On September 10, the U.S. House of Representatives’ Health Subcommittee convened a hearing with the FDA’s Deputy Commissioner and the Director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP). The session spotlighted the Biden administration’s tobacco programs, underscoring an alarming disconnect between federal policies and the public’s needs.

CTP Director Brian King revealed that out of 26 million premarket tobacco applications submitted over the past four years, the FDA rejected 99 percent, approving only 34 e-cigarette products and devices. Notably, among nearly one million applications for non-tobacco nicotine products from over 200 companies, not a single product has been approved.

During the same period, the FDA has approved thousands of combustible tobacco products. The agency has green-lit traditional cigarettes over vaping products at a staggering ratio of 45 to 1.

The American public, however, seems to want safer alternatives. Survey data from Philip Morris International (PMI)—which owns Zyn, the leading nicotine pouch brand—suggests voters support more FDA-approved alternatives to smoking. Out of 2,000 likely voters, 54 percent agreed that one way to reduce smoking rates is to encourage smokers to switch to FDA-authorized non-combustible options, such as vaping or nicotine patches. A full 68 percent said that American smokers should have access to a broad range of smoke-free alternatives to help them quit.

Why, then, is the FDA so reluctant to approve these products?

For King, the issue boils down to protecting children. He highlighted the Premarket Tobacco Product Application (PMTA) process as essential to public health, particularly for youth. Yet, according to the FDA’s own data, youth e-cigarette use has hit a decade low, and the agency reports that nicotine pouch usage among teens remains minimal. The justification for the FDA’s slow-rolling approval of alternatives appears increasingly tenuous.

Florida Congressman Neil Dunn echoed this sentiment during the hearing, expressing “grave concerns” about the unchecked influx of illegal vape and nicotine products from China, a problem exacerbated by the FDA’s sluggish approval process. This regulatory bottleneck, Dunn argued, leaves a market gap that illegal foreign manufacturers are all too happy to exploit—often at the expense of American children.

The Biden administration’s broader tobacco policies seem equally out of touch. Recent efforts to tax and even ban flavored vapes—favored by smokers seeking to reduce nicotine intake or quit altogether—only serve to deepen the disconnect.

Taxes on e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches already dwarf those on traditional cigarettes, creating a troubling double standard. By penalizing non-cigarette alternatives with higher taxes, the administration is making it harder for consumers to transition away from combustible tobacco. Outright bans are an even worse approach, especially given the current public health crisis.

It’s no coincidence that, in the midst of these unpopular policies, the Biden administration has received millions of dollars from tobacco giants. The federal government is projected to collect $9 billion in tax revenue over the next decade from the new vaping taxes alone—a significant windfall for a policy that ostensibly aims to reduce smoking.

But banning and taxing cigarette alternatives while expecting smokers to quit altogether ignores the reality of addiction. King noted that in 2024, 500,000 youths stopped using e-cigarettes, but failed to mention that restricting vaping products often drives up youth smoking rates. A study by economists at Georgia State University found that, following the FDA’s national flavored e-cigarette ban, cigarette consumption increased across all demographics, including among young people, the elderly, and pregnant women.

Moreover, many e-cigarette users find ways around the bans. In New York, New Jersey, and Washington D.C., where flavored vapes are banned, e-cigarette use did decline, but over half of users continued to access flavored products through illicit means. These black markets are not only more expensive but also more dangerous.

Reducing youth smoking and vaping is a noble goal, but the science is clear: combustible cigarettes are far deadlier than their electronic counterparts. In 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 2,807 cases of e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI), leading to 68 deaths. Smoking, by comparison, caused 449,300 deaths in the same year.

The FDA’s current approach—making cigarette alternatives more expensive and less accessible—stifles consumer choice and public health progress. By restricting access to safer options, the Biden administration is inadvertently pushing people back toward traditional cigarettes, which remain the most harmful of all nicotine delivery methods.

These policies not only reflect a deep ideological commitment to misguided public health strategies but also a fundamental distrust of the American public’s ability to make informed choices. In the end, Americans deserve a more coherent and pragmatic tobacco policy—one that prioritizes public health and consumer freedom over bureaucratic caution and outdated moralism.