NEWS
WHY MINNEAPOLIS IS THE WORST
PLACE FOR VAPING IN THE US
‘BY A SIGNIFICANT MARGIN’
A major new study on vaping has
ranked 52 US cities on their regulatory
environment for vaping.
The authors of the report have given
each of the cities rankings from A+ to F
and makes grim reading for those who
see vaping as a much safer alternative
to smoking.
Washington-based free-market thinktank R Street Institute, which conducted
the study, said: “Our research revealed
a broad array of regulatory restrictions
that affect the legality of using vaping
products in enclosed workspaces,
restaurants, bars and e-cigarette shops.”
At the bottom of the pile with F grades
were Boston, Chicago, Minneapolis,
Philadelphia, Seattle and eight cities in
California — Fresno, Long Beach, Los
Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, San
Diego, San Francisco and San Jose.
The study said that of all the cities with
the lowest grade, Minneapolis worst of
those “by a significant margin.”
“The city, state and county regulations
imposed within Minneapolis patently
fail to recognize the potential of vapor
products to reduce tobacco harm,” the
report said.
“Conditions are so bad that the city is
home to a tax paradigm that actually
favors cigarettes over vapor.”
The top overall city with an A+ grade
was Virginia Beach, Virginia, with the
report authors saying: “Across the board,
the city embraces policies conducive
to tobacco harm reduction. It is helped
greatly by a 2010 state Supreme Court
ruling that recognizes the distinction
between vapor and traditional cigarettes.
“Virginia Beach was the only city
to do better than the base score of
95. Following close behind were
Albuquerque, New Mexico and three
Arizona cities: Mesa, Phoenix
and Tucson.”
The report says that “relatively few cities”
in the US are actively addressing vaping
in terms of tax policy and it says that the
more politically conservative cities like
Colorado Springs, Mesa and Tucson
“appear to have a more hands-off
approach to vapor—possibly recognizing
the different nature of the products.”
Environmental prohibitions, excise taxes
and retail licensing regulations were all
factors considered in assigning each city
a grade.
“Conditions are so bad
that the city is home to
a tax paradigm
that actually favors
cigarettes over vapor.”
The authors also took each city’s “harm
reduction climate,” into account too
which added points for public information
campaigns which accurately discuss the
health effects of vaping and deducted
points for cities where public officials
equated vaping with smoking.
The report concluded: “Rather than
arbitrarily and unscientifically drawing
the conclusion that cigarettes and vapor
products are equivalent, public officials
should consider policies [that] treat vapor
products proportionally to their
health impacts.
“In the process, they’d be wise to
consider whether many of their
policies related to tobacco harm really
have the impacts they claim—or are
simply creating a series of unfortunate
unintended consequences.”
VAPOUROUND MAGAZINE USA 17