Alabama Still At IT!!!! HB383 and SB197/198

[Huntsvappin]

Figures Health S Read Second Time in House of Origin Health 03/15/2012
Health, smoking prohibited in places of employment, public places and private clubs, outdoor areas, exceptions, responsibilities of

I haven't found a new copy of the bill with any amendments yet. Has anyone else?

 

[CES]

I haven't. Has it come out of the rules committee yet?

 

[Huntsvappin]

Okay I found the Sub/Amendment to SB198, and they did take Electronic cigarettes out of the bill.
137305-3 Health first Substitute Offered.
The definition under (4) now reads: DEPARTMENT. The Alabama Department of Public Health.

and (17) reads " (17) SMOKE or SMOKING. The act of inhaling, exhaling, burning, carrying, holding, or possessing any lighted or heated tobacco product including, but not limited to, cigars, cigarettes, or pipes, or any other lighted or heated smoking equipment or device containing any weed, plant, or other combustible substance. The term also includes the use of any oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing the prohibition against smoking in this act.

Senate still hasn't voted yet. and we still need to watch it to make sure not more amendments are added to include electronic cigarettes again.

Also still on our watch list and in committee is SB197 and HB383. Still fight the good fight, we are making a difference. Continue emails to the House!

Happy Vapping!

 

[Bill Godshall]

CES wrote:

I wish we could relax now, but there is still the house bill (HB383) , and the other senate bill (SB197- it's the same except that it includes a constitutional amendment. I hope SB197 will now die in committee. )

Don't worry about SB 197 (as a Constitutional Amendment just isn't going to happen).

Since the Senate Health Cmte already amended e-cigs out of SB 198, even if the House passed HB 383 befor the Senate passed SB 198, it is likely that HB 383's ban on e-cig use would be similarly deleted by the Senate Health Cmte.

The likely reason SB 198 is in the Senate Rules Committee is because its sponsors still don't have a majority of Senators supporting the bill. If/when a majority of Senators votes are obtained, the bill would likely be moved to the full Senate for a vote.

When urging House members to remove e-cigs from HB 383, it is now important to also remind them that the Senate Health Cmte already did so in SB 198 (as that will make them more amenable to doing the same with HB 383).

 

[CES]

Thanks for finding the amendment Huntsvappin.


and thanks for the clarification Bill. I appreciate all the work you put into the legislative and harm reduction areas!

 

[Kamin_Majere]

Seems to me they took out PV from the bill, but left the wording vague enough to cover anything they really want. I'm not well versed in law/bill verbiage, but it seems to me that...

(17) SMOKE or SMOKING. The act of inhaling, exhaling, burning, carrying, holding, or possessing any lighted or heated tobacco product including, but not limited to, cigars, cigarettes, or pipes, or any other lighted or heated smoking equipment or device containing any weed, plant, or other combustible substance. The term also includes the use of any oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing the prohibition against smoking in this act

The bolded parts can still easily carry over to PV's if they wanted them to.

Maybe i'm just bad at reading this stuff, but except for the wording change it looks like just as bad a situation as it was to begin with.

 

[EJH]

Seems to me they took out PV from the bill, but left the wording vague enough to cover anything they really want. I'm not well versed in law/bill verbiage, but it seems to me that...



The bolded parts can still easily carry over to PV's if they wanted them to.

Maybe i'm just bad at reading this stuff, but except for the wording change it looks like just as bad a situation as it was to begin with.

That's how I read it, too.

Vapers all know that a PV is not an "oral smoking device," but an uninformed politician probably sees using an e-cigarette as smoking.

Or they're being crafty, using vague terms to sneak a e-cig ban past us.

 

[Bill Godshall]

While I share Kamin's concerns, no AL officials would try to make that argument (that e-cigs are still included) since an amendment was approved in the Senate committee to remove the sentence that specifically included e-cigarette use in the definition of smoking.

Whenever a dispute arises about the intent of legislation, the legislative history is considered first. And that Senate amendment (to remove e-cigarettes) is in the legislative history.

But if that definition of smoking appeared in newly introduced legislation (e.g. in another state bill or municipal council bill), it would be wise to advocate for changing it (to make sure it couldn't be interpretted as including e-cigs).

The reference to a "heated tobacco product" would apply to shisha/hookah pipes and to Eclipse and Premier heated tobacco cigarettes (which heat instead of burn the tobacco), although the latter products are no longer sold by Reynolds or PM.

 

[CES]

smoking equipment or device containing any weed, plant, or other combustible substance.

