Supporters to mount broad campaign in favor of California’s ban on flavored tobacco products

Law banning sale of flavored tobacco is on hold subject to referendum

It’s been about 18 months since California lawmakers passed legislation signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that banned the sale of flavored tobacco products in the state.

A pending referendum in a ballot measure headed for this November’s election has put that law on hold.

Now supporters of the law, led by the American Lung Association, and opponents, including the mighty tobacco industry, are gearing up to for a campaign and popular vote to decide whether California’s ban stays on the books or is dropped.

Halting the sale of such tobacco products in California tops the political agenda of the American Lung Association, which is concerned especially about teens’ use of the products and the potential longterm damage to their health.

Four out of five young people start using tobacco with a flavored product, chiefly e-cigarettes featuring “predatory flavors the tobacco industry uses to lure in children,” said Erica Costa, the Sacramento-based advocacy director for the association.

“It’s shocking,” she said. “They get hooked very young they could potentially become lifelong users.”

In its 20th annual “State of Tobacco Control” report, the nonprofit association — founded in 1904 to fight tuberculosis — urged voters to back a measure on the November ballot that would, if passed, retain the 2020 California law banning the sale of all flavored tobacco products.

“If we can get that passed in California it will set the tone for the nation,” Costa said.

Other supporters include the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the California NAACP, the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council, Parents Against Vaping e-cigarettes, and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

The California Coalition for Fairness, which supports a “no” vote on the ballot measure — which would repeal the law — has reported $21 million in contributions, primarily from the Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds tobacco companies.

“We agree that youth should never have access to any tobacco products, but this can be achieved without imposing a total prohibition on products that millions of adults choose to use,” the coalition said in a statement cited on Ballotpedia.

“Moreover, a prohibition will hurt small businesses and and jobs as products are pushed from licensed, conscientious retailers to an underground market, leading to increased youth access, crime and other social or criminal justice concerns for many California residents,” it said.

The coalition is a San Rafael-based nonprofit formed in 2020 that has identified itself as “sponsored by manufacturers.”

Senate Bill 793 was approved by state lawmakers in August 2020 on a combined vote of 92-1, with the lone no vote from former Assemblyman Bill Bough, an Orange County Republican.

The law bans sale of all flavored tobacco goods, from cotton candy vaping products to banana smash cigarillos and menthol cigarettes.

“Using candy, fruit and other alluring flavors, the tobacco industry weaponized its tactics to beguile a new generation into nicotine addiction while keeping longtime users hooked,” said former state Sen. Jerry Hill of San Mateo, sponsor of SB 793, CSP Daily News, a trade publication, reported.

More than two million middle school and high school students reported currently using e-cigarettes in 2021, with more than eight in 10 using flavored devices, said a study by the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released in September.

Mitch Zeller, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products, said in a news release it was disturbing to find “the quarter of high school students who use e-cigarettes and say they vape every single day.”

“It is critical that these products come off the market and out of the hands of our nation’s youth,” he said.

E-cigarettes are battery-powered smoking devices that have cartridges filled with a liquid that usually contains nicotine, flavorings and chemicals. Users inhale a vapor rather than smoke from combustible tobacco products,

The Food and Drug Administration’s “The Real Cost” campaign began prioritizing e-cigarette messaging in 2017 due to high usage rates among youth.

Citing a report that found about 80% of youth do not see any great risk of harm from regular use of e-cigarettes, the FDA said in a news release the “low-risk mentality could have devastating consequences.”

“Teens’ brains are still developing, making them especially vulnerable to nicotine addiction,” the FDA said.

With California’s ban on hold pending the November vote, Massachusetts is the only state with a strong policy restricting the sale of flavored tobacco products.

In the State of Tobacco Control report, the American Lung Association for the first time listed flavored tobacco products as one of the graded standards.

Massachusetts received the lone A, there were no B’s or C’s, three D’s and 46 F’s, the lowest mark indicating no policy or one that doesn’t meet criteria to receive a point.

California alone received an I for incomplete, citing the postponed implementation of the flavored tobacco products sales ban.

The ballot measure is titled the California Flavored Tobacco Products Ban Referendum.

In Sonoma County, three cities — Petaluma, Sebastopol and Windsor — had top scores of four for strong policies restricting flavored tobacco products.

Five cities — Cloverdale, Cotati, Healdsburg, Rohnert Park and Santa Rosa — and the unincorporated areas had zeros for lack of a policy, and the town of Sonoma had a one for the weakest policy.

Meanwhile, the association intends to push for local government actions that will normalize the restriction of flavored tobacco products and generate support for the state ban.

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors banned the sales of those products in 2017, prompting R.J. Reynolds to launch a repeal campaign and spend $12.9 million supporting it.

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg countered with $2.3 million, boosting the campaign to uphold the ban by almost $1 million.

Voters preserved San Francisco’s ban by a 68.4% majority.

You can reach Staff Writer Guy Kovner at 707-521-5457 or guy.kovner@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @guykovner.