Contact Us:

Whether you’re in Westchester County, New York, New York City, Fairfield County, Connecticut, or outside of our area (we ship throughout the U.S.A.) call:

or Email:

FREE Shipping all year round ON ORDERS $20+

September 2014:

Second SFATA Capital Hill Fly-In
Cherry Vape's co-owners Cheryl Richter and Christopher Mikovits were on Capital Hill, September 10 to meet with congressmen and senators. They urged them for common-sense regulations that would keep e-cigarettes and vaping products accessible to the adult smokers who need them.

They met with staff from the offices of Rep. Jim Himes (CT), Rep. Nita Lowey (NY), Rep. Grace Meng (NY), Sen. Bob Menendez (NJ), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA) Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), and Rep. Leonard Lance (MA).

There were good dialogues with lawmakers willing to listen and learn. (Except for Sen. Blumenthal's office (CT) who refused to meet with them this trip.)

May 2014: Over 50 leading scientists from around the world sign letter to Dr. Margaret Chan, Director General of the World Health Organization, urging non-restrictive adoption of e-cigarettes as a harm reduction tool. E-cigarettes “could be among the most significant health innovations of the 21st century, perhaps saving hundreds of millions of lives,” the group said. Letter to WHO Director General Margaret Chan.pdf
152.6 KB

News Page 

Westchester, Fairfield County and New York City vapers have a new e-cigarette shop and vape lounge! Cherry Vape is Proud to announce the opening of our first vape shop in Westchester County, NY: 
CV Vape Den, 108 Adee Street, Port Chester, NY 10573
   Open Daily, Monday - Saturday 12noon - 7pm
Sundays 1-5pm
       Municipal parking lot across the street and 1/4 block from the Metro North station. 
( just 40 minutes from New York City by train or car)
For more information, visit

FRIDAY, MARCH 14 from 6pm-10pm!

Read about the "birth" of our new vape shop in this article from E-Cig Advanced.


URGENT: Fight Proposed Philadelphia Laws


 Action Needed on Proposed Philadelphia Bans

There are proposed bans for another large city, Philadelphia. Please see below for call to action instructions.

Let's not let another major city ban the use of e-cigarettes in public! We hope you will do what you can to help.

Thank you,

Cheryl & Chris 

Two proposed ordinances have been submitted to the City Council and have been set for a hearing:

  • Bill No. 14009600, which would prohibit sales of "electronic smoking devices" and "unapproved nicotine delivery products" to minors.
  • Bill No. 14009500, which would ban e-cigarette use wherever smoking is prohibited (with an exception for specialty e-cigarette establishments). This bill is similar in effect to Bill No. 140011, which was originally the source of this Call to Action.

According to our information, a hearing for both bills will take place on Thursday, March 13th, 2014 at 1:00 P.M. at City Hall (Broad St & Market St, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107).  Meetings are typically held in Room 400.


We are asking vapers and harm reduction advocates to (1) plan on attending the hearing to offer testimony in opposition to both bills, and (2) call and write members of the Philadelphia City Council.


As a sign of respect, we request that you refrain from vaping during the meeting.  Link regarding offering public testimony before Philadelphia City Council.  


This Call to Action has now been divided into three sections, Part I for Bill No. 14009600 (ban on sales to minors), Part II for Bill No. 14009500 (ban on e-cigarette use wherever smoking is not permitted) and the similar bill, Bill No. 140011, and Part III (contact information, which is the same for all bills).


I.  Bill No. 14009600 (ban on sales to minors)

We support bans on sales to minors, but is unable to support this bill as presently drafted.
What to say to the City Council: 

 The bill defines e-cigarettes as "electronic smoking devices," which completely mischaracterizes the nature of the product.  These are not "smoking devices," but, rather, an alternative to smoking.  The bill also makes reference to "unauthorized nicotine delivery products," which also mischaracterizes the nature of the product.   

