Oregon Call to Action - Multiple bills threaten access, awareness, and availability of vapor products
- Thread starter Robino1
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
most governments and business use one of the
two major address data bases. even the post office.
both contain errors. if i use my apartment number
my address is rejected by my power
company. i had to leave of my apt. number no problem.
i assume the opposite is true.
mike
Update from the NW Vapor Association on todays hearing in regards to SB 417 which was for giving the Oregon Liquor Control Commission control of E-cig regulation.
Great turnout for the hearing today. Thanks to everyone that showed up. We should know more in a day or two but my initial impression is that SB 417 is going to die!
Again, thanks to all who showed up or submitted testimony on such short notice.
https://www.facebook.com/nwvaporassociation?fref=nf
Great turnout for the hearing today. Thanks to everyone that showed up. We should know more in a day or two but my initial impression is that SB 417 is going to die!
Again, thanks to all who showed up or submitted testimony on such short notice.
https://www.facebook.com/nwvaporassociation?fref=nf
https://www.facebook.com/nwvaporassociation
SB 417 Died, However Senator Hayward has put it into another Bill, SB 663. It is scheduled for public hearing Monday April 13. please submit their testimony to the Senate Health committee. If you don't want to speak you can still submit written testimony to zena.rockowitz@state.or.us Please address any letters
To: Senate Health Committee
Re: SB 663
SB 417 Died, However Senator Hayward has put it into another Bill, SB 663. It is scheduled for public hearing Monday April 13. please submit their testimony to the Senate Health committee. If you don't want to speak you can still submit written testimony to zena.rockowitz@state.or.us Please address any letters
To: Senate Health Committee
Re: SB 663
Last edited:
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Oregon Senate amends/approves, then House approves bill (HB 2546) to ban vaping of any “inhalant” (including no-nicotine e-cigs) in virtually all workplaces (by falsely claiming vaping causes cancer, heart disease, asthma and bronchitis), ban sales of e-cigs (including no-nicotine vapor products) to minors, and require child-resistant packaging for e-liquid
Oregon Legislative Information System
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB2546/Enrolled
Since nobody posted anything on this thread for the past month, nobody should be surprised Oregon just banned vaping in workplaces.
Oregon Legislative Information System
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB2546/Enrolled
Since nobody posted anything on this thread for the past month, nobody should be surprised Oregon just banned vaping in workplaces.
Considering the increasingly prevalent tone of ECFers berating other vapers for how, why, where and when they should vape, regulating it out of the public seems to be at the least a non-issue, at most a desirable outcome.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
The battles aren't over in Oregon.
On May 27 (next Wednesday), the Oregon Senate Finance and Revenue Cmte will hold a hearing on legislation (SB 415) that would ban the sale of flavored vapor products and tobacco products (except for tobacco and menthol flavors, which comprise 100% of cigarettes, about half of smokeless tobacco products, cigars and vapor products).
Oregon Legislative Information System
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB415/A-Engrossed
Per snork's absurd comment above, nothing like a Colorado vaper advocating a vaping ban in Oregon because of his/her dislike for some notes posted on ECF.
On May 27 (next Wednesday), the Oregon Senate Finance and Revenue Cmte will hold a hearing on legislation (SB 415) that would ban the sale of flavored vapor products and tobacco products (except for tobacco and menthol flavors, which comprise 100% of cigarettes, about half of smokeless tobacco products, cigars and vapor products).
Oregon Legislative Information System
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB415/A-Engrossed
Per snork's absurd comment above, nothing like a Colorado vaper advocating a vaping ban in Oregon because of his/her dislike for some notes posted on ECF.
SB415 has already been amended to remove the e-cigs language from the bill.
The version SB415A you linked is the version with the stripped language. Oregon does not consider e-cigs to be tobacco products by definition rather they are "Inhalent Delivery Systems". The previous version of the bill listed them specifically.
Last edited:
I have not heard of banning internet sales. Unless the site does not verify age. However that is a sticky widget. Since many kids can fake the age requirements. Still not sure the legislature is smart enough to know this. Also I know that using the private club method has been nixed for vapor lounges. I just spoke with the owner of Serenity Vapor lounge in Aloha. He is looking at putting a vape deck in for the samples.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Oregon Governor Kate Brown signs bill (HB 2546) to ban vaping of any “inhalant” (including no-nicotine e-cigs) in virtually all workplaces (by falsely claiming vaping causes cancer, heart disease, asthma and bronchitis), ban sales of e-cigs (including no-nicotine vapor products) to minors, and require child-resistant packaging for e-liquid
Oregon Legislative Information System
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB2546/Enrolled
Oregon Legislative Information System
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB2546/Enrolled
So this got banned too, right?
Not banned. But my reading of the following tells me that either e-cigs are being deeclared to NOT be tobacco products, or that they are exempt from the "inhalant" ban.
<quote>
(1) As used in this section and ORS 431.853:
(a)(A) “Inhalant delivery system” means:
(i) A device that can be used to deliver nicotine or cannabinoids in the
form of a vapor or aerosol to a person inhaling from the device; or
(ii) A component of a device described in this subparagraph or a substance in any form
sold for the purpose of being vaporized or aerosolized by a device described in this subpara-
graph, whether the component or substance is sold separately or is not sold separately.
(B) “Inhalant delivery system” does not include:
(i) Any product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Adminis-
tration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for any other therapeutic purpose, if the
product is marketed and sold solely for the approved purpose; and
(ii) Tobacco products.
(b) “Tobacco products” means:
(A) Bidis, cigars, cheroots, stogies, periques, granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready
rubbed and other smoking tobacco, snuff, snuff flour, cavendish, plug and twist tobacco,
fine-cut and other chewing tobaccos, shorts, refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings and sweepings
of tobacco and other forms of tobacco, prepared in a manner that makes the tobacco suitable
for chewing or smoking in a pipe or otherwise, or for both chewing and smoking; or
(B) Cigarettes as defined in ORS 323.010 (1).
<end quote>
So what happens if the FDA proclaims vaping products to be tobacco products? Does that take them out of the category of "inhalant" and lift the vaping ban?
Oregon URGENT: CALL TO ACTION. SB 663 is scheduled for hearing and work session tomorrow, 6/1/2015 8:30 AM, HR AA
SB 663 would force in state vendors to get licensed with the Oregon Liquor Control Commission and as of now has Removed the Sampling exemption for Vape Shops.
Written testimony can be emailed to Anna.grimes@state.or.us
SB 663 would force in state vendors to get licensed with the Oregon Liquor Control Commission and as of now has Removed the Sampling exemption for Vape Shops.
Written testimony can be emailed to Anna.grimes@state.or.us
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
No. About half of the states define e-cigs as "vapor products" or "alternative nicotine products", while other states define e-cigs as a half dozen other terms. The FDA Deeming Regulation won't preempt any of the those state laws.
The FDA deeming reg would, however, preempt state laws that require different warning labels. But no states have done so.
I liked how the closing of his letter mentions revenue before health and other reasons. That says it all.
- Status
