vaping appears to be one of the most effective smoking cessation tools ever invented – ask around your constituencies and it will be clear. Many people statewide have quit long-term tobacco habits using vaping, when other methods simply didn’t work. This should be encouraged, not discouraged.

The vaping industry does a good job of self-regulation. Because people by and large turn to vaping to escape the self-harm associated with smoking, the vaping industry has a highly functional self-regulating mechanism. Safety is a paramount concern for vaping consumers, and hardware and e-liquids are scrutinized closely. Vaping communities are preoccupied with safe use, and word gets around quickly when a manufacturer is not doing all it can. In fact, the industry is so safety-conscious that even Chinese manufacturers are taking steps to make their devices and e-liquids as safe as possible. It is a competitive advantage for vaping businesses to be able to tout safety!

Teen vaping does not lead to teen smoking. Vaping is a new product segment that is exploding in popularity, so it is impossible for usage figures to NOT be up across all segments, including children. But the increase in vaping among children in 2012 is correlated with a reduction in tobacco smoking among children in 2012, making it difficult to suggest that teen vaping leads to teen smoking. In the absence of toxic exposure and effects, vaping may actually make teenage indiscretions – which no law can possibly end – safer.

I have attached studies outlining the current scientific knowledge of the safety of vaping, which show
1) toxin exposure to be negligible, 2) that purportedly dangerous “secondhand vapor” is basically nonexistent, and 3) that vaping is as effective or moreso than other therapies. Please legislate based on evidence, and in the public interest.