    • Characterizing them as "smoking devices" or "unauthorized nicotine delivery products" sends the wrong message and suggests that e-cigarettes carry the same or similar risks as smoking.
    • E-cigarettes involve no combustion (and therefore no smoking) and are estimated to be 99% less hazardous than smoking.
    • In addition to objecting to "electronic smoking devices" and "unauthorized nicotine delivery products," this provision could very well put Philadelphia at odds with legislation currently being considered at the state level.
    • SB 1055, which would ban sales of e-cigarettes to minors, is currently being considered by state lawmakers.  Bill No. 14009600 would require different signage and would therefore conflict with state law if SB 1055 is passed.  
  • The bill should either be (1) amended to conform with the language contained in SB 1055 ("alternative nicotine product") or (2) rejected.

II.  Bill No. 14009500 and Bill No. 140011 (ban on e-cigarette use wherever smoking is not permitted)


There are two bills that have been introduced that would ban e-cigarettes wherever smoking is banned. You should address your comments to the entire City Council, not simply the Committee on Public Health and Human Services.
  On January 23, 2014, City Councilman Bill Green introduced an ordinance to include e-cigarettes within the City's Clean Indoor Air Worker Protection Law. According to Councilman Green, the legislation is intended as "an affirmation of a tobacco-free lifestyle, since the use of e-cigs in public places erodes decades of critical work focused on decreasing tobacco consumption.  Smoking is definitely not something we want to become 'cool' again."  He is joined by Councilman Greenlee who insists that the city should regulate "e-cigs as we do normal cigarettes."
  The bill has been referred to the Committee on Public Health and Human Services (members of this committee are highlighted in green below).

Please take this opportunity to send the members of the City Council (with particular attention focused on the members of the Committee on Public Health and Human Services, highlighted in green) with accurate information about e-cigarettes and your story about how the product has improved your life. 

We strongly encourage vapers to call and email City Council members.


What to say to the members of the Philadelphia City Council: 


1. You are a Philadelphia, Philadelphia-area, or Pennsylvania citizen and while you support banning sales of e-cigarettes to minors, you OPPOSE banning e-cigarette use where smoking is banned.   (If you are responding to this Call to Action and are not a state resident, please mention any connection you have to the area, for example, you travel to Philadelphia on vacation or have friends/family in the area.)


2. Tell your story on how switching to an e-cigarette has changed your life.

3. Explain that:

  • Smoking bans are enacted to protect the public from the harm of secondhand smoke, but e-cigarettes have not been shown to cause harm to bystanders. In fact, all evidence to date shows that the low health risks associated with e-cigarettes are comparable to other smokeless nicotine products.
  • The low risks of e-cigarettes is supported by research done by Dr. Siegel of Boston University, Dr. Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth, Dr Maciej L Goniewicz of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Dr. Laugesen of Health New Zealand, Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University, and by the fact that the FDA testing, in spite of its press statement, failed to find harmful levels of carcinogens or toxic levels of any chemical in the vapor.
  • A   comprehensive review conducted by Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University School of Public Health based on over 9,000 observations of e-cigarette liquid and vapor found "no apparent concern" for bystanders exposed to e-cigarette vapor, even under "worst case" assumptions about exposure.  
  • Electronic cigarette use is easy to distinguish from actual smoking. Although some e-cigarettes resemble real cigarettes, many do not. It is easy to tell when someone lights a cigarette from the smell of smoke. E-cigarette vapor is practically odorless, and generally any detectable odor is not unpleasant and smells nothing like smoke. Additionally, e-cigarette users can decide whether to release any vapor ("discreet vaping").  With so little evidence of use, enforcing indoor use bans on electronic cigarettes would be nearly impossible.
  • The ability to use electronic cigarettes in public spaces will actually improve public health by inspiring other smokers to switch. Surveys of thousands of users indicate that the majority of those who switch completely replace tobacco cigarettes with the electronic cigarettes, reducing their health risks by an estimated 99%.
  • By switching to a smokeless product, you have greatly reduced your health risks.

