Attention ECF members and CASAA members!! Call to Action for New York!!
- Thread starter kristin
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Good luck New York!!! Don't these politicians have anything better to do with thier time and the taxpayers dollars like help create jobs? Think of all the money wasted already on the federal AND state levels. Has any of this "research" helped put Americans to work? Is this really using our tax money wisely? This whole crusade against e-cigarettes is a joke!!! The worst part is people are starting to accept the fact our government is becoming socialistic and chaulking it up as the normal American way. Not only is banning a product so many love un-American, they also take from the mouths of the people who try and start little businesses. If this industry was run by Phillip Morris, this wouldn't be happening.
The Link at the very top of the page (New York - Take action Now!) that appears on every page on ECF takes us to page 2 of this thread, which is a little confusing. Somebody might want to change that Link to take folks to page One.
Alas, I have been out of the loop on this forum for some time and thus arrived too late to be able to send letters on time to participate in this fight. Sadly, I feel it might be a fight that cannot be won. I have written both Sen. Schumer and Sen. Gillibrand on the issue of banning the shipment of tobacco products (and e-cigs) through the mail and both replied to me, making it abundantly clear that they would endorse any legislation that would prohibit the sale of e-cigs in New York.
I hope that I am wrong, and I wish everyone who is actively participating in this battle the very best of luck. I wish I had at least written (although I will send emails - I do believe they will be read by someone, so at least I can hope to contribute in some small way). But my optimism is waning.
I just stocked up on enough e-juice to get me through the next couple of months. I went with two nicotine strengths, high and medium. I have a bottle of low. I will add a bottle of "0" as well. Hopefully I can gradually wean myself of nicotine dependency in time to be a total non-smoker by the time e-cigs are officially banned in NY.
The writing's been on the wall for a long time. The fact is, the lack of conclusive testing by a government approved facility PROVING the safety of e-cigs is the one weapon that's lacking in our efforts to convince stubborn, tax-obsessed legislators that e-cigs are perhaps the ONLY relatively safe alternative to smoking and a viable cessation tool.
It boggles the mind that lawmakers are so willing to ban devices not classified as "tobacco products" despite a lack of evidence that they are truly harmful, but will not make cigarettes illegal despite many decades of evidence that they kill. But then, we all know this and all feel frustrated with the obvious hypocricy of our elected officials.
I propose that we all take note of those who vote in favor of this ban and "voice" our dissent in the best, most effective way possible by voting them out of office when reelection time comes. It might not make a difference, but at least we can take comfort in knowing we did what we could.
I hope that I am wrong, and I wish everyone who is actively participating in this battle the very best of luck. I wish I had at least written (although I will send emails - I do believe they will be read by someone, so at least I can hope to contribute in some small way). But my optimism is waning.
I just stocked up on enough e-juice to get me through the next couple of months. I went with two nicotine strengths, high and medium. I have a bottle of low. I will add a bottle of "0" as well. Hopefully I can gradually wean myself of nicotine dependency in time to be a total non-smoker by the time e-cigs are officially banned in NY.
The writing's been on the wall for a long time. The fact is, the lack of conclusive testing by a government approved facility PROVING the safety of e-cigs is the one weapon that's lacking in our efforts to convince stubborn, tax-obsessed legislators that e-cigs are perhaps the ONLY relatively safe alternative to smoking and a viable cessation tool.
It boggles the mind that lawmakers are so willing to ban devices not classified as "tobacco products" despite a lack of evidence that they are truly harmful, but will not make cigarettes illegal despite many decades of evidence that they kill. But then, we all know this and all feel frustrated with the obvious hypocricy of our elected officials.
I propose that we all take note of those who vote in favor of this ban and "voice" our dissent in the best, most effective way possible by voting them out of office when reelection time comes. It might not make a difference, but at least we can take comfort in knowing we did what we could.
ACM - since you've been out of the loop, did you miss that these bans are falling like flies? Maryland let it die, Utah amended to just ban sales for minors (after calls and emails), California amended for minors and it looks like Illinois is going to die in committee, because of all of the letters, emails and the ECF/VF contingent that went to speak before the committee!!
Also, it's not too late - it just started. Write your letters, make your calls, since you are in New York and if the Bill is called for the Health committee meeting, get your .... down there.
