Inconsistency, Corruption of Congress on Display in Vape Debate

It’s not that hard anymore in a state legislature to get a bill across the finish line that will legalize or at least decriminalize marijuana use. But outside the West Coast, few states are even thinking of legalizing cocaine, heroin, or other hard drugs. 

Not that long ago, marijuana legislation was dead on arrival in most state capitals, so it’s possible Overton’s window will shift on these other drugs too. But it’s fair to ask why marijuana and none of the others. 

The argument against marijuana even in recent years was that alcohol could be used in cooking or drank in small enough amounts that it had essentially no power to intoxicate, but weed was smoked or eaten or ingested solely to get stoned.

So, the move to legalize marijuana means we’ve said as a society we are fine with substances whose sole reason for use is to intoxicate the user, but we’re not yet fine with getting obliterated legally on coke or other hard drugs. 

What is the standard? What today are we willing to allow governments to do to us in the name of “protecting us from ourselves.” 

Obviously, outlawing alcohol is out of the question in terms of protecting us from potentially life-damaging substances. We’ve tried it, and no one is for going back there.

So is marijuana, although there are those who favor letting it be smoked but not ingested via gummies or cookies. Inevitably, so will be harder drugs – mushrooms and other drugs already are legal in some states that do indeed seem to be functioning today with more likely to follow.

They restrict, tax and bar TV and radio advertising for cigarettes, but it’s easier to get around the ad barrier these days, and the products are age-restricted, legal, widely available, and not going anywhere. 

And then we get to vaping. 

First, what category does it fall into? Does it go with marijuana or even harder drugs because of its potential as a delivery system? Does it go with cigarettes since most view it as a healthier, no-tar alternative to smoking as a nicotine delivery device? Indeed, some stop-smoking experts have hailed vaping as an off-ramp from smoking addiction that is beneficial in the long run. 

These questions would be academic and inconsequential but for the fact Congress is getting involved again. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., asked the Food and Drug Administration to investigate a new Chinese-made e-cigarette that Schumer charges is being marketed to children. This is almost always a pretext for declaring the product a danger to children and paving the way for banning it. 

Vaping is already age protected, and research shows places where vaping is available for adults do not have higher incidences of youth involvement. 

Schumer also is trying to schedule hearings on banning flavored vaping products and has indicated he intends to treat social media influencers who recommend vaping products as televised commercial in potential future legislation. 

Interestingly, Schumer also is cosponsoring legislation introduced by Sens. Corey Booker of New Jersey and Ron Wyden of Oregon, known as the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act, which would remove cannabis from the federal list of controlled dangerous substances. This would make it easier for banks to lend to marijuana businesses and lead to a significant escalation in marijuana production and marketing in the US.

So, the question becomes what is the majority leader’s stance on when government should regulate these products? He’s ready to dramatically increase access to marijuana – whose only real use is to get high. But he wants to ban vaping, whose “high” when used properly is equivalent to that of cigarettes. 

It’s not the intoxication thing – he’s willing to let far more Americans get access to far more weed. And it’s not the “exposure to kids” thing – he’s all for gummies in flavors such as grape, mango, chocolate, and a variety of candy delivery devices – Gummy Bears, Sour Worms, Pop Rocks, which obviously builds appeal to the young.

And realistically it’s not the “damage to yourself” thing because he doesn’t seek to take cigarettes or weed off the market, and vaping is in theory not as harmful as either.

We still have some sorting out to do in terms of what should cause us to ban or allow things along these lines. But from what has been established already, banning vaping at this point would seem inconsistent with the decisions Schumer and others already have made and clearly want to make in the future. 

And since we can’t identify any extreme threats, we should err on the side of freedom and let adults use the products they want.

Brian McNicoll, a freelance writer based in Alexandria, Virginia, is a former senior writer for The Heritage Foundation and former director of communications for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.