I am confused. Your web site states "Public Citizen serves as the people’s voice in the nation’s capital."
And yet, we see your organization's name on the Amicus Brief filed on behalf of FDA in Smoking Everywhere versus FDA. Either your organization cares nothing for the health and welfare of the people, or you have been snookered.
Perhaps you fell for one or more of the many half-truths, unsupported fears, or outright lies you have been told about electronic cigarettes. Here are the facts, with sources cited:
Purpose - Electronic cigarettes were invented as a way to provide smokers who can't or won't quit with a substitute that is less hazardous than inhaling tobacco smoke. 
They were not invented as a way to outfox indoor smoking bans. They were invented in China. China doesn't have such bans.
They were not invented to be an NRT "smoking cessation" product. NRTs are purposely low-dose with the ultimate aim of "curing" nicotine addiction.
Target Market - Adult, committed smokers. Ask the people/organizations claiming that electronic cigarettes are being marketed to children, "What percent of customers are under age 18?" I'd be willing to bet they can't do this, because they haven't bothered to actually investigate it. You can check the results of a survey (n=303) conducted by the University of Alberta  to learn that 55% of customers are between 30 and 50, and 32% are 51 years or older. All were previous smokers. In an ongoing survey (currently over 1,100 responses) being conducted by CASAA , we find 53.2% between 30 and 50, with another 29% age 51 years or older, and 84.5% smoked for 10 years or more.
Success Rate as Smoking Alternative - The University of Alberta Survey  shows that 79% are using them for a complete replacement for traditional tobacco cigarettes. An additional 17% are using them as a partial replacement, and only 4% use them in addition to tobacco cigarettes. The CASAA survey  shows that only 17.9% of users continue to smoke (some) tobacco cigarettes and that 75.2% report that they now use no smoked or smokeless tobacco products at all.
Toxicity - Based on number and quantities of harmful chemicals, electronic cigarettes appear to be at least 1,000 times less dangerous than tobacco smoke.
The FDA's press release concerning lab tests conducted on 18 cartridges gleefully announced that the products contain carcinogens and "a chemical used in antifreeze". If you read the actual lab report  you will find that no quantities are specified for the carcinogens -- Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines (TSNAs).
You can, however, find in a report issued by Health New Zealand that a 16 mg. electronic cigarette cartridge contains 8 nanograms of TSNAs -- "This amount is extremely small, equal for example, to the amount reported to be present in a nicotine medicinal patch. (8 ng in 1g = eight parts per trillion)." 
To put this quantity in perspective, consider the fact that a pack of Marlboros contains 11,190 ng/g of TSNAs. 
Tobacco cigarettes also contain the "ingredient used in antifreeze." However, in addition, tobacco cigarettes contain arsenic used in rat poison, hydrogen cyanide used in gas chambers, formaldehyde used to embalm dead bodies, polonium radiation dosage equal to 300 chest X-rays in one year, and many more harmful substances that you will not find in electronic cigarette liquid or vapor.
No smoke - Electronic cigarettes use the process of vaporization, rather than combustion. Thus, the user does not inhale tar, carbon monoxide, or particulates. As you might guess (see next item), the lack of these substances as well as the extreme reduction in toxins and carcinogens appears to have a beneficial effect on the health of the users. Consider the bystanders as well. A tobacco cigarette remains lit, producing sidestream smoke. An electronic cigarette does not produce vapor until the user inhales, and the vapor does not go into the surrounding air until the user exhales. The vapor was also tested by Health New Zealand and pronounced to be "harmless, inhaled or exhaled." 
Beneficial Health Effects - The majority of University of Alberta survey  respondents reported that their general health (91%), smoker’s cough (97%), ability to exercise (84%), and sense of smell (80%) and taste (73%) were better since using e-cigarettes and none reported that these were worse. In the CASAA survey  91.3% report better lung function/easier breathing and 80% report increased lung capacity. Over half report reduced coughing, increased stamina, and sleeping better.
Adverse Health Effects - The CASAA survey  asked respondents about adverse effrects, rated by frequency. Dry/sore throat (3.3%), Dry Skin (1%), and Increased Phlegm (1%) were reported as being experienced frequently. These symptoms can be annoying, but are by no means life-threatening.
In contrast, two of the drugs approved by FDA for smoking cessation have resulted in serious adverse effects including seizures, major depression, suicidal ideation, and deaths, and now carry an FDA "Black Box" warning. 
In his 32-page opinion  accompanying the injunction against FDA in the aforementioned federal case, Judge Leon wrote:
"I am not convinced that the threat to the public interest in general or to third parties in particular is as great as FDA suggests. Together, both Smoking Everywhere and NJOY have already sold hundreds of thousands of electronic cigarettes, yet FDA cites no evidence that those electronic cigarettes have endangered anyone. Nor has FDA cited any evidence that electronic cigarettes are any more an immediate threat to public health and safety than traditional cigarettes, which are readily available to the public."
After considering the facts, I'm confident that you will agree that the public health dangers of electronic cigarettes have been greatly exaggerated by the FDA and the other organizations named in the Amicus Brief. As the surveys show, those who have switched to vaporized nicotine are enjoying the same kind of health benefits seen by those who quit all nicotine use. The real danger to public health lies with the possibility that FDA wins this case and immediately removes electronic cigarettes from the market. What will be the result?
In the CASAA survey , 72.2% indicate that it is likely or very likely that they will go back to smoking if electronic cigarettes become unavailable. Do you really want to be party to that end? Furthermore, consider the fact that the smoking prevalence rate has stagnated. Think of the over 40 million continuing smokers, who have tried over and over to quit, who might succeed at substituting vaporized nicotine for inhaling tobacco smoke--but not if the products are banned.
If you want to serve as "the people's voice," we are the people. We are being victimized by an overzealous government agency and non-profit organizations that claim they want to help people stop smoking. Instead, they are throwing all of their power and money into taking off the market the one product that finally worked for us. Look at both surveys. See how many products we tried in our attempts to quit. By insisting that "quit" means giving up all nicotine, these organizations are literally killing us with their "kindness."
Elaine D. Keller, Board Member
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association (CASAA)