This info is not my work but from Zig Cigs or Shawn's Hard research. Didn't want to take credit for someones hard work. I got it from his web page.
What to do - Proposed bans in 4 states
- Thread starter Vocalek
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- provari totally wicked
- Status
Above God - It's far better to send a hard copy of your letter by mail.
If that's not possible, the links to the relevant posts can be found in Vocalek's original post.
If that's not possible, the links to the relevant posts can be found in Vocalek's original post.
See the OP (#1 in the Thread) for links. Since SJ already answered this while I was writing, let me add this. Remember the KISS principle.
Keep It Simple, Sweetheart.
Make sure that they know what bill you are talking about (e.g. SB 882) and clearly express that you want them to vote against it.
Try to keep your message down to a couple of paragraphs.
Last edited:
For CA...
IDK if anyone noticed, but SB 882 is the Exact same bill that was proposed, passed and then vetoed by Arnold. SB 400 SB 400 Senate Bill - ENROLLED
WHO wins this up coming election might be our only hope.
And I dont "get" something....Why are democrats the ones pushing the bans on E-cigs? they are same ones who Pushed to make ......... legal!? Are they confused?
(And why is wacky weed's correct name blocked?)
IDK if anyone noticed, but SB 882 is the Exact same bill that was proposed, passed and then vetoed by Arnold. SB 400 SB 400 Senate Bill - ENROLLED
WHO wins this up coming election might be our only hope.
And I dont "get" something....Why are democrats the ones pushing the bans on E-cigs? they are same ones who Pushed to make ......... legal!? Are they confused?
(And why is wacky weed's correct name blocked?)
Last edited:
Chuck Shumer from NY just got a lengthy letter from me. I've gained my life and health back because of e-cigs, this CANNOT happen.
Kuya--Just quote Judge Leon the way I did. You can copy and past that passage right into your letter. Add to that your letter is going to get much more of a read with that in there.
Sun
Yep. The dems in CA state government are the reason why I will be voting republican for the first time this fall. Can't be bothered to balance the budget but have plenty of time to waste trying to ban e-cigs. Anyone thinking of voting for Jerry Brown really needs to think again as he has made banning e-cigs his crusade.
I just wish there were some old school republicans running. I really really hate voting for folks with even remote ties to the religious wackos...
Thanks sun...
& About Brown isn't he part of the lawsuit that I read about in january?
& About Brown isn't he part of the lawsuit that I read about in january?
i started a new thread- but can anyone confirm this email response from
Susan McComas – District 35 B
re: MD house bill 720
"This bill died in the Health and Government Operations Committee. You are safe this year."
Susan McComas – District 35 B
re: MD house bill 720
"This bill died in the Health and Government Operations Committee. You are safe this year."
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Please note that letters and calls can/should be made to state legislators in these states, not the two US Senators or members of US Congress from these states.
Also, if the bill is introduced in the House (and hasn't passed the House yet), contact members of the House (and especially contact House committee members if the bill is in a House Committee).
Similarly, if bills are introduced in the Senate (and hasn't passed the Senate), contact members of the Senate (and especially contact Senate Committee members if the bill is in a Senate Committee).
Also, if the bill is introduced in the House (and hasn't passed the House yet), contact members of the House (and especially contact House committee members if the bill is in a House Committee).
Similarly, if bills are introduced in the Senate (and hasn't passed the Senate), contact members of the Senate (and especially contact Senate Committee members if the bill is in a Senate Committee).
Tho I no longer live in NY I did send them the comment below
Tho I do agree with the restriction of sale to minors. I strongly disagree with this bill . To ban e-cigarettes on the grounds that is has not been approved by the FDA will with hold viable alternatives to tobacco smokers who need reliable nicotine replacement that in fact, work's. I, and thousands of others are proof of that. The liquid used in the e-cigarette are already GRAS by our government. The only potently harmful product is the nicotine. Also found in all tobacco products and NRT products that have a high failure rate in there effectiveness. So what are you trying to tell your constituents considering this bill ? Quit or Die ?
