Sally Satel: Why HUD should allow vaping in public housing

[Bill Godshall]

Sally Satel: Why HUD should allow vaping in public housing
Why HUD Should Allow Vaping In Public Housing

Truly excellent.

If HUD truly desired to significantly reduce smoking in public housing, the agency would encourage
all smoking tenants to switch to vaping since it poses no risks to others, and would save the tenants and HUD money (since vapor products cost less than cigarettes, and since vaping saves HUD maintenance money).

To send comments to HUD, go to:
Regulations.gov

HUD's proposed rule would ban smoking (and probably vaping) in public housing (and outside within 25 feet of buildings); comment period ends January 19, 2016

 

[this is my name]

Sally Satel: Why HUD should allow vaping in public housing
Why HUD Should Allow Vaping In Public Housing

Truly excellent.

If HUD truly desired to significantly reduce smoking in public housing, the agency would encourage
all smoking tenants to switch to vaping since it poses no risks to others, and would save the tenants and HUD money (since vapor products cost less than cigarettes, and since vaping saves HUD maintenance money).

Not to mention the money that could be saved not having to repaint/replace tar stained walls and ceiling fans. Or replacing stinking carpet with burn holes.

I work in apartments and when a smoker moves out, there is a lot of work to do.

 

[Bill Godshall]

HUD's proposal cites several hundred millions of dollars in economic benefits of banning smoking on pages 5, 8 & 9 at
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=smoke-freepublichousing.pdf

A CDC study by Brian King estimated $496.82 million in annual cost savings if smoking is banned in public housing
Preventing Chronic Disease | National and State Cost Savings Associated With Prohibiting Smoking in Subsidized and Public Housing in the United States - CDC

But both HUD and CDC cost saving estimates naively assumed that all smokers would swiftly comply with the new rule, and neither HUD nor CDC bother estimating costs of enforcement. So nobody should be surprised FDA is similarly incompetent at estimating costs of complying with its deeming reg/ban, and naively assuming that everyone will comply.

Amazingly, while CDC's Brian King claims a desire to reduce smoking (and to ban smoking in public housing), he's been demonizing vaping and lobbying for FDA's deeming e-cig ban.

 

[Kent C]

But both HUD and CDC cost saving estimates naively assumed that all smokers would swiftly comply with the new rule, and neither HUD nor CDC bother estimating costs of enforcement. So nobody should be surprised FDA is similarly incompetent at estimating costs of complying with its deeming reg/ban, and naively assuming that everyone will comply.

They really have no idea. Brings to mind the song and video: You've Got Another Thing Comin'

 

[DC2]

I own a few rental properties, and no way in hell is anyone allowed to smoke in them.
But they can vape all day long for all I care.