 4. Direct them to National Vapers Club, SFATA  or CASAA for more information.


III. Send Written testimony to the Chief Clerk, Michael Decker:; call or email all council members 

Comma Delimited Email List:,,,,,,,,,,,,,
District 1 - Mark Squilla
Phone: (215) 686-3458, (215) 686-3459
Fax: (215) 686-1931
District 2 - Kenyatta Johnson
Phone: (215) 686-3412, (215) 686-3413
Fax: (215) 686-1932
District 3 - Jannie Blackwell
Phone: (215) 686-3418, (215) 686-3419
Fax: (215) 686-1933
District 4 - Curtis Jones, Jr.
Phone: (215) 686-3416, (215) 686-3417
Fax: (215) 686-1934
District 5 - Darrell L. Clarke (President)
Phone: (215) 686-3442, (215) 686-3443
Fax: (215) 686-1901
District 6 - Bobby Henon
Phone: (215) 686-3444, (215) 686-3445
Fax: (215) 686-1935
District 10 - Brian J. O'Neill
Phone: (215) 686-3422, (215) 686-3423
Fax: (215) 686-1939
At Large - W. Wilson Goode, Jr.
Phone: (215) 686-3414, (215) 686-3415
Fax: (215) 686-1928
At Large - Bill Green (bill co-sponsor)
Phone: (215) 686-3420, (215) 686-3421
Fax: (215) 686-1930
At Large - James Kenney
Phone: (215) 686-3450, (215) 686-3451
Fax: (215) 686-2013
At Large - David Oh
Phone: (215) 686-3452 (215) 686-3453
Fax: (215) 686-1925
District 7 - Maria D. Quiñones-Sánchez
Phone: (215) 686-3448, (215) 686-3449
Fax: (215) 686-1936
District 8 - Cindy Bass
Phone: (215) 686-3424, (215) 686-3425
Fax: (215) 686-1937
District 9 - Marian B. Tasco
Phone: (215) 686-3454, (215) 686-3455
Fax: (215) 686-1938
At Large - William K. Greenlee (bill co-sponsor)
Phone: (215) 686-3446, (215) 686-3447
Fax: (215) 686-1927
At Large - Dennis O'Brien
Phone: (215) 686-3440, (215) 686-3441
Fax:  (215) 686-1929
At Large - Blondell Reynolds Brown
Phone: (215) 686-3438, (215) 686-3439
Fax: (215) 686-1926


URGENT: Fight Proposed Connecticut Law that would Impact Anyone in the E-Cig Business

There are two proposed bans that can affect you as a resident and e-cigarette user in Connecticut.  

Next week two committees in the Connecticut Legislature will hold public hearings on a pair of bills relating to e-cigarettes.  One is a bill to require warnings on all e-cigarette products sold in Connecticut that is guaranteed disaster for Connecticut e-cigarette vendors (and out-of-state vendors), while another (a simple minor ban) could very, very easily become a tax, usage ban, tobacco licensing, etc. bill.

SB 24, a minor ban that is currently something that vendors should SUPPORT, will have a hearing on Thursday, February 27th at 12 PM in LOB Room 2B of the State Capitol Building, Hartford. 

It is important that vendors attend, submit testimony, speak in support of the minor ban, and be prepared to testify against any suggestion that the bill be amended to include taxes, usage bans, etc.
The American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, etc. have been trying to railroad e-cigarette youth access laws with taxes, usage bans, tobacco licensing classification, and other restrictions in every state in which they are introduced.

[Link to] SB24 

HB 5286 is a bill to require a warning label covering 60% of all packaging of all electronic cigarette devices, disposables, batteries, atomizers, etc., will be heard on Friday, February 28th at 10:30 AM in LOB Room 1B at the State Capitol Building, Hartford.  This must be STRONGLY OPPOSED -- this would impact the entire industry if passed.  Please also note the 17 point font size warning requirement and the fact that "nicotine yield" does not mean nicotine content (i.e., 2.6%), but we believe it means  how much nicotine is delivered in the vapor of your product (a process for which there is no generally acceptable standard to perform these tests, not to mention the costs and utter impracticalities of it as it relates to e-liquid / variable voltage devices).
Email Public Hearing Testimony to:

[Link to]SB 5286

See the links to the right for committee members contact information.