E.R. member CASAA.org
Tho I do agree with the restriction of sale to minors. I strongly disagree with this bill . To ban e-cigarettes on the grounds that is has not been approved by the FDA will with hold viable alternatives to tobacco smokers who need reliable nicotine replacement that in fact, work's. I, and thousands of others are proof of that. The liquid used in the e-cigarette are already GRAS by our government. The only potently harmful product is the nicotine. Also found in all tobacco products and NRT products that have a high failure rate in there effectiveness. So what are you trying to tell your constituents considering this bill ? Quit or Die ?
E.R. member CASAA.org
This is CRAZY, first health care is jammed through not to mention amnesty, tax and trade, taking over the Auto industry, taking over the Banking industry, and on, and on, and on, and now THIS!!!! I quit analogs after I found ElizabethsElectronicz.com after going through a bunch of others they have a 510 model that comes with a Pcc just like Blu's Pcc, has atomizers that don't have that horrible flavor right out of the package and has awesome throat hits, unfortunately they are out of Illinois so I knew it was only a matter of time before they got screwed and by association I got screwed by the ever imposing Government.
Yes, this situation, if you will, is getting way out of hand.
I dunno if this is allowed, but I'm trolling for opinions on this Idea I have... And it fits in with these kinds of knee-jerk bans and scrutiny!
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tennessee-vapinteers/72659-killer-vid-idea.html#post1075567
Take a second to pop over and lemme know whatcha think
I dunno if this is allowed, but I'm trolling for opinions on this Idea I have... And it fits in with these kinds of knee-jerk bans and scrutiny!
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tennessee-vapinteers/72659-killer-vid-idea.html#post1075567
Take a second to pop over and lemme know whatcha think
No! you can't do that, that will make them want to ban e-cigs even more. =[
This is what was sent to me from the State of Maryland:
HB 720
Department of Legislative Services
Maryland General Assembly
2010 Session
FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE
House Bill 720
(Delegates Bobo and Frush)
Health and Government Operations
Public Health - Nontobacco Nicotine Products
This bill prohibits a person from selling, distributing, or offering for sale a product, or any part of a product, that contains or delivers nicotine intended for human consumption and has not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The bill does not apply to tobacco products. Violators are guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of up to $1,000 per violation.
Fiscal Summary
State Effect: Potential minimal increase in general fund revenues due to the bill’s penalty provision. No effect on expenditures.
Local Effect: Enforcement can be handled with existing resources, assuming it is based on complaints only and not on inspection of all retailers that sell nontobacco nicotine products.
Small Business Effect: Potential minimal.
Analysis
Current Law: State law does not address nontobacco nicotine products.
With certain exceptions, statute prohibits a person from smoking in an indoor area open to the public, an indoor place in which meetings are open to the public, a government-owned or -operated means of mass transportation, or an indoor place of employment. However, the prohibition does not apply to nontobacco nicotine products.
HB 720 / Page 2
Background: Electronic cigarettes, or “e-cigarettes,” are battery-operated devices that generally contain nicotine cartridges and often other chemicals to mimic flavors such as chocolate, mint, or strawberry. When a user sucks on an e-cigarette, a light-emitting diode causes the tip to glow, and the inhaled nicotine vapor is exhaled in a cloud that looks like cigarette smoke but dissipates more quickly and does not have a lingering odor.
The American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids have called for e-cigarettes, which are not regulated by FDA, to be removed from the market, saying that children may be attracted to the flavored products and that they have not been proven safe.
In July 2009, the Oregon Attorney General’s Office announced a settlement prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes in Oregon until they are approved by FDA, or until a court rules FDA does not have the authority to regulate electronic cigarettes. Even if courts decide that FDA does not have regulatory authority, the settlement stipulates, among other things, that electronic cigarettes may not be sold in Oregon unless there is competent and reliable scientific evidence to support product safety claims.
In addition, the California legislature attempted to ban the sale of e-cigarettes in the state entirely, but the bill was vetoed by the Governor in October 2009.
