California: bill to define e-cigs a drug (= sales prohibition?)

[Tom09]

Just came across this post by Janetda. It might warrant much more exposure:

I don't think most people have caught on yet, but California Senator Corbett's SB 882 will take e-cigs away from California too. The Gov. vetoed a similar bill last year but she introduced this new bill. The bill it includes this:
This bill would deem any article that can provide inhaled doses of nicotine by delivering a vaporized solution a drug under these provisions.
SB 882 Senate Bill - INTRODUCED

This bill does not read good, indeed:

This bill would authorize action to halt the sale, distribution, or offering for sale of electronic cigarettes that have not been approved or cleared by the federal Food and Drug Administration. [...]
This bill would deem any article that can provide inhaled doses of nicotine by delivering a vaporized solution a drug under these provisions. [...]

It reads to me as if, once again, a bill to ban - period - had been disguised as a measure “to protect the health of minors”.

Please check out SB 882 tracking site here.

 

[Janetda]

Thanks Tom!

 

[BuzzKill]

Somebody doesnt like the judges decision in the SE Vs. FDA case , would a Bill over ride the court decision ?

 

[Janetda]

I have no idea. I don't understand why they would put this up again while it's still in court. Other than just plain grandstanding, I don't get it.

 

[devnull71]

Thank you both for calling attention to this. I was still a smoker and unaware of e-cigarettes when SB400 was proposed. Now that I've been analog-free for over a month, I have no desire to see the use of these devices by adults criminalized.

I've read both bills, read Senator Corbett's press release regarding 882, and am interested in hearing from anyone who's fought similar legislation in their own states.

 

[Vocalek]

Here is the wording of BILL NUMBER: SB 882:

This bill would deem any article that can provide inhaled doses of
nicotine by delivering a vaporized solution a drug under these
provisions. By expanding the definition of an existing crime, this
bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

SEC. 5. Section 111247 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to
read:
111247. Any article that can provide inhaled doses of nicotine by
delivering a vaporized solution, including, but not limited to, an
electronic cigarette, shall be deemed to be a drug as defined in
Section 109925. This section shall not be construed as bearing on or
being relevant to the question of whether any other product is a drug
as defined in Section 109925 or a device as defined in Section
109920.


And here is her contact information.

Corbett, Ellen (Dem)

1057 MacArthur Blvd.
Suite 206
Sacramento, CA 94248-0001
(510) 577-2310

State Capitol
Room 5108
San Leandro, CA 94577
(916) 651-4010

39155 Liberty Street
Suite F610
Fremont, CA 94538
(510) 794-3900

 

[Janetda]

We fought a similar bill by Corbett last year. It passed with flying colors in both the Assembly and the Senate. It was ultimately vetoed by the Governor in October. All they gotta do is wait for a new Governor.

 

[devnull71]

Grim. I've drafted a snail-mail letter to the Senator for my home district (Leland Yee).

Thank you for the mailing addresses, Vocalek. As I'm not one of Corbett's constituents, I doubt my word would carry much. I had prepared a 3-paragraph message to Corbett with the intention of using her Web site form, but will now send it in print as well.

For those who've called their Senator's offices before, what's the normal protocol? Does a staffer only listen to your "oppose or approve" on a certain bill, or are they interested in the "why" as well?

 

[fast12345]

just spoke with anthony valdez in ellen Corbett's office in sacramento ca.
and he said she is amending the bill that the new bill would only apply to sales to minors.
and to check back next week for the changed bill.
tel# 916-651-4010 Ellen Corbett office #

 

[Janetda]

That would be the smart thing to do. Let's hope he's right.

 

[Drummel]

just spoke with anthony valdez in ellen Corbett's office in sacramento ca.
and he said she is amending the bill that the new bill would only apply to sales to minors.
and to check back next week for the changed bill.
tel# 916-651-4010 Ellen Corbett office #

If it sounds too good to be true...

I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but the Illinois bill starts out in the fashion of banning sales to minors and as it continues into something more like the E-Cigarette category the words "minor" and "under 18" have been replaced with anybody, respectively.

Pay close attention to the Bill and be sure there isn't some grey area that may seem to appease the eyes while it tricks the mind.

 

[Janetda]

yep, they are sneaky like that. Believe it or not, the bill last year in CA started out as a green vehicle bill, some how magically evolved into no e-cigs for minors, then finally, no-cigs for all.

 

[Katya]

yep, they are sneaky like that. Believe it or not, the bill last year in CA started out as a green vehicle bill, some how magically evolved into no e-cigs for minors, then finally, no-cigs for all.

It's all about money, really. California is broke. They are looking for something they haven't taxed yet. My feeling is that e-cigs will be classified as tobacco products and taxed similarly.

 

[Idaho Ron]

Let Hugo Chavez & his friend in the White House come & get me. I ordered 20 new Batteries & 50 premium carts & 500ml of juice. I will order 100ml every month till they ban them. As I believe they will at some time, or TAX the H**l out of them.

 

[taz3cat]

They are going to legalized Pot and ban e-cigs what a farce. That Corbet woman need to get a life.

 

[Rosa]

It's all about money, really. California is broke. They are looking for something they haven't taxed yet. My feeling is that e-cigs will be classified as tobacco products and taxed similarly.

so, I have been trying to figure this stuff out from a political perspective; IF a person bought a PV and 0mg juice, then it's not a "tobacco" product. And IF california needs the tax money from tobacco products so bad, what's wrong with them just taxing the juices that have nicotine in them? I guess I don't really understand how they can get away with it. On the one hand, I don't want to have to pay the tobacco tax on them, but on the other hand, I'd rather do that than have them banned "pending FDA approval". So, again, how come they don't just tax per mg of nicotine? Have they considered that yet?

 

[Janetda]

Here's the thing. Governments are not suppose to depend on tobacco tax to pay it's bills. The extra tax is suppose to go towards health care for smokers and anti-tobacco education, and discourage tobacco use. So taxing a less harmful form of nicotine shouldn't be an issue. It's like saying there should be a sin tax on nicotine patches and gum.

 

[sixofusernames]

why cant we just have the FDA regulate it, then there wouldnt be a problem, right? I dont want to lose my vaping rights, i just got started!!

 

[navyboym]

why cant we just have the FDA regulate it, then there wouldnt be a problem, right? I dont want to lose my vaping rights, i just got started!!

Several reasons

A) If we indeed allow the FDA to regulate it, then they can disallow the use the them entirely until they deem fit for its use in the United States, which leads too...

B) The e-cig suppliers could end up having to pay several millions of dollars in testing to get them approved by the FDA which could take years before they get into our hands and.....

C) With the insane gobs of money that is spent on their approval, the cost to you and I and all the consumers would go way way up, and also in the end limit the amount of suppliers offering them to the consumers.

Seriously its a no win situation.

 

[the86d]

I will shoot somebody an e-mail this weekend. I have to find some cartos for next week!

I do not think that this would be an issue due to the scumbags that let my brother and sister out multiple times for drug possession. This will be less than their possession of Mari-Jane, or pillZ. Brother has been to prison 3 times, sister is finally clean but fried her brain. Keeping these two behind bars and forcing longer sober periods would have been better for them. <Guts Spilled>

(What are they going to do: "OK I need you to pour that out in the dirt and grind it with your foot!"? I'll be getting fake wall socket safes and such, Those BASTAGES!!!)

EDIT: A wrist slap, if even that, like they do for drug users.