When calling, writing or testifying in person, make sure you:
  1. Tell your story on how switching to e-cigarettes has changed your life.
  2. Given the low risk of e-cigarette use, there is no need to impose a punitive labeling regulations on e-cigarettes.  
  3. The standards proposed for vaping products are not required of tobacco or medicine products. The font size for over the counter drugs is typically six ( 6) to eight  (8) not seventeen (17) point font.  It would be unwarranted and unreasonable not to follow existing standards for font size on warning and ingredient labels on vaping products.
  4. This bill requires manufacturers to present nicotine yield, it is very unclear what this actually means as this is not a valid term within our industry. It is much more appropriate to label bottles with a percentage of nicotine contained (mg/ml or percentage), rather than yield. It is also scientifically impossible to measure the yield due to the fluctuation of the individual use of these products.
  5. Ask them to oppose SB5286 which is in fact a back-door ban on e-cigarette sales in Connecticut.   
  6. For more information, direct them to: National Vapers Club SFATA or CASAA 

URGENT: Do Your Part in Fighting Proposed Devastating Legislation in Rhode Island!

On Thursday, February 27th at approximately 2:30 PM, the Rhode Island Senate Finance Committee will hold a critical public hearing on a bill that would tax e-cigarettes at an outrageous 80% of wholesale. This hearing will be held in Room 211 of the State House (82 Smith Street in Providence). Please attend the hearing and speak in opposition to this destructive tax.

Additionally, on Thursday, March 6th, the House Finance Committee will meet at approximately 4:30 PM in Room TBD of the State House (82 Smith Street in Providence). Please also attend this hearing.

Additionally, on Thursday, March 6th, the House Finance Committee will meet.
 We are asking our customers to please attend these hearings and speak in opposition to this destructive tax.  If you are on Facebook, you can connect with others who are attending at this Facebook Event page.

 As a consumer of electronic cigarettes, you know better than most that these products are NOT tobacco, are NOTHING like combustible cigarettes, and that cost and full access to them are important to you.  YOUR story must be heard by the legislators to make positive change, so make sure your voice is heard!

 While hearing from you in person at or before the hearing will have the most impact on legislators, you can still make a difference by telling your story to the members of the House Finance Committee by phone or e-mail.
Please consider taking a few minutes of your time to reach out to the members and RESPECTFULLY but firmly let them know that you OPPOSE the proposed new tax on electronic cigarette devices.  


 Last year, Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee vetoed a common sense piece of legislation that would have banned sales of e-cigarettes to minors. Governor Chafee was quoted as saying, "As a matter of public policy, electronic cigarette laws should mirror tobacco product laws." Consequently, it's no great surprise that this year, legislation has been introduced that would impose substantial burdens on adult vapers in a misguided effort to discourage use of these potentially life-saving devices by smokers.

 [Link to] House Bill 7021

(referred to the House Judiciary Committee) would ban e-cigarette sales to minors, but would also:


  • Define e-cigarettes as "tobacco products" for regulatory purposes.

  • Require a retailer conducting an online sale to: (1) obtain a copy of the buyer's driver's license; (2) obtain a statement from the buyer affirming that he/she is the person pictured; and (3) send the package through a service that checks the ID of the buyer at delivery. Retailers would be required to perform this check every time a consumer places an order. 

  • Mandate that e-cigarette retailers in Rhode Island obtain a tobacco license and only buy their e-cigarettes from licensed wholesalers or distributors.

[Link to] House Bill 7133
(referred to the House Finance Committee) is Governor Chafee's proposed budget for 2015.  This bill would:
  •  Apply a punitive excise tax of 80% of wholesale price on all e-cigarette devices


 Action is needed against these bills! Remember, these bills are in two different  committees, so please follow the below steps:

First, please call or write members of the House Judiciary Committee regarding House Bill 7021
and tell them that while you support bans on sales to minors, you oppose House Bill 7021 because it unjustly defines e-cigarettes as "tobacco products" for regulatory purposes.

Next, tell them you oppose HB 7133 because imposes substantial burdens on adult e-cigarette users and unfairly taxes e-cigarettes.
  1. Tell your story on how switching to e-cigarettes has changed your life.

