Editorial: San Francisco vaping ban is purely political grandstanding
San Francisco has a decidedly selective way of policing healthy living. It curbs smoking by banning it nearly everywhere. Yet it still allows tobacco and marijuana sales, gives away syringes to addicts and wants to open drug-injection facilities. City politicians go after Big Soda with glee, but mostly stay out of the way of the more powerful alcohol lobby.
Some of those seeming contradictions make practical sense. Others do not.
This latest one is flat-out ludicrous: Embarrassed that the No. 1 vaping company is prospering on port property, city leaders are in a legal fury. The city attorney and a member of the Board of Supervisors have proposed to bar e-cigarette firms from renting city property and, more sweepingly, block the sale of e-cigarettes in the city.
The stated rationale, of course, is a concern for public health. After all, vaping companies prey on a young audience with candy-flavored offerings and a hip, streamlined device. For other users, e-cigarettes are sold as a pathway from the chemical harms of tobacco, though the danger of nicotine addiction remains.
E-cigs are no fad, with the big tobacco company Altria in December buying a 35 percent share of Juul, based on Pier 70, giving the company a value of $38 billion. This city, an ostensible temple of clean living, is home to the leading edge firm in the vaping game — and yet the proposed measures can’t chase it out of town as long as its lease runs.