UPDATED New York State Call to Action

[yvilla]

Support S2926/A6667 and Oppose S695-2011/A1468

While Linda Rosenthal's bill that would ban all sales of electronic cigarettes in New York State is still pending in the Assembly Codes Committee, and Senator Klein's identical bill is still pending in the Senate Health Committee, competing bills that would simply ban sales to minors have been introduced in both the Senate and Assembly. These vastly improved proposals, S2926 and A6667, are currently pending in the Senate and Assembly Health Committees.

Here are both sets of bills on the NYS legislative website, so you can see their sponsors, compare their contents, and track their progress: See S2926/A6667 at http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S2926-2011 and S695-2011/A1468 at http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S695-2011.

The introduction of these competing bills is very good news for New York State, and we call on all CASAA members and other concerned persons to begin a new round of campaigning in New York, and to join us in calling, writing, faxing, emailing, and meeting in person with legislators in support of S2926/A6667, while at the same time denouncing S695-2011/A1468.

Residents of New York State should definitely meet face-to-face with their own Senator and Assemblyperson to express their support for S2926/A6667's ban on sales to minors, and their strong oppostion to Rosenthal and Klein's misguided attempt to ban sales to adults with S695-2011/A1468.

However, the biggest push right now for anyone who is willing to help, while these bills are all still in committee, should be to contact all the Senate and Assembly Health Committee members with that same message. Additionally, the Assembly Codes Committee members need to be made aware of the newer A6667, and our support for it, as it supplies a cogent reason for them to reject Rosenthal's A1468, even though they themselves do not as of yet have A6667 before them.

Here is the contact list for the Senate Health Committee: http://www.casaa.org/CTA/article.asp?articleID=153&l=a&p=

Here is the contact list for the Assembly Health committee: http://www.casaa.org/news/article.asp?articleID=154&l=a&p=

And here is the contact list for the Assembly Codes committee: http://www.casaa.org/news/article.asp?articleID=155&l=a&p=

Finally, here is a pre-written template letter suitable for faxing or mailing. Please consider adding to or modifying its content to personalize the letter. Be sure to insert the Senator or Assemblyperson's name at the beginning, and sign your name at the end. And if you are a New York resident, be sure to include your address: http://www.casaa.org/files/New_York_CTA_Template_Letter(5).doc

(This is from CASAA's Call to Action page for New York, found at CASAA.org=)

 

[John Phoenix]

Thank you for this Info! I'm not from N.Y. but I hate injustice in any form especially when it's the people we put in power to represent US and they only use the position to further some agenda that don't represent the will of the people.

 

[Brewlady]

I'm not from New York, but when I called the Assembly members, I did explain that the ban would still have a negative impact on me, because I purchase supplies from New York vendors.

 

[John Phoenix]

I'm not from New York, but when I called the Assembly members, I did explain that the ban would still have a negative impact on me, because I purchase supplies from New York vendors.

Excellent point Brewlady.

 

[Tom09]

Came across some PR for the garbage can which made me, nonetheless, searching for an update on the actual NY State situation. After all, NY could be the first state (expand internationally to country) where a legitimate democratic body might finally vote to outlaw e-cig sales. Not much found, besides this latest Call to Action (OP Yvilla). No news is good news?

 

[yvilla]

So far it is Tom.

I monitor the New york State Senate and Assembly sites weekly, specifically checking for meeting agendas in the committees these bills are pending in. That would be the Senate Health Committee, and the Assembly Codes and Health Committees. Neither the Rosenthal/Klein bills, nor the two newer bills that would simply ban sales to minors, have been on any committee agenda since my above post.

All three committees have meetings this week, but the bills in question are again not on their agendas this week. Even better, next week is the last full week of this year's legislative session, which is scheduled to end on Monday, June 20.

So I'm cautiously optimisitic at this point.

 

[yvilla]

Omigod, I just looked at your link - what lying idiots!

 

[Tom09]

I hoped to provoke your particularly well informed reply. Thanks very much, Yvilla!

 

[Demarko]

LOL! The first one legal? What!?

 

[Tom09]

Was referring to legitimate. I don’t think that legal equals legitimate, but leave this open to native speakers.

 

[yvilla]

I think he was referring to your "garbage" link too, Tom, not to your post.

 

[Valsacar]

A little delayed, but I got a response back from Joel M. Miller today. Short and sweet, A1468 has issues that he disagrees with (but didn't specify) and therefore would not vote for it in its current form. A bit moot now, since the bill would no longer apply to electronic cigarettes but nice that they did respond.

 

[yvilla]

A bit moot now, since the bill would no longer apply to electronic cigarettes but nice that they did respond.

