NJ Senate passes bill to restrict e-cigarettes

[crippledbazooka]

so will NJ repeal this law now?

[Raenon]

Originally Posted by crippledbazooka

so will NJ repeal this law now?

Very unlikely to do so on it's own, but if a few concerned citizens start writing to the press about it, and a few more to their representatives... and a few suppliers start grumbling about the bill being passed under false pretenses.. You're more likely to see some movement

[ChipCurtis]

Originally Posted by crippledbazooka

so will NJ repeal this law now?

Unfortunately, the NJ law doesn't have anything to do with the banning of importation, distribution, advertising and sales. It is specifically for the banning of e-cigs in enclosed spaces and public properties. Two different issues altogether. I don't think one can argue in court that just because the e-cig is now legal for sale and distribution nationwide, that NJ now has to allow vaping in public spaces and enclosed buildings. That's a local state battle to be waged separately.

As was mentioned in the main FDA Docket thread, individual state Attorney Generals and state legislatures are now going to speed up the process of getting their own laws and bans put in place. That's unfortunately the downside of a victory at the federal level: it wakes up the local anti-smoking lobbyist groups even more and gets their underwear all in a bunch. The anti's are even angrier now and this group will just not stop fighting their 'moral' fight. The war definitely ain't over yet.

[crippledbazooka]

but the ban was largly based on the fact that SE and FDA were in court.

[stevelenti]

Good luck in enforcing a ban on PV's. I don't see how it would even be possible to ban e-cigarettes. In themselves they are just a battery, and heating element. They haven't been able to ban drug paraphernalia and smoke shops in most if not all states.

Best they can do is put more restrictions on the e-juice.

[jj2]

Originally Posted by Raenon

Very unlikely to do so on it's own, but if a few concerned citizens start writing to the press about it, and a few more to their representatives... and a few suppliers start grumbling about the bill being passed under false pretenses.. You're more likely to see some movement

Support CASAA---they are going to fight and work like the devil to improve the anti's impressions.

[Skwerl]

Sadly we are cursed with the bastard child of Chicago way politics and Tammany hall cronyism....and taxes, lots of taxes.
I write, fax and email these blathering nimrods every week or so on many subjects including this one. What I have learned is they don't care. About you, me, the guy down the street. They only care about getting re-elected and fattening their wallets. It matters not what party either- they're all bums once they enter the hallowed echo chambers of rarefied air that is Trenton.

I hope they all get covered in cold sores and made to swim a sea of urine, salt water and lemon juice. Jerks.

/rant.
Thank you for your patience, I have been holding that in far too long.

[crippledbazooka]

hope they all get covered in cold sores and made to swim a sea of urine, salt water and lemon juice

why does this remind me of smoking an analog?

[420GypsyGirl]

BTW if you look at New Jersey's tax revenue for cigarettes, you'd see that it has been on a decline for the past few years. They count of the taxes to help bad their coffers and though they kep raising the taxes the revenue keeps going down and down. I think the reason this moron had this bill passed is because he knows that if it catches on New Jersey can kiss theirtax revenues from cigarettes good bye.

[ChipCurtis]

Originally Posted by crippledbazooka

but the ban was largly based on the fact that SE and FDA were in court.

I don't think Gordon and Vitale put this bill into motion just because two e-cig companies were in court. Probably it was based on 2 principal things: loss of NJ cig-tax revenue, and pressure from anti's to ban anything that looks like smoking. (I'll bet the 2 state senators didn't even catch on to point #1, they're probably that dumb... probably just public pressure alone).

It didn't take a lot of "lawyering-up" for NJ lawmakers to simply alter wording in the bill at the last moment. They didn't even bother to include e-cigs in a separate amendment, with all kinds of scientific or legal justification for it. They just panicked at the last moment and simply added the phrase "electronic cigarettes" to the list of banned tobacco-product items. Based on that, the whole bill could conceivably get tossed out in its entirety.

Even so, none of this had anything to do with the state of e-cigs being legal or illegal, or being a tobacco-based or pharmacy-based product. They weren't illegal then, and they certainly aren't illegal now. Any state can create a law to ban certain things from being used in public spaces, even if that law makes no sense. (i.e. there's the nonsense going on with the VA Dept of Health trying to interpret state law to include e-cigs. At least there, the fight is not as tough because the state law doesn't even mention e-cigs.)

Yes, it's going to take another lawsuit like the ones SE and NJOY crafted to put the nails into the NJ law's coffin. But do remember that NJ and VA positions are based on banning the e-cig in public spaces, not banning them altogether (i.e. made illegal).