CASAA’s Fall: A Stark Reminder of What Happens When Harm Reduction Can’t Afford to Speak

Consumer‑facing advocacy has always been the engine driving tobacco harm‑reduction (THR) forward. Now that engine is losing one of its most influential components, the Consumer Advocates for Smoke‑Free Alternatives Association (CASAA). For 15 years the pre‑eminent U.S. grassroots organization has been defending access to lower‑risk nicotine products. But sadly, as of August 2025, it will cease all legislative activity because of insufficient funding. And while the group’s website will remain online as an educational archive, its real‑time mobilization of 250,000 registered members will end.

CASAA’s closure is more than a U.S. story, it underscores a worldwide reality. When consumer advocacy relies on shoestring budgets and sporadic industry grants, it becomes fragile precisely when it is most needed. Across the globe, regulatory battles over vapes, heated‑tobacco products and nicotine pouches are intensifying, and opponents of harm reduction often wield the claim that support from the nicotine industry discredits any consumer voice. CASAA’s experience demonstrates how that stigma can translate into dwindling donations and, ultimately, silence.

Since its founding in 2009, CASAA produced legislative alerts, filed court briefs, spoke at public‑health conferences and provided state‑by‑state tracking tools—accomplishments delivered largely by volunteer labour. It postponed flavour bans, delayed Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules and ensured consumers testified at hearings where only industry and public‑health groups had previously held the floor. Such achievements prove that organised users of safer products can recalibrate policy debates otherwise dominated by abstinence‑only narratives.

Why sustainable funding matters

The organisation survived on roughly US $2,000 a month from small donors—far short of the US $10,000 needed for basic operations, such as bill‑tracking software and member communications. Larger contributions came from independent vape businesses and, later, from tobacco companies that market reduced‑risk products. When policy clashes emerged—most recently over “PMTA registry” bills that would wipe out non‑FDA‑authorised vaping products—those corporate donors withdrew support, unwilling to bankroll an organisation opposing their commercial interests. CASAA chose mission over money, but the financial fallout proved fatal.

Sadly, this situation isn’t unique to this one group. A 2023 global audit had indicated that this instability is the norm for such organizations, not the exception. The Global State of Tobacco Harm Reduction (GSTHR) project surveyed 52 active consumer organisations worldwide and discovered that 31 received no funding at all. Combined annual income for the remaining 21 groups amounted to just US $310,000—a sum Bloomberg Philanthropies spends in a single day of its US $160 million anti‑vaping campaign.

Most advocacy work within such organizations is done by volunteers: only seven groups reported any paid staff, employing a total of 13 people across five continents. These lean operations survive mainly through passion, not payroll, and many affiliate under regional umbrellas such as ETHRA (Europe), CAPHRA (Asia‑Pacific), CASA (Africa) and ARDT Iberoamérica (Latin America).

In the Philippines, where smoking causes an estimated 117,000 deaths each year, the consumer advocacy group Vapers PH faced similar financial struggles while supporting the Vaporized Nicotine Products Act. Opponents accused the group of being influenced by “Big Tobacco,” which discouraged donors and led to a drop in funding. In France, Sovape relied heavily on crowdfunding after pharmaceutical‑funded NGOs lobbied against any ties to vape companies. As a result the group announced their dissolution in October 2024. The pattern is clear: consumer organisations that fight for access to scientifically proven safer products walk a funding tightrope, vilified if they accept industry money, starved if they do not.

The importance of consumer advocacy

Yet the existance of such groups is crucial. Real‑world experience is a form of data policymakers cannot obtain from clinical trials alone. In the United Kingdom, testimony from ex‑smokers swayed Parliament to back the “Swap‑to‑Stop” kit distribution programme, contributing to a record decline in smoking prevalence to 12.9 % in 2022. In Japan, consumer demand for heated‑tobacco products hastened a 43 % drop in cigarette sales between 2015 and 2022, the steepest fall on record. And in Sweden—now under 6 % daily smoking—public acceptance of nicotine pouches cemented political will to keep flavours legal. Each of these success stories was amplified by organised user voices.

CASAA’s board insists the decision is a tactical retreat, not surrender, noting that millions of U.S. adults now use vaping or oral‑nicotine products. Those consumers still possess tremendous political potential if their stories reach lawmakers. But without a coordinating hub, state‑level proposals to tax, flavour‑ban or outright prohibit safer products will face weaker push‑back.

Rebuilding a global THR advocacy network

Internationally, the lesson is stark: THR movements must diversify funding, cultivate donor bases beyond industry, and build cross‑border alliances to share resources when one node falters. Digital platforms can preserve institutional memory, yet real‑time advocacy still requires paid staff and modern infrastructure.

CASAA’s sunset should galvanise, not demoralise, the harm‑reduction community. Policymakers are increasingly confronted by evidence that adult smokers quit more successfully with regulated alternatives—daily vaping raises cessation odds eight‑fold, according to a 2021 peer‑reviewed study. Ensuring these alternatives remain available demands a resilient advocacy ecosystem. If CASAA’s fall reminds the world that consumer organisations are indispensable yet perishable, its legacy will continue steering the global conversation toward pragmatic, life‑saving policy.

Silenced by Smears: The Persecution of Tobacco Harm Reduction Experts