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

[UBRocked]

Very good letter Brian! Only problem I see with it is that the FDA doesn't spend any money on drug research, the companies that want their product approved have to pay for the research. Maybe they're upset that when they finally get the power to control tobacco a lot of smokers are choosing to use a product that cannot be defined as tobacco. Having millions fewer citizens smoking cigarettes could have a detrimental affect on the FDA's future budgets. And, as you can probably guess by my avatar, I'm not a big fan of the recipient list...

So who is paying for the research the FDA is doing in regards to e-cigarettes? Hey, you may be right...could be the big pharmaceutical companies that have a stake in the matter! I know the e-cig companies are not paying for the research they have performed thus far. The FDA got the power and then the government implemented the largest tax EVER on all tobacco related products...sounds like a fundraiser to me!

As far as you not liking the recipient list...feel free to address a letter to CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, and then wait for them to act. Problem is that all of those "liberal" news organizations are too busy kissing their liberal controlled government's rear ends. Have those organizations even reported on the ACORN videos yet? Huge corruption (concerning OUR tax dollars) and Charlie Gibson hadn't heard about it 5+ days after Fox News produced the video PROOF that ACORN is corrupt! This from a 20 year old college student that puts most investigated journalist to shame? Sorry my friend but you are watching the US version of Al Jazeera. I don't even call them legit news sources anymore.

 

[Kamanjah]

Please see form letter to Schwarzenegger here.

Thanks!

____________

 

[Rickgren]

Just sent mine off,hope it does something.

 

[LABeachBum]

...As far as you not liking the recipient list...feel free to address a letter to CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, and then wait for them to act. Problem is that all of those "liberal" news organizations are too busy kissing their liberal controlled government's rear ends...

Ya, they are way too busy playing a role in propaganda... as is the FDA as everyone can tell by their 'objective' review and comparison of e cigs, thus followed by Big Media headlines as "E Cigs contain harmful chemicals and antifreeze!!" So they will be little help.

I like the governor letter idea since CA governers can perform line-item vetos and simply remove parts of a bill before signing into law. And he does enjoy tobacco products so that might help.

Which leads to the other aspect to all of this which is that most Americans are non-smokers and they could give a ratt's ... about smokers, regardless of how miraculous a non-combustive form is. Associate it with "smoking" and most non-smokers will turn off or at least more easily buy into negative propeganda about E cigs.

I hope more and more doctors and other respected professionals (like the UCLA Medical Chief) start making some noise about the ludicricy of the FDA's decision and how many lives it impacts.

 

[Computer Extreme]

To Protect Tobacco Revenues at all costs would be a better title to the bill.
As it will help to do this at the cost of millions of lives.

 

[UBRocked]

To Protect Tobacco Revenues at all costs would be a better title to the bill.
As it will help to do this at the cost of millions of lives.

I'm starting to change my opinion of how the government feels about this issue. I don't know that the tobacco revenues are the main concern. They want to pass a government health care system and that will be cheaper to do if we are still killing ourselves with tobacco. I'm sure lung cancer will be a "self inflected" pre-condition that will not be covered...quick, call Hospice and the death panel!!! It would be funny if it wasn't close to the truth!

 

[MHR7331]

Problem is that all of those "liberal" news organizations are too busy kissing their liberal controlled government's rear ends. Have those organizations even reported on the ACORN videos yet? Huge corruption (concerning OUR tax dollars) and Charlie Gibson hadn't heard about it 5+ days after Fox News produced the video PROOF that ACORN is corrupt! This from a 20 year old college student that puts most investigated journalist to shame? Sorry my friend but you are watching the US version of Al Jazeera. I don't even call them legit news sources anymore.

As the thread seems to have degenerated into liberal news media bashing as it is, I'll add: If you honestly think Fox News is a legitimate, "no spin" news source, don't bash MSNBC. They're just the other side of the coin. They both pander to their respective agendas, which is why I get my news from the Daily Show

Ideological differences aside, I think we can all agree that this pending California issue is critical for our longterm fog time enjoyment. Email the Governator, cross your fingers and tell your friends.

 

[June]

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.

The bill morphed into a bill to ban the sale of e-cigs to everyone, not just minors!

 

[yvilla]

The bill morphed into a bill to ban the sale of e-cigs to everyone, not just minors!

Yes, June, that is unfortunately correct.

But, my post was obviously written before the bill was amended, and with reference only to what was true at the time it was written.

 

[June]

Yes, June, that is unfortunately correct.

But, my post was obviously written before the bill was amended, and with reference only to what was true at the time it was written.

yvilla,
That is what I thought. Just did not want anyone to think that is what is still was. Our legislators have been pretty sneaky.

 

[Timekey]

As this bill has taken on a new agenda I feel it is time to reflect and observe what the real issue is here. Almost EVERY single complaint/agenda against the e-cigs throughout the country is a result of marketing/sales tactics by Smoking Everywhere and their mall selling approach. It was the reason Oregon banned them and the SB-400 bill was a result of Smoking Everywhere selling e-cigs to minors in a Milpitas, Ca. Mall. Now we are weeks away from possibly enacting a statewide ban on e-cigs and I am sick and tired of all the bull**** I read on this site about this and that and nobody understands the fundamental issue ............selling these to kids.

What should be the main agenda for everyone on this site is to suggest and support the outlawing of selling e-cigs in an environment such as a mall. If they were only to be sold like cigarettes we would not be in the position we are currently in. If they could only be sold in a liquor store, cigarette store etc. then the kid issue would be a mute point.

I am shocked I never here anyone talk about this easy solution. Instead the main focus is on a ridiculously irrelevent lawsuit over border seizures.