In July 2009, FDA announced that laboratory analysis found that the e-cigarette contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze. However, manufacturers maintain that their products are safe, and in February 2010, a federal judge ruled that FDA cannot regulate electronic cigarettes as drug-delivery devices.
Additional Information
Prior Introductions: None.
Cross File: None.
Information Source(s): Caroline, Prince George’s, and Montgomery counties; Baltimore City; Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; Comptroller’s Office; Judiciary (Administrative Office of the Courts); American Medical Association; Oregon Department of Justice; Washington Post; Wall Street Journal; Department of Legislative Services
HB 720 / Page 3
Fiscal Note History:
First Reader - March 4, 2010
mlm/ljm
Analysis by: Sarah K. Volker
Direct Inquiries to:
(410) 946-5510
(301) 970-5510
The Bill was voted on and rejected for this year with a vote of 19 to 3 against.
We are safe until next year!
HB 720
Department of Legislative Services
Maryland General Assembly
2010 Session
FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE
House Bill 720
(Delegates Bobo and Frush)
Health and Government Operations
Public Health - Nontobacco Nicotine Products
This bill prohibits a person from selling, distributing, or offering for sale a product, or any part of a product, that contains or delivers nicotine intended for human consumption and has not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The bill does not apply to tobacco products. Violators are guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of up to $1,000 per violation.
Fiscal Summary
State Effect: Potential minimal increase in general fund revenues due to the bill’s penalty provision. No effect on expenditures.
Local Effect: Enforcement can be handled with existing resources, assuming it is based on complaints only and not on inspection of all retailers that sell nontobacco nicotine products.
Small Business Effect: Potential minimal.
Analysis
Current Law: State law does not address nontobacco nicotine products.
With certain exceptions, statute prohibits a person from smoking in an indoor area open to the public, an indoor place in which meetings are open to the public, a government-owned or -operated means of mass transportation, or an indoor place of employment. However, the prohibition does not apply to nontobacco nicotine products.
HB 720 / Page 2
Background: Electronic cigarettes, or “e-cigarettes,” are battery-operated devices that generally contain nicotine cartridges and often other chemicals to mimic flavors such as chocolate, mint, or strawberry. When a user sucks on an e-cigarette, a light-emitting diode causes the tip to glow, and the inhaled nicotine vapor is exhaled in a cloud that looks like cigarette smoke but dissipates more quickly and does not have a lingering odor.
The American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids have called for e-cigarettes, which are not regulated by FDA, to be removed from the market, saying that children may be attracted to the flavored products and that they have not been proven safe.
In July 2009, the Oregon Attorney General’s Office announced a settlement prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes in Oregon until they are approved by FDA, or until a court rules FDA does not have the authority to regulate electronic cigarettes. Even if courts decide that FDA does not have regulatory authority, the settlement stipulates, among other things, that electronic cigarettes may not be sold in Oregon unless there is competent and reliable scientific evidence to support product safety claims.
In addition, the California legislature attempted to ban the sale of e-cigarettes in the state entirely, but the bill was vetoed by the Governor in October 2009.
In July 2009, FDA announced that laboratory analysis found that the e-cigarette contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze. However, manufacturers maintain that their products are safe, and in February 2010, a federal judge ruled that FDA cannot regulate electronic cigarettes as drug-delivery devices.
Additional Information
Prior Introductions: None.
Cross File: None.
Information Source(s): Caroline, Prince George’s, and Montgomery counties; Baltimore City; Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; Comptroller’s Office; Judiciary (Administrative Office of the Courts); American Medical Association; Oregon Department of Justice; Washington Post; Wall Street Journal; Department of Legislative Services
HB 720 / Page 3
Fiscal Note History:
First Reader - March 4, 2010
mlm/ljm
Analysis by: Sarah K. Volker
Direct Inquiries to:
(410) 946-5510
(301) 970-5510
The Bill was voted on and rejected for this year with a vote of 19 to 3 against.
We are safe until next year!
Wishes it would be dropped by all states etc.
Has more to say about it but not place for it.
Has more to say about it but not place for it.
- Status
