The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

California vote on e-cigs coming--Gov. vetos--defers to SE v. FDA case

Discussion in 'Legislation News' started by TropicalBob, Aug 29, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. TropicalBob

    TropicalBob Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 13, 2008
    Port Charlotte, FL USA
    Well, add California to the list of states wanting to categorize electronic cigarettes as "tobacco products." That can only be for tax purposes in a state desperate for additional taxes. But the ramifications are many -- none good, in my view. I'm sorry to say that I am not interested in a practice only legal in the confines of my own home, taxed to the hilt and despised by the general public. That should not be the e-cig future. Here's the bill:

    Note that vote: 17-0. Suffolk County was simply a pioneer in a tidal wave coming down on e-cigs.

    And this is awaiting referral to a committee:

    Other California measures would prohibit smoking at hospitals (and that would now include e-cigarette use if the 17-0 vote is indicative of a law to come) and in state parks and on beaches.
     
  2. yvilla

    yvilla Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Nov 18, 2008
    Rochester, NY
    T Bob, it may not be quite so bad as all that after all. Apparently, the inclusion of electronic cigarettes into the California definition of "tobacco products" is solely for purposes of preventing sales to youth.

    http://www.center4tobaccopolicy.org/_files/_files/July%202009%20Legislative%20Update.pdf

    SB 400 Senate Bill - AMENDED

    As we discussed before, simply being a "tobacco product" does not equal violation of any of the existing smoking bans, as they specifically target "smoking" - the burning/combustion of tobacco.
     
  3. Robert

    Robert Moved On

    Jun 18, 2009
    San Diego, CA.
    Beaches-= again with the beaches!!!! Damn- Even when I smoked I didn't throw butts on the beach......I never obeyed that law and I won't obey any no vaping law. What possible harm could my e-cig have? Our governor smokes 20$ cigars and everyone cheers?!?! They are too scared to legalize and tax the one thing that could make some money. The prisons are full. We should all jump up and down maybe Cali would just fall in the ocean.
     
  4. yvilla

    yvilla Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Nov 18, 2008
    Rochester, NY
  5. TheBoogieman

    TheBoogieman Senior Member ECF Veteran

    May 11, 2009
    Brooklyn, New York
    When you categorize a tobacco less cigarette (ecig) in the same category as tobacco cigarettes. There is a BIG problem. That wasn't done by mistake.
    Why didn't they just pass a bill putting an age limit on the purchase of ecigs? This gets their toe in the door. Next comes the whole foot.
    As far as this goes:
    "tobacco product" does not equal violation of any of the existing smoking bans, as they specifially target "smoking" - the burning/combustion of tobacco.
    Tell that to the guys in Suffolk County. Theres no innocence here. They are setting the game rules. And they are playing for keeps.
     
  6. BigJimW

    BigJimW Moved On ECF Veteran

    May 17, 2009
    Warwick, RI
    California is a state?
     
  7. yvilla

    yvilla Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Nov 18, 2008
    Rochester, NY
    The full text of the bill in California (SB 400) is linked to in my post. It is strictly and solely a sale to minors bill. That's all. They have included ecigs in the defintion of "tobacco products" that are illegal to sell to minors.

    As for Suffolk County, it is horrendous what they did. But, it nonetheless proves my point - they had to actually change the wording of their local smoking ban to include ecigs. It was deliberate, but had nothing to do with any "classification" of ecigs.

    And if you look at the California legislation to ban smoking on beaches -the full text also linked to in my second post - it does not include ecigs, as it targets smoking per se, ie, lighted, burning tobacco (or other plant material). Thankfully, California, at least for now, has not gone as wonky as Suffolk County, NY!
     
  8. quovadis

    quovadis Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Jul 5, 2009
    Florida USA
    I'm stocking up, just in case some clever Florida red neck legislator tries to pass the same bill.

    Is nicorette classified as a tobacco product?
     
  9. Proverb

    Proverb Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Aug 24, 2009
    Boulder, CO
    I know for certain that same question is asked about RI, but for entirely different reasons. Hopefully this whole classification as a tobacco product is as yvilla pointed out solely due to prohibiting the sale of it to minors and not for taxing purposes.
     