As everyone puts their heads in the sand and focuses on the wrong agenda, one by one states will begin to ban e-cigs ..........all because of one damn company ruining it for everyone.

 

[June]

As this bill has taken on a new agenda I feel it is time to reflect and observe what the real issue is here. Almost EVERY single complaint/agenda against the e-cigs throughout the country is a result of marketing/sales tactics by Smoking Everywhere and their mall selling approach. It was the reason Oregon banned them and the SB-400 bill was a result of Smoking Everywhere selling e-cigs to minors in a Milpitas, Ca. Mall. Now we are weeks away from possibly enacting a statewide ban on e-cigs and I am sick and tired of all the bull**** I read on this site about this and that and nobody understands the fundamental issue ............selling these to kids.

What should be the main agenda for everyone on this site is to suggest and support the outlawing of selling e-cigs in an environment such as a mall. If they were only to be sold like cigarettes we would not be in the position we are currently in. If they could only be sold in a liquor store, cigarette store etc. then the kid issue would be a mute point.

I am shocked I never here anyone talk about this easy solution. Instead the main focus is on a ridiculously irrelevent lawsuit over border seizures.

As everyone puts their heads in the sand and focuses on the wrong agenda, one by one states will begin to ban e-cigs ..........all because of one damn company ruining it for everyone.

I agree Smoking Everywhere is an "In Your Face" company that is doing more harm than good for the other e-cig companies and users. Unfortunately, the anti smoking control freaks and government have been able to use them for their own agenda and are trying to pass legislation against adults also. I do not want to Smoke Everywhere, just leave me alone to vape in my own home, car, and outside at work, restaurants, etc. But I do expect to vape at parks, and the beach.

 

[tfbncc]

Timekey, I disagree with that approach. By associating PV's with cigarettes by only allowing PV's to be sold where cigarettes are sold gives the legislators more leverage. Once we have been linked to smoking laws, we're dead in the water. Vaping has to be recognized as a completely different habit. In no way, shape, or form the same as smoking. I do agree that Smoking Everywhere's sales approach is short sighted and doing more harm than good, but legally and morally, it's their business, not ours. If they want to go that route, they have every right to.

If we could afford it, ECF and CASAA would do well to start a seperate ad campaign highlighting the benefits of PV's. Only educating the public and bringing pressure on legislators through media will have any real affect.

 

[Timekey]

Regulating where and how they are sold is the only way to keep them legal in this country and if you don't believe that I'm sorry for you. And I disagree regarding the association to traditional cigarettes. They are in EVERY way associated with smoking ........they are an ALTERNATIVE to smoking and they replicate the entire act of smoking except for the lighting up. What are you afraid of exactly by them being associated with traditional cigarettes anyways?

The EFC and the CASAA need to begin a campaign to stop all sales of e-cigs in malls before another council person sees another kid being sold a kit.

 

[Timekey]

From just a few responses it's clear the biggest reason we are where we are is no one can agree what the problem is. Can anyone tell me WHY the FDA .....which appears to many as having a major concern over e-cigs has not banned them yet? If they could have banned them don't you think they would have by now? They are powerless to do so. It takes bills such as SB 400 to actually ban them as I'm afraid Californians are about to find out .........but hopefully not.

 

[afihigh019]

just bought my 510 a week or so ago, haven't touched a deathstick since. This looming prospect of a ban is truly concerning me, as I know I won't stop vaping for anything.

Anyone know when any more concrete answers will be out about ecigs in California? Time to stock up? Time to rally in front of the capitol building?

WTF

 

[Timekey]

If you are simply a user and live in California I don't think you have anything to worry about no matter what the outcome of SB 400 is. Since 90% of all e-cig sales are over the internet you'll still be able to buy and use as before.

It's after all the other states fall in line with California that you need to be concerned about getting your supply.

 

[dragonpuff]

If you are simply a user and live in California I don't think you have anything to worry about no matter what the outcome of SB 400 is. Since 90% of all e-cig sales are over the internet you'll still be able to buy and use as before.

It's after all the other states fall in line with California that you need to be concerned about getting your supply.

Actually, most internet companies (not referring to e-cig as it hasn't happened yet, but generally speaking) refuse to ship to states where their product is illegal. No one is going to put their business on the line just to ship to CA. You would have to have a friend who lives out of state to have a prayer at getting around it, and not everyone has that.

So no, you will not be able to "buy and use as before," because you will not be able to get it shipped.

 

[Timekey]

Baloney ...........plenty of e-cig companies will ship to a banned state. Who in the world would enforce it? Let's face it .............most e-cig "companies" are someone operating out of their bedroom and again, no one is going to enforce this.

 

[June]

California will not stop with SB 400. Again, this is the first step is creating a negative connotation for e-cigarettes. This is a control freak nanny state. Next they will ban the use of them all together. Look at what has happened with cigarette bans. In some cities here you can't even smoke on the streets, or in a parking lot. You are regulated to smoking in your car or home. A smoking ticket is $200.00. You bet those cities enforce it. It a new source of revenue. Sorry, I can't keep up. Now they are banning cigarettes in our homes also.

BELMONT, California — During her 50 years of smoking, Edith Frederickson says she has lit up in restaurants and bars, airplanes and trains, and indoors and out, all as part of a two-pack-a-day habit that she regrets not a bit. But as of two weeks ago, Frederickson can no longer smoke in the one place she loves the most: her home.
"I'm absolutely outraged," said Frederickson, 72, pulling on a Winston as she sat on a concrete slab outside her single-room apartment. "They're telling you how to live and what to do, and they're doing it right here in America. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/world/americas/27iht-smoking.1.19706667.html

Good thing my neighbors can't smell my e-cigarette!