Letters, Phone Calls & Emails NEEDED for NJ

[yvilla]

There are a couple of threads discussing the impending legislation in NJ that would ban use of electronic cigarettes in public places, STATEWIDE.

But I am surprised and dismayed to see so little being discussed here about taking action on this. There was plenty of that happening when California was contemplating banning the sale of ecigs, so I wonder why people are not galvanizing to action now?

So please consider calling, writing and emailing New Jersey legislators. The Senate version of this bill is scheduled to be voted on on Thursday. So communication with NJ Senators is needed urgently! (http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/BillsForAgendaView.asp)

It is Senate bill 3053/3054 that you should be referring to. I imagine a good strategy would be to communicate your agreement with the part that prohibits the sale to minors, but to strongly oppose the part that equates the use of ecigs with smoking. We need to hammer home the message that ecigs do not involve combustion, nor burning of anything, do not emit smoke, and do not implicate any of the concerns for "clean air" that smoking bans are intended to address. And that there is simply no public health justification for such a ban.

Here is a complete list of NJ Legislators that has phone numbers and addresses: Alphabetical List of Members

For email, you can do it from the NJ leg site one by one, here:
New Jersey Legislature - Find your State Representatives by Municipality. Or, you can use these addresses directly:

Senator Diane B. Allen Republican
senallen@njleg.org

Senator Bill Baroni Republican
senbaroni@njleg.org

Senator Christopher Bateman Republican
senbateman@njleg.org

Senator James Beach Democrat
senbeach@njleg.org

Senator Jennifer Beck Republican
senbeck@njleg.org

Senator Anthony R. Bucco Republican
senbucco@njleg.org

Senator Barbara Buono Democrat
senbuono@njleg.org

Senator Gerald Cardinale Republican
sencardinale@njleg.org

Senator Andrew R. Ciesla
senciesla@njleg.org

Senator Richard J. Codey Democrat
sencodey@njleg.org

Senator Christopher J. Connors Republican
senconnors@njleg.org

Senator Sandra B. Cunningham Democrat
sencunningham@njleg.org

Senator Michael J. Doherty Republican
sendoherty@njleg.org

Senator Nia H. Gill, Esq. Democrat
sengill@njleg.org

Senator John A. Girgenti Democrat
sengirgenti@njleg.org

Senator Robert M. Gordon Democrat
sengordon@njleg.org

Senator Philip E. Haines Republican
senhaines@njleg.org

Senator Sean T. Kean Republican
senkean@njleg.org

Senator Thomas H. Kean, Jr.
senkean@njleg.org

Senator Joseph M. Kyrillos, Jr. Republican
senkyrillos@njleg.org

Senator Raymond J. Lesniak Democrat
senlesniak@njleg.org

Senator Fred H. Madden, Jr. Democrat
senmadden@njleg.org

Senator Kevin J. O'Toole Republican
senotoole@njleg.org

Senator Steven V. Oroho Republican
senoroho@njleg.org

Senator Joseph Pennacchio Republican
senpennacchio@njleg.org

Senator Dana L. Redd Democrat
senredd@njleg.org

Senator Ronald L. Rice Democrat
senrice@njleg.org

Senator M. Teresa Ruiz Democrat
senruiz@njleg.org

Senator Nicholas J. Sacco Democrat
sensacco@njleg.org

Senator Paul A. Sarlo Democrat
sensarlo@njleg.org

Senator Nicholas P. Scutari Democrat
senscutari@njleg.org

Senator Robert W. Singer Republican
sensinger@njleg.org

Senator Bob Smith Democrat
senbsmith@njleg.org

Senator Brian P. Stack Democrat
senstack@njleg.org

Senator Stephen M. Sweeney Democrat
sensweeney@njleg.org

Senator Shirley K. Turner Democrat
senturner@njleg.org

Senator Jeff Van Drew Democrat
senvandrew@njleg.org

Senator Joseph F. Vitale Democrat
senvitale@njleg.org

Senator Loretta Weinberg Democrat
senweinberg@njleg.org

Senator Jim Whelan Democrat
senwhelan@njleg.org

And even though it's the Senators that are critical right now, don't ignore the Assembly representatives! The same bill in the assembly is A 4227 4228.

