62 Percent Think E-Cigarette Use in Public Should be Allowed Despite Expected FDA Regulations


Time magazine says, "Regulations of electronic cigarettes are expected to be a top priority for states and cities in 2014." Indeed, many districts have placed or are considering placing bans on the tobacco-free nicotine delivery devices and the Food and Drug Administration plans this month to issue guidelines regulating e-cigarettes as a tobacco product. But Americans don't want the government interfering with people's ability to use e-cigarettes.

The new Reason-Rupe poll finds that 62 percent of Americans think the government should allow people to use tobacco-free electronic cigarettes in public places while 34 percent say the government should prohibit this activity.

Non-partisan independents (66 percent) and independents who lean Republican (68 percent) are more likely than Democrats (58 percent) to think government should allow people to use e-cigarettes in public places. Nevertheless, majorities of all political groups think electronic cigarettes should be allowed, including 63 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents who lean Democratic.

Self-identified libertarians are 22 points more likely than self-identified liberals to say the government should allow this activity (77 percent to 55 percent).

Older Americans are much more opposed than younger Americans to e-cigarette use in public.  Forty-two percent of people ages 55 and over favor a government ban on the public use of e-cigarettes while just 29 percent of Americans under age 35 agree.

Nationwide telephone poll conducted Dec 4-8 2013 interviewed 1011 adults on both mobile (506) and landline (505) phones, with a margin of error +/- 3.7%. Princeton Survey Research Associates International executed the nationwide Reason-Rupe survey. Columns may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Full poll results, detailed tables, and methodology found here. Sign up for notifications of new releases of the Reason-Rupe poll here.

NEXT: Drug Warriors Kidnap and Sexually Assault a Woman After Getting Permission From a Dog

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Self-identified libertarians are 22 points more likely than self-identified liberals to say the government should allow this activity (77 percent to 55 percent).

    There are people who call themselves libertarians and think the government should ban use of e-cigarettes in public places?

    1. There are douchebags like Bill Maher who sometimes self-identify as a libertarian, for reasons I can't explain.

      1. I can assume BM will be voting for Rand in the next election then, right?

        1. I do not think Maher is a libertarian at all. And I intend to support Rand. Having said that I do not think that is a foolproof litmus test for whether one is a libertarian. For example, if, among standard LP stands, the issues of immigration or abortion had special importance to one it could be difficult for some libertarians to support him.

      2. If Bill Maher's a libertarian, then we're all militant anarchists.

      3. But he seems like the sort who is libertarian about things like smoking and drugs and whatnot, but regular leftist on most other things. I've ignored him for years now, so maybe he has changed, but I wouldn't imagine Maher being for a ban.

    2. "I support the right of communities to organize themselves as the voters wish."

    3. There are so many people in this world who don't even have a fucking clue what "libertarian" means that you pretty much have to ignore its use unless you know that the source actually does know what it means.

      1. Shreek is a great continuous example of this.

    4. Are you really going to change your handle? It's hard enough keeping track of who's who without all the name changing.

      Besides, I liked SweatingGin.

  2. Only 62%.

    They are E-Cigarretes. Did they get that part?

    1. It hurts my brain when I try to understand the objection to e-cigs.

      1. I know. Do they also object to nicotine gum or patches in public? A lot of people smoke e-cigs as a step toward quitting any smoking. Well, we can not have that!

        1. The thrust of public appeals is to Do Something, because Something Must Be Done.

          It's not to achieve something, because clearly delineating goals and timetables would interfere with Doing Something later on.

      2. It's very, very simple. Most people who love to ban things are animists. They totemize objects and imbue them with supernatural powers; so, in the case of cigarettes, a slim white-ish cylinder that you suck on and smoke/vapor comes out is the totem. And to them, this totem is pure evil. Since they are retarded animists, anything that even looks like a cigarette gains the same supernatural evil powers; hence, they see e-cigs, they see people operating them like cigarettes, and all they see is the evil totem that must be destroyed before it uses its supernatural powers to seduce and kill.

        Gun banners are just the same, which is why you get kids being suspended for chewing their pop-tart into the vague shape of a gun. It looks like a gun, therefore it is evil.

        Animists are extremely stupid, but they are distressingly common.

      3. Goes to show what they really care about is controlling people, not, as they claim, helping them.

        1. And among the hard core anti-smoking people, it seems like a lot of them would rather just have smokers all die rather than finding safer alternatives as it will further their goal of a tobacco free world more quickly. Or something like that.

  3. "Gun banners are just the same, which is why you get kids being suspended for chewing their pop-tart into the vague shape of a gun. It looks like a gun, therefore it is evil."

    That is actually a quite interesting explanation that does explain a fair amount of silliness.

  4. 62% of Americans polled ignored by an unelected, unaccountable federal bureaucracy.

  5. I figure I'd better buy my e-cigarettes now, before they get banned. Any recommendations as to which I should get?

    1. A couple people I work with have Provari e-cigs with clear tanks and other associated things attached to them.

      Total cost was around $200 for the "unit" plus about $40 for a 100ml bottle of juice (which would probably last a pack-a-day smoker about a month and a half, give or take.)

      I'm looking into to getting one after the new year.

      1. Dammit:

        *The folks I work with can't say enough good things about the Provari, hence my recommendation.

        1. I wouldn't recommend starting with a Provari but they certainly rock! Its more of an advanced mod but if your ready to jump in head over heals go for it! You will be dripping and wrapping your own coils in no time LOL.

    2. I have a Provari and it's great. I actually broke my first one and went out and bought another one. I quit smoking 2 years ago without trying using an Ecig. If that's not a testament to their effectiveness, I don't know what is!

    3. Check out the E-Cig forum, its easy to find. I recommend either an Ego battery or an I-taste VV Battery and a Protank2 as a great start. It can be confusing at first because there are so many options and different opinions on how to do things , the industry is brand new, innovations come out daily.Stay away from anything you mite fond in a convenience store. If you have a Vape shop near you just go there and they will hook you up. You can get the above equipment for around $50 and juice runs around $12 for a bottle that will last you a few weeks. After 25 years of smoking I quit after one day of vapeing Good luck!

  6. If e-cigs are orderless and they don't cause second hand buzz then there really can't be any objections. That's like telling people they can't take an aspirin in public.

    However, if they do cause second hand buzz then they will have to be regulated to specific well ventilated areas.

    Think about it this way, if you are a parent (or have the imagination of what it is like to be one) and you are vaping then are you willing to blow your vapor into your newborn child's face for an hour at a time? If not then you shouldn't be vaping in public.

    Also, if you are vaping around others in a stagnant area and don't have the decency to stop then you shouldn't mind people with children forcibly stopping you or people without children releasing their own gas around you.

    1. To be truthful they are not odorless but rarely unpleasant like a cigarette. My wife vapes a sweet cupcake flavor and the air smells like pleasant vanilla baked goods wherever she goes. It depends on the juice some have no smell, My tobacco flavors don't smell at all.

      1. I don't think odor will be that big a deal. We already deal with people who use too much perfume or cologne - and it sounds like the vapor has a set of pleasant smells. My issue would be the buzz - especially if it gave me a headache or something from not being used to it.

  7. Sounds like a pretty good plan to me dude.


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.