  10. Rogue X2 v2

    Rogue X2 v2 Moved On

    Apr 27, 2009
    Not if I was in charge, I'd turn CA into it's own nation. :thumbs:
     
  11. DisMan

    DisMan Super Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 2, 2008
    So they tax local sales. Big deal.

    The e-cig has the correct market to avoid any taxes as Interstate commerce is not taxed. Sure, if a federal tax is imposed, then we have to go foreign...which then gets covered under Duty-free exceptions.

    Face it, there is no significant tax revenues to be had by taxing these things. As we see, dedicated "smokers" are fine with online sales.
     
  12. marcb70

    marcb70 Super Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 1, 2009
    Dublin, CA USA
    you're right we should be our own country
     
  13. TropicalBob

    TropicalBob Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 13, 2008
    Port Charlotte, FL USA
    And then there's the PACT bill pending Congressional approval. It will shut down online sales. There is major panic in the snus world about not being able to order from Sweden. But if that bill becomes law, I can't even order a tobacco product from Kentucky, much less Sweden.

    Look to intent. THEY WANT TO SHUT US DOWN. That's the intent. Find one ruse and they'll close it. Find another and they'll close it. Look to intent, exactly as the FDA is.
     
  14. ladyraj

    ladyraj Super Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 30, 2009
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    TBob, I fear truer words have never been spoken. We are in the midst of one of the biggest social revolutions that I have seen, almost as big as the "hippie" movement. The pendulum swings out...it swings back in again. What a shame that so many people can be hurt by these machinations and forced conformity in the guise of what is "good" for you. As with all endeavors, the hammer will come down one to many times and our society's rebels will have to step in to cry "no more". I await that day...when enough people see that intolerance is not amenable to human civilization a correction will have to be made.;)

    Off topic but interesting:

    No 'same again'. . it's water for you! - Scotsman.com News

    No happy hour, water offered instead of another drink, waitstaff told to keep track of each of their clientele's intake....yes the powers that be are coming after alcohol next. After that...it will be what you eat, how much, and whether it is nutrious or not. No more salty nuts at the bar during happy hour...it will be tofu snacks and veggie juice. I can't bear it!8-o

    Sorry for hijacking...I got carried away and California seems an alien place to me due to the ban-happy legislators/groups that defy imagination. This state has led the way for others to jump on the ban-wagon. Seems a lot of creativity...but lack of forward thinking.
     
  15. LaterSkater

    LaterSkater Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Aug 24, 2009
    Huntington Beach, CA
    California Uber Alles! :D
     
  16. grimmer255

    grimmer255 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    As they say fighting fire with fire never works.....so I say lets bring on a blizzard.
     
  17. aditas

    aditas Moved On

    Jul 5, 2009
    It is a big deal. This is how they chip away and chip away on freedoms.
     
  18. mbolack

    mbolack Super Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Jun 20, 2009
    Tulsa
    Maybe so, but I tend to think it is, in an odd way, a good thing. If they tax it, then they have a financial stake in having it available for purchase.
     
  19. SLDS181

    SLDS181 Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Aug 11, 2009
    Western NJ
    Or they tax it so drastically that it becomes more expensive than cigarettes, causing the poor and middle class to keep smoking, or former vapers going back to smoking.
     
  20. TheBoogieman

    TheBoogieman Senior Member ECF Veteran

    May 11, 2009
    Brooklyn, New York
    So much for innocent bill to protect the children. Guess they just weren't happy enough with just the toe in the door. Politicians and politics sure make for a fun game.

    The Magic 8 Ball has been proven right again. Smokers told you they are gonna come for you next. BUT they all laughed as the taxes just kept going up on cigs. It doesn't effect me you all said. I don't smoke.

    Well if it worked for cigs. It was only a matter of time. Social Engineering thru ads and taxes. Heres your ads. Taxes next. Welcome to my world.

    "New York State has shelved the idea of a tax on sugary sodas and juice drinks. But New York City’s public health officials opened a new front in their struggle against high-calorie beverages on Monday, unveiling an ad campaign that depicts globs of human fat gushing from a soda bottle."

    ENJOY
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice