CA Gov to issue MASS VETO!!!
- Thread starter LaceyUnderall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Who knows if the bill is in the 700 veto club. But if it is...then it's a really awkward position that the Governator is putting us in. Schwarzenegger wants legislature to come up with a better deal to upgrade the CA water system between northern and southern CA. Basically almost all the water in southern CA (where I am) comes from northern CA, and believe me when I say there is a lot of water up there. If they don't come up with anything then he threatens to veto all the bills.
Hmmmm...better water system, or ecig rights? Do you think he really cares about the ecig?
Hmmmm...better water system, or ecig rights? Do you think he really cares about the ecig?
In Arnold voice
"AHH WEEEEEL CRUSH THE LEGISLATION BANNING E-CIGS."
Had to do it.
"AHH WEEEEEL CRUSH THE LEGISLATION BANNING E-CIGS."
Had to do it.
and don't forget "In Calleyfornia"
How can you become Governor of a state you can't even pronounce???
and don't forget "In Calleyfornia"
How can you become Governor of a state you can't even pronounce???
You're just mad because our governor, can kick your governors ....
I don't understand why a blind veto is a good thing. All it does is move the issue to the future, with the same consideration. The people who make these decisions will know the next time around that it was dismissed without thought the previous time around, therefor the dismissal in question will not have a positive affect on future discussions. Also, blind litigation in any way, whether it's dismissal or acceptance, is ignorant.
I called the gentleman who did the abstract for SB400.
He told me that they were aware of the Exponent report, but did not take it into consideration. What they did use for consideration were the FDA findings and the media. Next stop, Senator Corbett's office.
So... while this might push it off to the future, it does buy us time to get the real information out there to the rest of the Senate and Assembly to help them make a truly informed decision.
This legislation was done very sly like because it had to be done that way.
If there is a veto, that doesn't mean we can all go home and have a party because as Slim notes, this WILL come back in the future and it will happen pretty fast. As soon as there is a veto, we need to start contacting everyone who voted against this in the first place to help them feel more confident in their vote so they will vote the same way and then we need to get to those who were on the fence but voted for it, to see the light.
The vote was very close 16-14 so it IS possible to see this again and actually make some waves so it doesn't pass.
He told me that they were aware of the Exponent report, but did not take it into consideration. What they did use for consideration were the FDA findings and the media. Next stop, Senator Corbett's office.
So... while this might push it off to the future, it does buy us time to get the real information out there to the rest of the Senate and Assembly to help them make a truly informed decision.
This legislation was done very sly like because it had to be done that way.
If there is a veto, that doesn't mean we can all go home and have a party because as Slim notes, this WILL come back in the future and it will happen pretty fast. As soon as there is a veto, we need to start contacting everyone who voted against this in the first place to help them feel more confident in their vote so they will vote the same way and then we need to get to those who were on the fence but voted for it, to see the light.
The vote was very close 16-14 so it IS possible to see this again and actually make some waves so it doesn't pass.
Sorry, but I gotta correct you there: The initial count of those state senators present was 16 ayes 14 nays, but an hour later it became 23 ayes 14 nays. And of course none of this accounts for the other house of the legislature, just the senate.
That said, I agree with it being possible to prevent re-passage. More useful perhaps would be to prevent e-cigs from being attached to a bill that appeals to legislators, to whom the addition of a clause affecting such a small percentage of their constituents may seem unimportant... Standing as a bill by itself I expect legislators could be swayed to shoot it down, but bundled together with other issues I'm afraid that they might consider it to be of little enough concern that they vote solely on the other issues.
j
lol. the governator? good? for goodness sakes! he tried to kill john connor and cause the end of mankind!!! JKJK.
Good luck everyone in CA!
If things don't go your way you can always join me out in here in VA. Just check your surfboards at the door.
-Gooney0
If things don't go your way you can always join me out in here in VA. Just check your surfboards at the door.
-Gooney0
Holy Sh** you are right! SB 400 Senate Bill - Vote Information
How does that happen? If they aren't present at the vote can they come back and vote later? I apologize... I am learning about California law as I go here...
I know in Congress, if you miss a vote, you can submit why you missed the vote to the record and then the vote submitted... but each Congress gets to change that rule. (yes... isn't that nice?)
I don't know much about CA, but I know in the video to which Tom09 posted a link and of which I posted a transcript, they called the vote and it was 16:14, then "Senator Corbett moves a call", then about an hour later they again called the previously absent senators, and garnered seven more 'aye' votes.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ber-2-prohibit-sale-e-cigs-13.html#post574352 - that's the post where I provided a transcript of the vote itself. That transcript was made from the video linked earlier in the thread, at http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ber-2-prohibit-sale-e-cigs-13.html#post573812 , and the list of Senators voting for/against was posted at http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...mber-2-prohibit-sale-e-cigs-9.html#post565708.Dragonpuff said:This is the first i've heard that
j
Vote in Assembly was 50ayes, 29 nays SB 400 Senate Bill - Vote Information.
Fuller history of the bill is here: Assembly Bill List. Interestingly, it was the Assembly that changed the purpose from 'prevent ecig sales to minors' to 'prohibit ecig sales', between August 24 and September 2.
j
Fuller history of the bill is here: Assembly Bill List. Interestingly, it was the Assembly that changed the purpose from 'prevent ecig sales to minors' to 'prohibit ecig sales', between August 24 and September 2.
j
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked