Thank you for Posting this shoreline.
It wouldn't be a bad idea for WA Residents to contact there Reps even if theirs Isn't currently sitting on this Committee.
Washington State HB1645 is back and moving full steam
- Thread starter squee
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Thank you for Posting this shoreline.
It wouldn't be a bad idea for WA Residents to contact there Reps even if theirs Isn't currently sitting on this Committee.
Having commented on the bill on the Leg site, got no response from my rep.
DID get this from Sen. Becker's office:
Thank you for writing to share your concerns about HB 1645. At this time the bill has passed in the House 59/36 and will now be referred to the senate committees. It will need to receive a hearing in order to progress further. Last year the bills companion in the senate did not receive a hearing. We will share your comments with the senator.
Sincerely,
Tiffani Sanne’, Legislative Assistant to Washington State Senator Randi Becker 2nd District
DID get this from Sen. Becker's office:
Thank you for writing to share your concerns about HB 1645. At this time the bill has passed in the House 59/36 and will now be referred to the senate committees. It will need to receive a hearing in order to progress further. Last year the bills companion in the senate did not receive a hearing. We will share your comments with the senator.
Sincerely,
Tiffani Sanne’, Legislative Assistant to Washington State Senator Randi Becker 2nd District
Another update:
IN THE SENATE
Feb 16 First reading, referred to Health Care.
Feb 22 Executive action taken in the Senate Committee on Health Care at 10:00 AM.
HLTH - Majority; without recommendation. (Majority Report)
And refer to Ways & Means.
Feb 23 Referred to Ways & Means.
IN THE SENATE
Feb 16 First reading, referred to Health Care.
Feb 22 Executive action taken in the Senate Committee on Health Care at 10:00 AM.
HLTH - Majority; without recommendation. (Majority Report)
And refer to Ways & Means.
Feb 23 Referred to Ways & Means.
No it's not!
This bill is what passed --> http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/Senate Passed Legislature/6328-S.PL.pdf
And after amendment by the health committee, etc... it's actually quite a good bill.
Not only does it get rid of the taxes, it has a preclusion clause so that no locality can add any. It requires safety warnings on the labels, child-resistant packaging, ID checks (no signature requirement for mail order), requires a license for retailers but fairly inexpensive.
I mean, if we have to have regulations (and we do), this should be the model template that is used. Good job, Washington State.
Excellent if that's the case. I assumed it was still the original form since I've seen very little news about it here.
I am wondering the same thing as @Rossum. Why should there be any regulatory concern
what so ever? The juice is as easy and safe to make as Kool-Aid. There is absolutly no
evidence that any one has been harmed aside from perhaps allergic reactions which
anything can cause or misuse. Second hand vapor is completely harmless.
(sorry worry warts the science is in on this)
One can go on and on about long term studies but, they will never be done as there is
nothing right now to indicate they're needed so no one will fund any. Aroma therapy which
uses base oils that are known to be harmful to humans and their "pets" is under
no such scrutiny.
The biggest single problem that vaping as if there is one is that it is incredibly inherently
safe from the beginning. It as been determined that side by side toxicology tests on cell
tissues comparing smoke with vapor cannot be done as the smoke kills all the cells to
quickly. Tis in and of itself speaks volumes about how safe vaping is.
Regards
Mike
Because that's reality. And I prefer to deal with reality. You can stand outside shouting at the clouds all day if you like but that won't stop the rain. Me? I'll grab an umbrella
Did you actually *read* this bill? Because you'll see, they basically agree with you. This has nothing to do with long-term health effects or clean rooms or homeland security. This is about packaging, labels and not selling to minors. This is about doing a minimum to ensure basic safety and restrict access by children.I am wondering the same thing as @Rossum. Why should there be any regulatory concern
what so ever? The juice is as easy and safe to make as Kool-Aid. There is absolutly no
evidence that any one has been harmed aside from perhaps allergic reactions which
anything can cause or misuse. Second hand vapor is completely harmless.
(sorry worry warts the science is in on this)
One can go on and on about long term studies but, they will never be done as there is
nothing right now to indicate they're needed so no one will fund any. Aroma therapy which
uses base oils that are known to be harmful to humans and their "pets" is under
no such scrutiny.
The biggest single problem that vaping as if there is one is that it is incredibly inherently
safe from the beginning. It as been determined that side by side toxicology tests on cell
tissues comparing smoke with vapor cannot be done as the smoke kills all the cells to
quickly. Tis in and of itself speaks volumes about how safe vaping is.
Regards
Mike
I wasn't disagreeing with the contents of the bill per say. I was disagreeing with your notion
that we do need regulation.
Even the bill doesn't really do anything. Minors will still get their hands on it.
The bill only opens the way for meaningless compliance checks that requires
expansion of the bureaucracy to collect the fines they will get because compliance
checks are not designed to catch the guilty,they are designed to entrap the young
inexperienced and harried worker. Child safety caps do not work when parents do
not take the rudimentary steps to keep their children from getting their hands
on it in the first place. The chillin' are doing just fine. The chillin' are not guzzling
e-juice like it was naturally organic sun kissed 100% fruit juice made by old hippies
from their sippy cups.
Do you want to protect children? Ban candles and space heaters.
"Children younger than 5 made up 52% of the deaths of children younger than 16 in fires in 2007, "
Report: Half of children killed in fires are under age 5 - USATODAY.com
Making a law to protect a class that needs no protection or rejects such protection out
of hand is meaningless.
Regards
Mike
Umbrella? Let me check my freezer -- [time passes].We should be grabbing an umbrella WHILE shouting at the rain.
Yep, I still have a lifetime supply of umbrellas.
While we don't really need 'regulation' having a well written commonsense law such as this one (apparently is) may make it more difficult for the ANTZ to get a bad law (ie Indiana) passed. Politicians are quite busy with more important things such as lining each others pockets So once they have thumped their chest in self importance once may possibly tell the ANTZ to take a hike if they show up again.
My theory and I'm sticking with it. Plus it will be great ammunition in my home state if our proposed bill resurfaces next year.
So once they have thumped their chest in self importance once may possibly tell the ANTZ to take a hike if they show up again.My theory and I'm sticking with it. Plus it will be great ammunition in my home state if our proposed bill resurfaces next year.
I wasn't disagreeing with the contents of the bill per say. I was disagreeing with your notion
that we do need regulation.
Even the bill doesn't really do anything. Minors will still get their hands on it.
The bill only opens the way for meaningless compliance checks that requires
expansion of the bureaucracy to collect the fines they will get because compliance
checks are not designed to catch the guilty,they are designed to entrap the young
inexperienced and harried worker. Child safety caps do not work when parents do
not take the rudimentary steps to keep their children from getting their hands
on it in the first place. The chillin' are doing just fine. The chillin' are not guzzling
e-juice like it was naturally organic sun kissed 100% fruit juice made by old hippies
from their sippy cups.
Do you want to protect children? Ban candles and space heaters.
"Children younger than 5 made up 52% of the deaths of children younger than 16 in fires in 2007, "
Report: Half of children killed in fires are under age 5 - USATODAY.com
Making a law to protect a class that needs no protection or rejects such protection out
of hand is meaningless.
Regards
Mike
Well, age 0 to 5 makes up 1/3 of the children under age 18. They are the least mobile and the least aware of what to do.
We should be grabbing an umbrella WHILE shouting at the clouds.
It Never Rains in California.
Oh wait... You're gonna have to be 21 to buy e-Liquids and Vape Gear.
Never Mind.
Toddlers between the age of 2 up to 4 are the most vulnerable and most likely
to find things that are left carelessly about. Child resistant caps may deter some
toddlers but the most important factor is keeping potentially harmful things
out of their reach in the first place. It is interesting to note the only child thought
to have died from nicotine poisoning from e-juice got a hold of a bottle of Nic base
where the child resistant cap had gone completely missing. According to the police
report none was ever found.
Regards
Mike
In a previous life I sold certain things to certain people.
If I needed money I could see doing that in the future with nicotine.
But thankfully, I no longer need that kind of money.
So I'll keep what I have for now.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