 

[kristin]

The link posted (http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/BillsForAgendaView.asp) didn't work for me, but I did find this link to the proposed bill: New Jersey Legislature - Bills

Click the PDF files at the bottom to read the bills/changes: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/S3500/3053_U1.PDF

 

[ski]

I emailed them all. I cleaned up a few typos in the list (an extraneous " and a njleg.state.org instead of njleg.org).

Here's the list of addresses, bracketed in HTML tag because it's the first way I found to keep the forum from abbreviating the list:

senallen@njleg.org,senbaroni@njleg.org,senbateman@njleg.org,senbeach@njleg.org,
senbeck@njleg.org,senbucco@njleg.org,senbuono@njleg.org,sencardinale@njleg.org,
senciesla@njleg.org,sencodey@njleg.org,senconnors@njleg.org,
sencunningham@njleg.org,sendoherty@njleg.org,sengill@njleg.org,
sengirgenti@njleg.org,sengordon@njleg.org,senhaines@njleg.org,senkean@njleg.org,
Senkean@njleg.org,senkyrillos@njleg.org,senlesniak@njleg.org,
senmadden@njleg.org,senotoole@njleg.org,senoroho@njleg.org,
senpennacchio@njleg.org,senredd@njleg.org,senrice@njleg.org,senruiz@njleg.org,
sensacco@njleg.org,sensarlo@njleg.org,senscutari@njleg.org,sensinger@njleg.org,
senbsmith@njleg.org,senstack@njleg.org,sensweeney@njleg.org,
senturner@njleg.org,senvandrew@njleg.org,senvitale@njleg.org,
senweinberg@njleg.org,senwhelan@njleg.org

Here's the message I sent. Feel free to copy and paste, but you can probably come up with something better on your own
Dear Senator, please oppose the part of the bill that would equate
cigarettes with smoking tobacco. E-cigarettes are the only thing in
20 years that has let me quit smoking cigarettes. They have no
lingering odor, they don't cause cancer, they don't harm my lungs or
stain my teeth yellow, and there is no "second-hand smoke" because
there's no smoke at all! It's just water vapor being exhaled.
Preventing the sale to minors is a good goal, however it should be
seperate from restricting the rights of adults when there is no harm
or danger to one's self or others.

 

[yvilla]

Must have been a temporary glitch Kristin - as I tried just now and got the same problem, and then again and it worked. But thanks for the alternative URLs.

And thanks Ski - I found and fixed the typos (hope I got them all).

 

[kristin]

Here is my letter:

Dear Senator,

It has been brought to my attention that there is currently a proposed bill in which the definition of smoking is to include "electronic cigarettes." While I agree completely that electronic cigarettes should not be sold to minors, considering electronic cigarettes to be the same as smoking tobacco would place more people in harm's way than not.

The proposed bill states:

"Electronic smoking devices have not been approved as to safety and efficacy by the federal Food and Drug Administration, and their use may pose a health risk to persons exposed to their smoke or vapor because of a known irritant contained therein and other substances that may, upon evaluation by that agency, be identified as potentially toxic to those inhaling the smoke or vapor;"

I believe the authors of this bill have completely misinterpreted the FDA report. In truth, the FDA has done no research nor released any statements on the possible effect of EXHALED vapor, because they only did limited tests on the unvaporized liquid. In fact, the tests they did revealed that electronic cigarette liquid contained a minuscule fraction of the ingredients found in tobacco cigarettes, showing that they do not pose the same risk as tobacco!