  2. Explain that the purpose of states imposing high cigarette taxes is ostensibly to cover governmental healthcare expenditures caused by smoking and to discourage smoking.  However, e-cigarettes are estimated to pose approximately 1% of the risk of that from smoking.  Therefore, there is absolutely no financial or public health justification for such a hefty tax.

  3. Given the low risk of e-cigarette use, there is no need to impose a punitive tax on e-cigarettes.

    The low risks of e-cigarettes is supported by research done by Dr. Siegel of Boston University, Dr. Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth, Dr Maciej L Goniewicz of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Dr. Laugesen of Health New Zealand, Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University, and by the fact that the 2009 FDA testing, in spite of its press statement, failed to find harmful levels of carcinogens or toxic levels of any chemical in the vapor.
    comprehensive review by a Drexel University professor based on over 9,000 observations of e-cigarette liquid and vapor found "no apparent concern" for bystanders exposed to e-cigarette vapor, even under "worst case" assumptions about exposure.  

  4. Many smokers who switch to less hazardous e-cigarettes instead of continuing to smoke do so because e-cigarettes are less expensive than cigarettes.  Increasing the cost of e-cigarettes with punitive taxes would discourage many smokers from switching to e-cigarettes.  It could also encourage some e-cigarette consumers to go back to cigarette smoking.

  5. The vast majority of House Bill 7021 is unnecessary and will have unintended consequences on small businesses and e-cigarette users in Rhode Island.

  6. By making online sales burdensome and expensive, the legislation favors products sold by the large tobacco companies (companies which have established points of distribution in physical locations throughout the state wherever combustible cigarettes are sold).

  7. Either the onerous online sales and delivery requirements should be removed or  the legislature at the very least should consider more reasonable and less intrusive and burdensome requirements.  For example, there is no need to require an adult signature for every delivery to a particular person at a particular household.  Once a household has been vetted, future deliveries should be permitted to the same person at the same address without the expense and inconvenience associated with signature delivery.  Moreover, third-party verification systems should be a permitted alternative.

  8. This legislation would not only require e-cigarette sellers to obtain a license to sell tobacco, but would also mandate that they only buy their products from a Rhode Island based distributor or wholesaler.  This provision would impact the availability of hundreds of specialty e-cigarette products as there are no Rhode Island businesses wholesaling those products.

  9. Direct them to the National Vapers Club , SFATA or CASAA 
    websites for more information.

Email list for all members of the House Finance Committee:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

House Finance Committee Members: 

Rep. Helio Melo (D - East Providence) [Chairperson]

(401) 222-8028 /


Rep. Eileen S. Naughton (D - Warwick) [Deputy Chairperson]

(401) 738-7928 /


Rep. John M. Carnevale (D - Providence, Johnston)

(401) 274-1353 /


Rep. Frank Ferri (D - Warwick)

(401) 737-5113 /


Rep. Raymond E. Gallison Jr. (D - Bristol)

(508) 677-4235 /


Rep. Joy Hearn (D - Barrington)

(401) 247-9867 /


Rep. Raymond A. Hull (D - Providence)

(401) 272-4026 /


Rep. Robert B. Jacquard (D - Cranston)

(401) 943-7799 /


Rep. Jan Malik (D - Warren)

(401) 247-1271 /


Rep. Patricia L. Morgan (R - West Warwick)

(401) 222-2259 /


Rep. Deborah Ruggiero (D - Jamestown)

(401) 423-0444 /


Rep. William San Bento Jr. (D - Pawtucket)

(401) 727-0276 /


Rep. Agostinho F. Silva (D - Central Falls)

(401) 728-5473 /


Rep. Scott Slater (D - Providence)

(401) 741-7641 /


Rep. Larry Valencia (D - Richmond, Exeter, Glocester)

(401) 539-3420 /


Sign Up to Receive Cherry Vape's Free Newsletter!

E-cigarette news, e-cig & accessory product reviews, vaping events, contests and exclusive specials!
Sign up to receive Cherry Vape News today:

First Name:  *
Last Name:
State: *
Email:  *
Opt-in to receive e-news from Cherry Vape. We will never sell or rent your info or share it with any 3rd party.