Yes, people complain about the donaters bribing the politicians, more than the politicians extorting from the donaters.
CALIFORNIA VAPERS: Things are getting ugly...
- Thread starter DC2
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Oh ye of little faith! 
Why the long faces? Can't we at least celebrate another victory for a while? Have y'all forgotten that in 2008 and 2009 we were facing a total ban on e-cigs? That shipments from China were being seized in our ports by the FDA as drug delivery devices?
Judge: e-cigarettes not subject to FDA oversight as drug delivery device - amednews.com
"The case was prompted when the FDA in September 2008 seized imports of the battery-operated devices that vaporize a nicotine solution for inhalation."
Today, nobody is even dreaming of banning e-cigs, not even Mssrs. Leno and Cooper. Now it's just about taxes and flavors and age limits and vaping in hotel lounges. And with every new study showing that vaping is indeed quite harmless, our chances of winning even those battles are increasing daily. Have faith and have fun! Have a vape.
Looky here--this is from UC Berkeley, of all places. Who would have thought...
To help smokers quit, make them vapers - LA Times
"The right strategy to fight smoking should be "harm reduction." By simultaneously reducing the nicotine content of regular cigarettes, raising their cost in key states and, at the same time, making e-cigarettes available to smokers nationwide at a modest price at least for a while, large numbers of smokers are likely to respond in ways that existing tobacco control strategies have failed to achieve. That would achieve an enormous public health gain."
Why the long faces? Can't we at least celebrate another victory for a while? Have y'all forgotten that in 2008 and 2009 we were facing a total ban on e-cigs? That shipments from China were being seized in our ports by the FDA as drug delivery devices?
Judge: e-cigarettes not subject to FDA oversight as drug delivery device - amednews.com
"The case was prompted when the FDA in September 2008 seized imports of the battery-operated devices that vaporize a nicotine solution for inhalation."
Today, nobody is even dreaming of banning e-cigs, not even Mssrs. Leno and Cooper. Now it's just about taxes and flavors and age limits and vaping in hotel lounges. And with every new study showing that vaping is indeed quite harmless, our chances of winning even those battles are increasing daily. Have faith and have fun! Have a vape.
Looky here--this is from UC Berkeley, of all places. Who would have thought...
To help smokers quit, make them vapers - LA Times
"The right strategy to fight smoking should be "harm reduction." By simultaneously reducing the nicotine content of regular cigarettes, raising their cost in key states and, at the same time, making e-cigarettes available to smokers nationwide at a modest price at least for a while, large numbers of smokers are likely to respond in ways that existing tobacco control strategies have failed to achieve. That would achieve an enormous public health gain."
LOL, you're pretty chipper today.Oh ye of little faith!
Why the long faces? Can't we at least celebrate another victory for a while? Have y'all forgotten that in 2009 we were facing a total ban on e-cigs? That shipments from China were being seized in our ports by the FDA as drug delivery devices?
Judge: e-cigarettes not subject to FDA oversight as drug delivery device - amednews.com
Today, nobody is even dreaming of banning e-cigs, not even Mssrs. Leno and Cooper. Now it's just about taxes and flavors and age limits and vaping in hotel lounges. And with every new study showing that vaping is indeed quite harmless, our chances of winning even those battles are increasing daily. Have faith and have fun! Have a vape.
Looky here--this is from UC Berkeley, of all places. Who would have thought...
To help smokers quit, make them vapers - LA Times
"The right strategy to fight smoking should be "harm reduction." By simultaneously reducing the nicotine content of regular cigarettes, raising their cost in key states and, at the same time, making e-cigarettes available to smokers nationwide at a modest price at least for a while, large numbers of smokers are likely to respond in ways that existing tobacco control strategies have failed to achieve. That would achieve an enormous public health gain."
How can they possibly pass those in the next several weeks if they aren't back into session until next year?
Oh ye of little faith!