There is no tar, carbon monoxide nor most of the other toxins that are created by the burning of tobacco, because there is no burning in electronic cigarettes. This is the very reason that, in spite of the FDA "warning," tens of thousands of electronic cigarette users (and more every day) consider the devices to be a life saver and have used them to escape the dangers of cigarette smoke. In fact, there have been NO reports of any illness or deaths associated with electronic cigarettes in the 5 years they have been available and the majority of electronic cigarette users report improved health and breathing.

While the FDA did report finding diethylene glycol, they found less than 1%, in only ONE cartridge and tested only 18 cartridges, from just two companies. Independent testing of numerous other brands have reportedly found no DEG and it is thought to have been a contaminated sample by many people. The FDA also reported finding some carcinogens, but failed to report that they found these in TRACE amounts - parts per BILLION - amounts so low that they could also be found in the same levels in some processed meats and even FDA approved nicotine gums, patches and inhalers.

In a report released by Health New Zealand, who did extensive research on electronic cigarettes (and found no diethylene glycol), they found that there is no cause for concern about the possibility of "second hand vapor":

"Cigarette smoke is a mixture of sidestream smoke and exhaled mainstream smoke. In constrast, the e-cigarette generates no sidestream smoke from its (artificially lit) tip. Any exhaled PG mist visibly dissipates to vapor within seconds. Non-smoking bystanders do not find the mist unpleasant. The mist is odorless, and those close by quickly realize it does not have the odor of smoke or the irritating quality of tobacco cigarette smoke.

Inhaled nicotine in cigarette smoke is over 98% absorbed 6, and so the exhaled mist of the e-cigarette is composed of propylene glycol, and probably contains almost no nicotine; and no CO. (see Figure 3.5) Lacking any active ingredient or any gaseous products of combustion, the PG mist or ‘smoke’ is not harmful to bystanders.

The ‘smoke’ or mist is not tobacco smoke, and not from combustion – no flame is lit – and is not defined as environmental tobacco smoke."

(http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/ex...ety-report.pdf)

Does this sound like something that would bother anyone? Just because it "looks" like a cigarette does not mean it is. It is about as far from a tobacco cigarette as a Nictrol inhaler is. This is purely a knee-jerk reaction of people to something new and unknown. Just because something "may" cause a reaction is not a reason to put electronic cigarette users back into the KNOWN dangers of second hand smoke exposure!

By requiring electronic cigarette users to move into smoking-only areas or be outside with other smokers, you are not doing anything to protect your constituents, as they were never in any danger of any "second hand vapor" in the first place. In fact, you are placing your non-smoking, electronic cigarette using constituents directly into the path of the second hand smoke that they are trying to get away from.

By all means, limit the sale of electronic cigarettes to legal adults, but I strongly urge that you place aside this other part of the bill for now, until you have truly educated yourself about electronic cigarettes and before you place your non-smoking, electronic cigarette constituents in harm's way.

Please consider your vote on this bill very carefully. If you vote yes, you "may" be protecting some people from "possible" danger, but you will DEFINITELY be putting thousands of electronic cigarette users right back into the KNOWN danger of tobacco smoke.

Sincerely,

Kristin Noll-Marsh,
Secretary
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association

 

[RatRacer]

How come Sen. Frank Lautenberg is not on any of these lists. He's probably one of the most influential seats that needs impressing.

Senator Frank R. Lautenberg

 

[Bella Chic]

I do not live in NJ but I sent a letter to all senators.

 

[kristin]

How come Sen. Frank Lautenberg is not on any of these lists. He's probably one of the most influential seats that needs impressing.

Senator Frank R. Lautenberg

He doesn't seem to be listed and his website has a contact form and no listed email address, but I did find this one by google:

senator@lautenberg.senate.gov

Hopefully, it works.

I'll send one to him, as well!

 

[kristin]

He doesn't seem to be listed and his website has a contact form and no listed email address, but I did find this one by google:

senator@lautenberg.senate.gov

Hopefully, it works.

I'll send one to him, as well!

It didn't work - it bounced back to me.