We've already proven we have the ability to influence these politicians. All is NOT lost!!
Also, it's not too late - it just started. Write your letters, make your calls, since you are in New York and if the Bill is called for the Health committee meeting, get your .... down there.
We've already proven we have the ability to influence these politicians. All is NOT lost!!
I hope you're right, Kristin. I am skeptical only because of the responses I have received already from my senators. But I am pushing forward. Below is a copy of a letter I just sent to Gov. David Patterson. I also sent similar letters to my assemblymen, Andrew P. Raia and James D. Conte, and my state senator, Carl L. Marcellino. Perhaps, if the bill makes it to the governor to sign, he will take some of my comments into consideration (if he ever gets to read them.)
"April 27, 2010
Dear Governor Patterson:
Legislation to ban the sale of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) in the State of New York is about to come to a vote in the New York State Assembly and Senate. The bills in question, Assembly Bill A9529 and Senate Bill S7234, will prohibit such sales to all adult residents in the state, and thus will effectively eliminate a potentially life-saving option for those wishing to stop using tobacco, but who have been unsuccessful in their efforts to quit smoking. I implore you to follow the lead of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and veto this legislation should it cross your desk to be signed into law. Believing you to be a reasonable man, I beg you to instead push for fair legislation regarding the sale, taxation, and use of electronic cigarettes in New York State.
The current call for the banning of these alternatives to smoking is largely a knee-jerk reaction to a July 2009 report by the FDA. In this report, the FDA questioned the safety of e-cigs without sufficient testing to back up its concerns. It created a firestorm of controversy, leading to emotional bans of e-cigs in various states and local municipalities throughout the U.S.
This report also led to a misguided belief that electronic cigarettes are intentionally marketed to children. This is very much not the case. While some manufacturers of e-cigs also make flavored nicotine "juices" that some believe to be attractive to children, no manufacturer or retailer has ever marketed their products to minors. In fact, all of the retailers I have done business with restrict access to their online stores to adults over the age of 18. The truth is, minors can more easily purchase actual tobacco products, such as cigarettes and chewing tobacco, from convenience stores than they can purchase e-cigs and related products from online retailers or mall kiosks.
I live in Suffolk County, NY. Last year, the Suffolk County legislature included e-cigs in its public smoking ban. It did this without any scientific testing to justify its actions. The State of Oregon flatly banned sales of e-cigs altogether, again with no solid science to back up claims of potential health hazards. How can this be allowed in New York as well, especially when the proposed ban does not affect the sale of actual tobacco products, which have been conclusively proven to be deadly? It's hypocrisy, plain and simple, and seriously calls into question the true motivation behind this proposed legislation. Is it really intended to protect the public health or is it designed to preserve the enormous tax revenue generated through the sale of cigarettes?
With the significant health dangers of tobacco being well-researched, proven, and published, how can anyone in government truly justify its continued legal production and sale in the U.S. while banning a product that currently has no proven health dangers and which might actually save lives, reduce smoking-related disease rates, and lower heath care costs for many Americans?
Governor Schwarzenegger employed thoughtfulness and logic when he vetoed a law that woud have banned e-cigs in California for essentially the same reason I am asking you to preserve, for the time being, the sale and use of these smoking alternatives in New York State: They are not known to be dangerous. Rather, they are likely to save lives.
Please step up and be the voice of reason on this issue. Do the right thing to ensure that thousands of adult smokers have the legal option to switch to what is quite possibly a safer alternative to the known dangers of tobacco, at least until their actual safety is properly determined. Let science be the primary factor in the decision to ban or allow e-cigs, not emotion and not tax revenue."
"April 27, 2010
Dear Governor Patterson:
Legislation to ban the sale of electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) in the State of New York is about to come to a vote in the New York State Assembly and Senate. The bills in question, Assembly Bill A9529 and Senate Bill S7234, will prohibit such sales to all adult residents in the state, and thus will effectively eliminate a potentially life-saving option for those wishing to stop using tobacco, but who have been unsuccessful in their efforts to quit smoking. I implore you to follow the lead of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and veto this legislation should it cross your desk to be signed into law. Believing you to be a reasonable man, I beg you to instead push for fair legislation regarding the sale, taxation, and use of electronic cigarettes in New York State.