I was also concerned about the vagueness of the wording, there is quite a bit of wiggle room...but the term combustible seems to specifically rule out e-cigs.

 

[Huntsvappin]

I checked today and there is not status Change on SB198 or its amendment. E-Cigarettes are still removed, and it still waiting on a senate vote. HB383 is still in committee, so is SB 197. So no new news on the smoking ban for Alabama. Any Word on the ordinance for Birmingham?

 

[CES]

I haven't heard or seen anything about the city ordinance. I check the city council website a couple of times a week, but no amended version has been posted. A friend who knows a council person's assistant said the assistant knows a vaper and thought that e-cigs would be removed, but that was a few weeks ago.

 

[Huntsvappin]

Well let hope they have been omitted. Keeping fingures crossed!

 

[Huntsvappin]

Just an Update on our state Clear Air Act 2012. As vapor we are still in the clear. As of yesterday 4/26/2012 SB198 has been carried over to the call of the chair (What ever that means) The last Amendments we also made yesterday by senator Dial.

140372-2 : n : 04/05/2012 : LCG / th LRS2012-20689R1
AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SB198,
AS AMENDED

On page 9, line 8, after the period insert the
following new language:
E-Cigarettes shall not be considered smoking devices for purposes of this act.

If you are in Senator Dials District Vote for Him! Or at least send him a thank you email for standing up for Vapers!

gerald.dial@alsenate.gov
Room 732
State House
11 South Union Street
Montgomery, Alabama 36130
(334) 242-7874
Business: Post Office. Box 248
Lineville, Alabama 36266
(256) 396-5600

HB383, and SB197 are still pending in committee, but still have the language involving ecigs so we need to watch them.

Happy Vaping!

 

[Huntsvappin]

Update: as of 5/11/12


Figures Health S Indefinitely Postponed in House of Origin Health 04/26/2012
Health, smoking prohibited in places of employment, public places and private clubs, outdoor areas, exceptions, responsibilities of Health Department and State Board of Health, penalties, Smoke-free Air Act, Secs. 22-15A-1 to 22-15A-10, inclusive, repealed

 

[CES]

so, we get to do this again next year? if we're lucky they'll start out with a bill that omits e-cigs next year.

thanks for keeping track huntsvappin!

 

[DC2]

Status of SB197: Pending Committee Action in House of Origin
Alabama Legislative Information System Online

Status of HB383: Pending Committee Action in House of Origin
Alabama Legislative Information System Online

Status of SB198: Indefinitely Postponed in House of Origin
Alabama Legislative Information System Online

However, if SB198 gets taken up again, there was an amendment offered by Dial as follows...
Amendments/Substitutes for SB198
View Amendment.140372-2 for SB198

1 140372-2 : n : 04/05/2012 : LCG / th LRS2012-20689R1
2
3 AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR SB198,
4 AS AMENDED
5
6
7
8
9 On page 9, line 8, after the period insert the
10 following new language:
11 E-Cigarettes shall not be considered smoking devices
12 for purposes of this act.

 

[Bill Godshall]

CES wrote:

so, we get to do this again next year? if we're lucky they'll start out with a bill that omits e-cigs next year.

Don't know if ACS/AHA/ALA in Alabama will encourage Senator Figures to include an e-cig ban again next session when she reintroduces the same (or similar) bill.

But since Senator Dial amended the explicit e-cigarette use ban out of the bill in the Senate Health Cmte, and since Senator Dial offered another amendment on the Senate floor that explicitly stated the bill wouldn't ban e-cig use (since the amended bill was still vague), Alabama vapers would be wise to contact Senator Figures (and other primary sponsors of SB 198 and urge them to exclude e-cig use from the definition of "smoking" in next year's smokefree workplace legislation.

Senator Figures may have already decided to not include e-cigs in her bill next year (as she probably doesn't want to be embarrassed again because her bill falsely asserted that using an e-cigarette is smoking), but it can only help to politely remind her.

And of course, it would be very helpful for Alabama vapors to thank Senator Dial for offering his amendments to remove the e-cig use ban from the bill (in the Senate Health Cmte and again in the full Senate).

 

[Bill Godshall]

Alabama vapers may want to monitor Henagar City Council as it considers a smokefree park ordinance (as ANR, ACS, AHA, ALA may send them a model ordinance that falsely defines smoking as including e-cigarette use).
City considers smoking ordinance - times-journal.com: News

 

[CES]

Thanks Bill!