Not true.

The bill as written refers to the New York State definition of "tobacco product" (as found in the Public Health Law). I've written about that before. See, eg, this post: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...york-sales-ban-next-steps-18.html#post3109713

So although the developments in federal court and with the FDA render the bill's tortured wording even more weird and stupid than it was originally (while the FDA still deemed ecigs to be "drug" products), they would not necessarily prevent the intended ban should the bill still pass.

Fortunately, however, as I noted above it is really looking like time is running out on it this year so it won't pass, although I won't celebrate until 6/20!

 

[Thulium]

Not true.

The bill as written refers to the New York State definition of "tobacco product" (as found in the Public Health Law). I've written about that before. See, eg, this post: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...york-sales-ban-next-steps-18.html#post3109713

So although the developments in federal court and with the FDA render the bill's tortured wording even more weird and stupid than it was originally (while the FDA still deemed ecigs to be "drug" products), they would not necessarily prevent the intended ban should the bill still pass.

Fortunately, however, as I noted above it is really looking like time is running out on it this year so it won't pass, although I won't celebrate until 6/20!

It took some digging, but I found the New York State definition of "Tobacco Product" you referenced:

5. "Tobacco products" means one or more cigarettes or cigars, bidis,
chewing tobacco, powdered tobacco, nicotine water or any other tobacco
products

Obviously, the "any other tobacco products" is vague, but IMO the mention of nicotine water that is obviously only "derived" from tobacco combined with the "any other" would very reasonably include other liquid nicotine/tobacco products that could be used in a low power vaporizer.

You're the lawyer, but it seems to me that any remaining doubt about whether e-cigarettes would or wouldn't be considered tobacco products was answered by Judge Leon, the entire Appellate court, and the FDA's reluctant acceptance of Congress' intent that non-therapeutic products containing or derived from tobacco be regulated under the Tobacco Act.

I suspect that the prohibitionists haven't figured out a backup plan to destroy the upstart e-cig industry so they're leaving the outright bans on the back-burner and instead trying to sneak usage restrictions into smoking bans.

 

[yvilla]

Of course Thad, that very broad and vague New York defintion of "tobacco product" has itself always been our "ace in the hole" so to speak, since Rosenthal first introduced her bill in the 2009-2010 session. Had her bill passed (or if it yet passes), she would have instantly regretted how stupidly and poorly she worded it, because the legal argument that ecigs should be deemed to fit within the meaning of PHL section 1399-aa in any event is indeed a very strong one.

But that still would have required litigation, as the legislative intent to accomplish an outright sales ban - the (dumb) legislative belief that ecigs are not within the meaning of that definition - is crystal clear.

And, that litigation would have to be in a New York court. New York's determination would control, not that of any federal court. New York courts are the only ones that are entitled to interpret and construe New York law and New York statutes (with some very limited exceptions not relevant in this context, such as diversity jurisdiction in federal court).

 

[Bustastew]

Fix this problem at the source, call Linda Rosenthal and ask her to drop her adult nanny bill in favor of Senator Kliens bill.

 

[Placebo Effect]

What Linda Rosenthal has been up to lately instead of pushing for a vote on her e-cigarette ban:

Little, Rosenthal introduce bill to target sexual harassment of hotel staff - Election Inbox by Nathan Brown's political blog - AdirondackDailyEnterprise.com | News, Sports, Jobs, Saranac Lake region

Animal Rights Activists, Lawmakers Call For Ban Of Horse-Drawn Carriages In NYC « CBS New York

Ornamental Urns Sawed Off Historic UWS Building - DNAinfo.com

The residents' cause has won the attention of Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal, who represents the Upper West Side. Rosenthal told DNAinfo she's asked the Department of Buildings to investigate whether Atria has the proper permits to remove the urns.

 

[yvilla]

Fix this problem at the source, call Linda Rosenthal and ask her to drop her adult nanny bill in favor of Senator Kliens bill.

Although we're close to safe for this year, just to be clear: Klein's bill in the Senate is identical to Rosenthal's bill in the Assembly. We have been opposing both since last year's session.

The two new bills (listed in the OP here) are the ones we would support, that only ban sales to minors.

 

[jimbalny]

To hell with NY state legislators! I don't think Long Island and the boroughs get fair representation - secession is the only answer! The state of Long Island!

 

[ACM]

To hell with NY state legislators! I don't think Long Island and the boroughs get fair representation - secession is the only answer! The state of Long Island!

But don't forget, Suffolk County banned e-cigs in public places under the umbrella of their ban on cigarettes in bars, restaurants, hotels, and the workplace a long time before this NYS proposed ban even surfaced.