The current call for the banning of these alternatives to smoking is largely a knee-jerk reaction to a July 2009 report by the FDA. In this report, the FDA questioned the safety of e-cigs without sufficient testing to back up its concerns. It created a firestorm of controversy, leading to emotional bans of e-cigs in various states and local municipalities throughout the U.S.
This report also led to a misguided belief that electronic cigarettes are intentionally marketed to children. This is very much not the case. While some manufacturers of e-cigs also make flavored nicotine "juices" that some believe to be attractive to children, no manufacturer or retailer has ever marketed their products to minors. In fact, all of the retailers I have done business with restrict access to their online stores to adults over the age of 18. The truth is, minors can more easily purchase actual tobacco products, such as cigarettes and chewing tobacco, from convenience stores than they can purchase e-cigs and related products from online retailers or mall kiosks.
I live in Suffolk County, NY. Last year, the Suffolk County legislature included e-cigs in its public smoking ban. It did this without any scientific testing to justify its actions. The State of Oregon flatly banned sales of e-cigs altogether, again with no solid science to back up claims of potential health hazards. How can this be allowed in New York as well, especially when the proposed ban does not affect the sale of actual tobacco products, which have been conclusively proven to be deadly? It's hypocrisy, plain and simple, and seriously calls into question the true motivation behind this proposed legislation. Is it really intended to protect the public health or is it designed to preserve the enormous tax revenue generated through the sale of cigarettes?
With the significant health dangers of tobacco being well-researched, proven, and published, how can anyone in government truly justify its continued legal production and sale in the U.S. while banning a product that currently has no proven health dangers and which might actually save lives, reduce smoking-related disease rates, and lower heath care costs for many Americans?
Governor Schwarzenegger employed thoughtfulness and logic when he vetoed a law that woud have banned e-cigs in California for essentially the same reason I am asking you to preserve, for the time being, the sale and use of these smoking alternatives in New York State: They are not known to be dangerous. Rather, they are likely to save lives.
Please step up and be the voice of reason on this issue. Do the right thing to ensure that thousands of adult smokers have the legal option to switch to what is quite possibly a safer alternative to the known dangers of tobacco, at least until their actual safety is properly determined. Let science be the primary factor in the decision to ban or allow e-cigs, not emotion and not tax revenue."
You're missing the name of one of the committee members on page 1 -- Charles J. Fuschillo Jr.
Senator Duane is my senator and he's a good guy, very supportive of his constituents rather than the vested interests. I'm going to hand-deliver a letter to his Manhattan office tomorrow (and cc his Albany one.)
Senator Duane is my senator and he's a good guy, very supportive of his constituents rather than the vested interests. I'm going to hand-deliver a letter to his Manhattan office tomorrow (and cc his Albany one.)
Last edited:
And, you have a minor spelling error. Not to be the spelling nazi, but maybe you copy/pasted....
Well, I sent an email in, even if it's late and I don't live anywhere near NY. I hope it's not too late to be of some use.
I like how this letter reads. A no-nonsense presentation of the facts on the ground without getting too detailed. Would you mind if I borrowed it and personalized it for myself?
VaporMadness (and ACM), there are parts of the letter above I truly hope will not be repeated.
While the FDA's misleading and disingenuous press conference did create a great deal of controversy, it did not lead to "bans of e-cigs in various states and local municipalities throughout the U.S."
As Kristin pointed out, each statewide ban on the sale of ecigs that has been proposed so far has fallen. California by veto, but the potential bans in Utah, Maryland and Illinois were never passed in the first placed (Illinois, while not official yet, will be dead by Friday).
And yes, NJ passed a statute banning use in public places, but not a ban on sales. As far as other such use bans, the only other place that passed one as far as I know is Suffolk County, in NY.
More importantly, there is no ban in Oregon either. The Oregon AG threatened to sue SE and Njoy, and Njoy settled, agreeing not to sell there. A very misleading press release was issued about that settlement, but the bottom line is there is NO law prohibiting sales of ecigs in Oregon.
And New York is not over! We will be there when they are considering whether to pass S7234!.
By overstating their successes, we are crediting too much power and influence to those lobbying in favor of legislation against ecig sales (and use in public). And we risk leaving the terrible impression that if other states are doing it, well then maybe our state should too!
So, if we are trying to convince those in power in states considering bans to vote against them, the better argument is how all those other proposed bans in other states were killed, as unwise and counter to public health.
