A Senate vote in favor of a ban on the sale of flavored tobacco and e-liquid products was a priority for Health and Welfare Committee Chair Ginny Lyons, D-Chittenden Southeast. When the chamber passed the bill in late March, she thought the hard part was done.
In previous attempts since 2019, similar bills made it through Lyons’ committee, but never got to the Senate floor. Now with just a few weeks until adjournment, she is still waiting for S.18 to appear on the agenda of the House Human Services Committee, where it was sent three weeks ago.
The witnesses called by her committee provided a wide range of information, including the high cost of tobacco-related illness to state coffers and the strong preference of young and new smokers for flavored products, Lyons said.
“All the data is there, and obviously it was very compelling to this committee and the full Senate,” Lyons said. “I really wish that [House Human Services] would take testimony to appreciate the importance of moving that forward.”
The Human Services Committee spent the past several weeks looking at S.56, the Senate’s bill to address access to and affordability of child care. The panel is now discussing H.72, which would offer immunity to people operating and utilizing supervised sites for the consumption of previously obtained illicit drugs.
Chair Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, said Wednesday that the committee does plan to take testimony on both the flavored tobacco bill and on S.25, which would limit the sale of products containing the chemical group PFAS, before adjournment.
“The committee is definitely taking up the bills. It’s just a matter of timing,” Woods said. “Our committee does its due diligence in terms of witnesses and understanding the problem.”
Although the House has considered a flavored tobacco ban in previous sessions, Woods pointed out that one-third of the chamber is newly elected, and it is a new issue for those legislators.
“There is, I think, what I would call more divergent opinions about this bill than there has been in the House previously,” she said. “We need to take the time to build consensus around that.”
Even lawmakers in the Senate expressed concern about enacting a full ban on flavored tobacco products just four years after Vermont increased the legal age to purchase tobacco products to 21 years old. They don’t agree with limiting choices for adults.
In the Statehouse cafeteria on Wednesday, Tracy Devarney, a pediatric nurse from South Burlington who works at the University of Vermont Medical Center, shared her personal story with lawmakers as she scooped up strawberry ice cream at an American Cancer Society Action Network event.
Devarney said her mother died from lung cancer after getting hooked on cigarettes as a teenager. Her son switched to vaping after his grandmother’s death because he believed it was safer, but now cannot stop that.
She understands the argument that adults should make their own choices. But without a ban, she knows teenagers will continue to access flavored vaping products that facilitate a lifetime addiction, she said. “It may be illegal, but we all know they are going to get it,” Devarney said.
Proponents of the ban, including the action network, are still hopeful for action in the next few weeks. They worry that pushing a floor vote off until next year will be an advantage for deep-pocketed opponents in the tobacco industry.
“The delay certainly gives them an opportunity for more time and that’s disappointing,” said Mike Rollo, the action network’s director of government relations. “But it also gives us more time for education.”
The New York Legislature is also considering a flavored tobacco ban, championed by Gov. Kathy Hochul, which has drawn far more attention from lobbyists on both sides of the issue than the activity in Vermont.
But major manufacturers are paying attention, and starting to spend money.
Flyers urging customers to “Own it. Voice it.” and “stop overreaching tobacco bans” by contacting Vermont legislators are on display in convenience stores around the state. According to the associated website, the campaign is directed by a subsidiary of Reynolds American, Inc., the parent company of cigarette manufacturer R.J. Reynolds, which owns the vape brand Vuse.
Also, a subsidiary of the Altria Group, which owns Philip Morris USA, Black & Mild cigars and e-liquid brand IQOS, registered a list of lobbyists, consulting and in-house, with the Secretary of State’s Office this session. The company reported having spent around $50,000 on lobbyists and other expenditures by the end of March.
On the other side of the issue, American Cancer Society Action Network reported spending a little over $20,000 during the same period.
A lobbying campaign by the tobacco industry would not be a new experience for Vermont lawmakers. To some degree, it has happened every time Lyons has pushed for a ban.
“They are going to come full tilt, absolutely full tilt, and so will we,” she said.
