Monday, November 18, 2019

Trump Backs Off Flavored Vape Ban Amid Backlash




Sources:
Washington Post
Fox Business


Two months ago, Trump promised to try and fix the youth vaping epidemic that has affected 5 million teenagers in the US by banning most flavored e-cigarettes, a decision that was cleared by federal regulators. Candy, fruit, and mint flavors were to be ordered off the market within a month after the ban. The only thing left for this to go into effect was Trump’s signature.

However, on November 4th, Trump suddenly changed his decision and refused to sign the “decision memo” page, stating that he did not want the ban (that he once vehemently supported) to go into effect. He feared that people would lose jobs and be angry with him. Trump decided to no longer support a significant public health issue and not ban flavored e-cigarettes anymore because he is worried that the vape shop owners and their customers would harm his chance at reelection. 

This connects to the government's role to protect citizens and their safety/health but also the people’s freedom to choose, which has been a reoccurring topic like abortion. There needs to be a balance between government regulation of safety and helping citizens maintain good health while also taking into account what the people want. However, this issue in particular is starting to escalate with the amount of teenagers going to the hospital rising because of a life threatening emergency linked to vaping, causing them to fight for their life. I think although he doesn’t support the ban of e-cigarettes anymore because he fears he won’t get the support of many vape store owners and their customers, he will still lose support from parents who have children that are being affected by this e-cigarette epidemic. Either way, he will lose support.

  1. Should Trump have banned e-cigarettes (and lose some support from vape store owners and their customers) or was it a good idea that he backed out of his original decision (and lose some support from families who are affected by this vaping issue)?
  2. Is this issue a big factor in the possibility of his reelection?

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

With the US in an unseen epidemic of vaping and drug use, President Trump is justified in saying that a lot of his supporters are suppliers of these or are users just because of the amount of people that vape or use drugs. However, this crises puts the people's public health in danger as it is already widely known that vaping and e-cigarettes cause unintended consequences and health impairments despite the overwhelming evidence that the industries want to be put against them. This ban could have been a step in the right direction to improving the health of teenagers that are pulled into addiction or unknowingly harming their body. The vaping and e-cigarette industry has not been helping because the only thing they care about is getting more people to use their products, not their safety, just like the tobacco industry. So, as lobbyists swarmed President Trump to get him to not sign the ban and as his advisors warned him that some of his supporters would be lost, it seems that the President has failed to protect the health of his supporters, encouraging their problems. This decision could backfire with people against vaping and e-cigarettes choosing to condemn President Trump for his decisions, but they have significantly less power than the vape and e-cig industries. So, President Trump had a good idea in mind that would help the American population, but he chose to accept his own ambitions and kneel to the industry instead.

Anonymous said...

When a president puts his or her own agenda before the needs of the people, they are not fit to be in such a position of power. They do not deserve to be called the president. Trump simply backing out of this bill based solely around the concern about his reelection is contradictory. Trump should look after the people before his own affairs. Yes, he claimed that the ban would put many Americans out of jobs, but this is also part of his quest to strengthen the economy for monopolies and the elite, such as himself. It is not what the people want, but what the people need. It takes a strong leader to do what's necessary, but at the cost of his or her own welfare.

Anonymous said...

Trump has always flip flopped between issues, so, unfortunately, it’s not really surprising that he would back out of something he’s been so vocal about. While it’s completely fine to change one’s opinion, Trump has shown a trend of inconsistency across the board and an inability to remain dedicated to many issues. Personally, this isn’t a trait that I would necessarily seek out for a president. Like you said, backlash is inevitable; as long as you’re picking one side on an issue, you’re standing against another, so I agree that this wasn’t a smart move. Trump may lose support because of this, but then again, people have still stood by him regardless of his inconsistent track record. I don’t think that this will be a defining moment in determining his chances in the election, but rather the impeachment proceedings and the things people learn from that.

Anonymous said...

Vaping and e-cigarettes have been a huge epidemic, and Trump's decision to not sign the ban is unjustified as he initially advocated for the ban, and also is an extreme health issue. Trumps reasoning to revoke his decision was because he was worried that the consumers and producers of e-cigarettes would complain, but the decision shouldn't be based off of his reputation, and the decision should be for whats right for the people. Even if a few people complain, it ultimately is better for e-cigarettes to be banned as it would prevent a lot of health problems in the population of the U.S. As president, you were elected to make decisions that would make the country a better place, and not a way to raise your reputation. Even if he did maintain the number of jobs, there will not be not be a sufficient amount of people to cover those jobs in the future if the future generation won't even be there.

Anonymous said...