So please consider this in writing your letters.
While the FDA's misleading and disingenuous press conference did create a great deal of controversy, it did not lead to "bans of e-cigs in various states and local municipalities throughout the U.S."
As Kristin pointed out, each statewide ban on the sale of ecigs that has been proposed so far has fallen. California by veto, but the potential bans in Utah, Maryland and Illinois were never passed in the first placed (Illinois, while not official yet, will be dead by Friday).
And yes, NJ passed a statute banning use in public places, but not a ban on sales. As far as other such use bans, the only other place that passed one as far as I know is Suffolk County, in NY.
More importantly, there is no ban in Oregon either. The Oregon AG threatened to sue SE and Njoy, and Njoy settled, agreeing not to sell there. A very misleading press release was issued about that settlement, but the bottom line is there is NO law prohibiting sales of ecigs in Oregon.
And New York is not over! We will be there when they are considering whether to pass S7234!.
By overstating their successes, we are crediting too much power and influence to those lobbying in favor of legislation against ecig sales (and use in public). And we risk leaving the terrible impression that if other states are doing it, well then maybe our state should too!
So, if we are trying to convince those in power in states considering bans to vote against them, the better argument is how all those other proposed bans in other states were killed, as unwise and counter to public health.
So please consider this in writing your letters.
Im just grateful that I've got family that lives out of state, so even with the ban in effect it will have little bearing on me as I will simply have the merchandise sent to another state, then sent back to me... I would however rather have the option of just having it shipped straight to me without having to pay double shipping. If thats what its gonna take, I'll do it I wont let big tobacco ruin my health again!
I have also written letters to the nincompoops running the show in Albany and to my assemblyman as well
I have also written letters to the nincompoops running the show in Albany and to my assemblyman as well
Last edited:
Understood and thank you for the wise insight! If and when I personalize this for myself, I'll be sure to make adjustments. What I liked about ACM's letter was the general tone of it. When I try to put things into words, it ends up with too shrill of a tone.
Last edited:
With the group on ecf I'd think that you have lots of family on this board that live in different states. I know that I'd chip in and mail something to you if needed
Maureen
By the way, only 17 comments on the NYSenate Open Legislation page for S7234
S7234 - NY Senate Open Legislation - Prohibits the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors and items not defined as a tobacco product or approved by the FDA as a tobacco use cessation or harm reduction - New York State Senate
Perhaps a few more comments by ECFers might do some good?
SJ
S7234 - NY Senate Open Legislation - Prohibits the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors and items not defined as a tobacco product or approved by the FDA as a tobacco use cessation or harm reduction - New York State Senate
Perhaps a few more comments by ECFers might do some good?
SJ
Good letter. I would point out to others following suit, a couple of things.
1. California's governor vetoed based on letting the court decide. He did not come down on the side of ecigs, in that sense. I would definitely recommend mentioning Utah, however. Even that conservative state listened to reason (our letters) and decided that ecigs "seemed to be helping people," so they amended to only ban sales to minors.
2. Oregon has NOT outright banned ecigs. The AG came to an agreement with Njoy and Smoking Everywhere that they wouldn't sell in 2 store chains. The settelment dod NOT apply to other ecig vendors, nor does it stop Njoy and SE from selling in other store chains.
Unfortunately, irresponsible journalism and a cocky press release from the Ag gave the IMPRESSION that ecigs have been banned, so a lot of people think that.
It's NOT too late folks - keep those letters, phone calls and emails coming!!
That's all well and dandy, but if New York falls, other states will follow and pretty much all of the states your family live in will have banned it too.
It's very important that EVERYONE gets involved in their own states and other state, because they are NOT separate issues - they all influence each other. So, there is no "it's not my problem" in these situations.
I am not a New York resident but, seeing how this could effect us all.....
Done and done!!!
Sending the email took about a minute and a half and was very easy. I would encourage everyone who reads this to take the short time it takes and send the email.
Done and done!!!
Sending the email took about a minute and a half and was very easy. I would encourage everyone who reads this to take the short time it takes and send the email.
I sent the CASAA link to the generic letter to my relatives in NYC, but when I tested the letter myself it failed to send from Mac Mail, which said that it did not recognize the email address structure. Any ideas?
- Status