Here is his contact form for commenting on issues:
http://lautenberg.senate.gov/contact/index1.cfm

EDIT: He is a US senator and wouldn't be a part of this legislation. so an email to him may not be appropriate.

 

[Bigbuyer]

I have used the list to write all the Senators.
I quoted Kristin's letter saying I agree completely with it.

Just please when I sent it, spell check found a bunch of misspellings. I hope you ran it too before sending.

I hope this bill does not pass!

 

[Bigbuyer]

He doesn't seem to be listed and his website has a contact form and no listed email address, but I did find this one by google:

senator@lautenberg.senate.gov

Hopefully, it works.

I'll send one to him, as well!

Senator Lautenberg is a US Senator to Congress and has no vote or influence on the NJ State Legislature as far as I know.

 

[Tristar4]

Just finished emailing. Plan to make some phone calls tomorrow as well.

 

[ski]

Thanks Kristin, I just used the form to send Lautenberg a copy of my email.

 

[kristin]

I have used the list to write all the Senators.
I quoted Kristin's letter saying I agree completely with it.

Just please when I sent it, spell check found a bunch of misspellings. I hope you ran it too before sending.

I hope this bill does not pass!

I just edited my original post with the spell-checked copy. Most of it was in the quotes, so I did not change those, but I did have two of my own misspellings. I wrote it in notepad and forgot to spellcheck. Oops.

 

[kristin]

Senator Lautenberg is a US Senator to Congress and has no vote or influence on the NJ State Legislature as far as I know.

Oh well, he got my letter anyhow!

 

[Bigbuyer]

Kristin no problem. As long as they get some sort of response from the public it is better than not.

I already received some of the bounce back confirmations from the Senators.

 

[kristin]

Yeah, I've received a few auto-responses, too. Hopefully, a real person will read them!!

 

[youtubecommercial]

E-mailed them all ... Used Kristin's letter but shortened it a little and put Proposed Bill in the subject line:

Dear Senator,
It has been brought to my attention that there is currently a proposed bill in which the definition of smoking is to include "electronic cigarettes." While I agree completely that electronic cigarettes should not be sold to minors, considering electronic cigarettes to be the same as smoking tobacco would place more people in harm's way than not.

The proposed bill states:

"Electronic smoking devices have not been approved as to safety and efficacy by the federal Food and Drug Administration, and their use may pose a health risk to persons exposed to their smoke or vapor because of a known irritant contained therein and other substances that may, upon evaluation by that agency, be identified as potentially toxic to those inhaling the smoke or vapor;"

I believe the authors of this bill have completely misinterpreted the FDA report. In truth, the FDA has done no research nor released any statements on the possible effect of EXHALED vapor, because they only did limited tests on the unvaporized liquid. In fact, the tests they did revealed that electronic cigarette liquid contained a minuscule fraction of the ingredients found in tobacco cigarettes, showing that they do not pose the same risk as tobacco!

There is no tar, carbon monoxide nor most of the other toxins that are created by the burning of tobacco, because there is no burning in electronic cigarettes. This is the very reason that, in spite of the FDA "warning," tens of thousands of electronic cigarette users (and more every day) consider the devices to be a life saver and have used them to escape the dangers of cigarette smoke. In fact, there have been NO reports of any illness or deaths associated with electronic cigarettes in the 5 years they have been available and the majority of electronic cigarette users report improved health and breathing.


Please consider your vote on this bill very carefully. If you vote yes, you "may" be protecting some people from "possible" danger, but you will DEFINITELY be putting thousands of electronic cigarette users right back into the KNOWN danger of tobacco smoke.


Sincerely,

 

[kristin]

E-mailed them all ... Used Kristin's letter but shortened it a little and put Proposed Bill in the subject line:

Yes, I put the proposed bill in the subject line, as well!

 

[youtubecommercial]

I also go a few "Thank you for taking the time to contact my office" e-mails .. I hope enough people send e-mails for them to take notice ...