Although Trump flip-flops more than its type in shoes, we all knew that already. When it comes to such a creature, it's hard to expect much. With that said, I think we can expect more from our state legislatures on such issues. Recently, a new law will be put into effect in Illinois that raises the smoking age from 18 to 21, in part to combat teen/underage smoking. Even if the federal government refuses to comply with it's constituents needs, that should not be an immovable wall for change. Also, Trump is perhaps less fearful of losing the general populations vape vendor votes (ohhh alliteration but probably grammatically incorrect?), but more of the ultra rich tobacco and vaping industry executives rolling in the dough that are influencing politics and the president's very decisions. I mean, could their possibly be enough vape store owners to lose Trump the election should he sign? Probably not. It's also ridiculously funny when said industries support efforts to raise smoking ages and pass legislation publicly, when they know their nasty sh*t kills people. Gotta love humans.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I think the President should have banned flavored e-cigarettes. Essentially every law or political move will alienate someone. Helping millions of children to stay healthy is more important than helping those who profit off them. That being said, I think it is more likely that the President did not sign because of pressure from corporations and big tobacco, rather than, as per the example given, pressure from small smoke shop owners. This was, additionally, a poor move because it demonstrates how easily he can flip flop, simply doing what will get him reelected in 2020 and please his supporters. In this sudden change of position, he is ignoring his personal values as a trustee and American values as a whole––prioritizing winning an office over the health of select Americans. I do not think this is a big factor only because so much controversy already surrounds the Trump presidency. The media is more likely to pick up and discuss stories about information coming out of the impeachment hearings than an already irrelevant flip flop (which is not new for this president).

Anonymous said...

I'm really not sure if he made the right decision or not. On the one hand, I personally am not a fan of vaping at all and would love to see it become less available as well as attractive the adolescent population. On the other hand, people are going to find ways to get what they want. Putting bans on things such as drugs doesn't always have the effect you hope for because people want what they want and don't really care what the government has to say about this. It's so sad that Trump decided to cancel his ban due to his fear of not being reelected, instead putting more young lives at risk. :(

Anonymous said...

I think Trump should have stuck to the ban, because e cigarettes have been proven to have fast acting, acute effects on the body, even in comparison to smoking, in which serious illnesses may take decades to manifest. Add on the fact of how young the target consumers are and he had a chance to nip a possible epidemic in the bud. On the other hand, I agree with Olivia that banning things doesn't always get the result you want, but at the same time vaping is relatively new, and isn't as established in the American conscious as something like tobacco or alcohol is, so I'd maintain hope that a ban could work in this case.

Mavi Eyuboglu said...

Yes, vaping has turned into an epidemic and therefore, is a public health concern. But we can't forget that before Trump was president, he was a business man. And while e-cigarettes have been a health hazard, it has been a very successful market on the rise. It's possible that Trump made this decision thinking more with this business brain than his president brain. Because it doesn't just affect a few vape store owners and their customers. Companies like JUUL are huge and they have thousands of employees of all different categories. Cutting down on e-cigarettes means inevitable downsizing on one of the most fast progressing markets and economies right now. So I'm not sure if Trump made the right decision or not but speaking from an economic sense, it could have been the right decision. I hate to say it, but the teens who want to vape will do it either way. Ban or not, they will find a way. So it truly doesn't matter if the ban went through or not because the same teens would be getting access to the same e-cigarettes. And this way, without the ban, the businesses don't have to go through the hardships. So again, I don't want to say it was a good decision or not, but I can see it from both perspectives.

Ryan Oshinsky said...

To answer your second question, I would say that Trump's policy decisions on substance consumption will play a factor in the next election. Trump choosing not to ban vaping appeals to his more libertarian-leaning base. Right now, one of the most effective policy weapons the 2020 Democrats have is the legalization of marijuana, which has huge bipartisan support. I wouldn't be surprised to see Trump push to maybe legalize or at least decriminalize marijuana to pull that rug out from under his general election challenger.

Samantha Hou said...

While Trump may have decided not to ban flavored e-cigarettes in order to protect his support going into the elections, I kind of agree with his decision for a different reason. While I do think that flavors contribute to the wide-spread issue of youth vaping, I don't believe that banning flavors was the best way to solve it. Banning flavors may be seen as an infringement on the companies' freedom and would also cause companies to lose customers who are legally allowed to use their products. I think that perhaps some sort of program to increase regulation on selling and target youths might be a solution that would also still allow e-cigarette companies to put out products to a legal customer base. Thus, coming from Trump's perspective, his decision can be seen as a good one appealing to a more libertarian audience and would allow him to come up with a different solution in order to still care for public health.