Why the long faces? Can't we at least celebrate another victory for a while? Have y'all forgotten that in 2008 and 2009 we were facing a total ban on e-cigs? That shipments from China were being seized in our ports by the FDA as drug delivery devices?
Judge: e-cigarettes not subject to FDA oversight as drug delivery device - amednews.com
"The case was prompted when the FDA in September 2008 seized imports of the battery-operated devices that vaporize a nicotine solution for inhalation."
Today, nobody is even dreaming of banning e-cigs, not even Mssrs. Leno and Cooper. Now it's just about taxes and flavors and age limits and vaping in hotel lounges. And with every new study showing that vaping is indeed quite harmless, our chances of winning even those battles are increasing daily. Have faith and have fun! Have a vape.
Looky here--this is from UC Berkeley, of all places. Who would have thought...
I really liked what you wrote there, but not what you linked to.
Last edited:
I am chipper, indeed.
They are adjourned til January 2016. I'm going to have fun and then get ready to fight another day. As usual.
They are adjourned til January 2016. I'm going to have fun and then get ready to fight another day. As usual.
I'm looking for the thread where we discussed the article. I, and others explained there...
Don't bother. I disagree with a lot of what he says in the article, but it's still a sea change--coming from the HQ of CA progressivism and nannyism.
"E-cigarettes, although varied in style, all deliver nicotine to the user in a vapor, which can look like cigarette smoke. By vaping, e-cigarette users can get the level of nicotine hit that addicted smokers crave but without the dangers of burned tobacco. To be clear, nicotine is addictive, but it is not the ingredient in cigarettes that makes traditional smoking so lethal — it's the burned tobacco that kills."
Sea change.
I am chipper, indeed.
They are adjourned til January 2016. I'm going to have fun and then get ready to fight another day. As usual.
Don't wanna be the one to De-Chipper you.
But they Didn't adjourn the Extraordinary Sessions yesterday.
The way i understand it by putting the bills through the health and welfare committeeThey are adjourned til January 2016. I'm going to have fun and then get ready to fight another day. As usual.
they can come up at any time.
mike
The way i understand it by putting the bills through the health and welfare committee
they can come up at any time.
mike
I don't believe it has to do with what Committee they went thru.
It is because they were Not part of the California Regular Legislative Session.
BTW - Many/Most didn't want Any of these Bills to do thru the Governmental Organization Committee. Who's Primary Jurisdictions include alcohol, Indian gaming, horseracing, gambling, tobacco, public records, open meetings laws, state holidays, outdoor advertising and emergency services/natural disasters (this can be shared with the Housing and Community Development Committee and Local Government Committee).
Because BT has a Lot of Influence over many Governmental Organization Committee members.
The way i understand it by putting the bills through the health and welfare committee
they can come up at any time.
mike
Not any time, the way I understand it. The session was formally adjourned til Jan. 4, 2016.
After that date, they can, and I suspect they may, try again.
California lawmakers fail to act on several anti-tobacco bills - LA Times
"Officials said it is unlikely the bills will be heard again before next year."
"Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) said the Legislature just ran out of time Friday, but she noted versions of the bills were introduced in a special session, which could extend into early next year, when the bills could be taken up again."
"It got vaporized," Cooper said. "It's very disappointing but that's the process. I respect the process."
“Unfortunately it’s not the first time the Assembly has disappointed us,” Leno said after the midnight adjournment.
You sound just like Leno...
"Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), who also had a bill to regulate e-cigarettes, has complained that the tobacco industry generally has too much sway in the Capitol and particularly with members of the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee that tried to gut his bill this year."
That part's unclear. Might mean they still can be brought up between now and then, or it might mean what you say it means.
Not to me--nothing can/will happen between now and the new year ("early next year, when the bills could be taken up again" means they can not/will not be taken up before that date).
"It got vaporized!"
Dumb jokes are hard for people to resist, even if they have a side effect of causing confusion. I should know. I have a lot of experience of making confusing bad jokes."It got vaporized!"
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
