NC bill (SB 530) sponsored by Reynolds would require age ID verification for all Internet "vapor product" marketers

[Bill Godshall]

North Carolina legislation (SB 530) sponsored by Reynolds would ban “vapor product” sales to minors, would require all Internet "vapor product" marketers to purchase expensive age ID verification software.
S530 [Edition 1]

 

[Bill Godshall]

Interestingly, it appears the definition of "vapor product" in SB 530 applies to e-liquid contained in cartridges, doesn't apply to e-liquid sold in bottles, and may or may not apply to mods that are sold without e-liquid.

Vapor product. – Any noncombustible product containing nicotine that employs a mechanical heating element, battery, or electronic circuit, regardless of shape or size and that can be used to heat a liquid nicotine solution contained in a vapor cartridge. The term includes an electronic cigarette, electronic cigar, electronic cigarillo, and electronic pipe. The term does not include any product regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration under Chapter V of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

 

[Bill Godshall]

News article on Reynolds sponsored bill in NC misrepresents Reynolds' true intentions (as Reynolds' bill doesn't close a "loophole" and isn't intended to "protect children".
Bill would close loophole allowing e-cigarette sales to minors - Winston-Salem Journal: Local

 

[rothenbj]

Any noncombustible product containing nicotine that employs a mechanical heating element, battery, or electronic circuit, regardless of shape or size and that can be used to heat a liquid nicotine solution contained in a vapor cartridge.

What scares me about that definition is that it doesn't address hardware that is sold sans nicquid or the sale of niquid sans an e cig. That would appear to be good news except it may be in line with what the FDA is planning to deem as regulations- e cigs with non-refillable sealed cartridges.

 

[Berylanna]

News article on Reynolds sponsored bill in NC misrepresents Reynolds' true intentions (as Reynolds' bill doesn't close a "loophole" and isn't intended to "protect children".
Bill would close loophole allowing e-cigarette sales to minors - Winston-Salem Journal: Local

My reply:

This article misses the point -- this is not a "loophole" -- online vendors sell expensive items that require credit cards to buy and do NOT give a buzz. It is the "buzz" that teenagers go for. The nicotine in ecigs absorbs so slowly that there is no thrill at all, just relief from craving.

The REAL purpose of the Big Tobacco companies aggressively lobbying to require ID signatures is to kill all the American small businesses (including a LOT in the two Carolinas!) that brought us this product, invent accessories for it, and are saving lives. BT wants to be the only vendor, which will also limit the types of devices will be available, making them less attractive to many people. If I cannot get the particular devices and flavors that work FOR ME, I'll end up back on Combustible Coffin Nails. BT also wants to limit sales to their established distribution chains. How many people who want to quit smoking will agree to have their vaping products delivered to their place of employment?

This is a straight-up market grab that should be forbidden by antitrust laws, but if Big Tobacco can "sell" this as protecting children from a nonexistent danger (the AVERAGE age of ecig customers is over 40!) then they can get around the antitrust laws by pushing unnecessary restrictions that apply to adults.

Think about it -- there are a LOT of "boomers" aging out there. If I live near you, which would you rather see in my hand if I fall asleep in front of the TV -- a lit ember or a battery?

 

[TomCatt]

Maybe I'm just being picky, or interpreting it wrongly; but "mechanical heating element" brings to mind some little gremlin inside the ecig rubbing two sticks together.

 

[Berylanna]

Maybe I'm just being picky, or interpreting it wrongly; but "mechanical heating element" brings to mind some little gremlin inside the ecig rubbing two sticks together.

Hmmm, there's been a few seconds delay on my mod between when I push the button and I get vape....

Since I have friends that can start a fire with a hand drill in just a few seconds (requires callouses) maybe you're right after all.

 

[Fiamma]

maybe i'm just being picky, or interpreting it wrongly; but "mechanical heating element" brings to mind some little gremlin inside the ecig rubbing two sticks together. :d

roflmao !!

 

[Bill Godshall]

Another RJ Reynolds sponsored bill (identical to SB 530) to regulate e-cigarette sales in North Carolina was introduced in NC House, referred to Health and Judiciary Cmtes.

North Carolina General Assembly - House Bill 864 Information/History (2013-2014 Session)

 

[Bill Godshall]

On Thursday last week, the NC Senate Health Care Cmte approved a Committee Substitute of Reynolds’ e-cigarette legislation, which was then rerefered to the Judiciary Cmte
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Applica...nt.aspx?SessionCode=2013&DocNum=4671&SeqNum=0
North Carolina General Assembly - Senate Bill 530 Information/History (2013-2014 Session)


Don't see any substantive changes from the originally introduced S 530, as the Committee Substitute bill would still impose restrictions on Internet sales of e-cigarettes (which could only be enforced against companies based in NC).

 

[rwoodin]

Looks like this bill has been passed today?

North Carolina General Assembly - Senate Bill 530 Information/History (2013-2014 Session)

 

[rwoodin]

Looks like this bill has been passed today by the NC Senate.

North Carolina General Assembly - Senate Bill 530 Information/History (2013-2014 Session)

 

[Berylanna]

Bill, can you clarify or find out of us? On another thread about this bill it says the bill itself says it is being enacted in order to not lose federal grants or funding.

Is that true? If it's a lie, it needs to be exposed before this gets to the House. If it's the truth, someone needs to get sued.

It also calls for stings and imprisonment.

BTW, can they tell the vendors not to sell OUT OF STATE via the internet?

 

[rwoodin]

Hey Berylanna,
I live in Oak Ridge NC and I'm the person who posted about this in both forums. I'm not quite sure what or who you mean is lying or should be sued? All I know is I got an email from one of the NC representatives yesterday informing me the bill was scheduled for vote. I looked at the NC legislative site and posted the link. As far as I can tell, being a laymen and not skilled at looking through government legislation documents, this bill has passed the NC Senate. I do not know if it has to pass in the NC House? Start reading at page 3, line 36 -Here is link to and reprint of that text from the bill.

....................................................................................


http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/Bills/Senate/PDF/S530v3.pdf

36 (d) Send or assistSending or assisting a person less than 18 years to purchase or receive
37 tobacco product.products, tobacco-derived products, vapor products, or cigarette wrapping
38 papers. – If any person shall send a person less than 18 years of age to purchase, acquire,
39 receive, or attempt to purchase, acquire, or receive tobacco products products, tobacco-derived
40 products, vapor products, components of vapor products, or cigarette wrapping papers, or if any
41 person shall aid or abet a person who is less than 18 years of age in purchasing, acquiring, or
42 receiving or attempting to purchase, acquire, or receive tobacco products products,
43 tobacco-derived products, vapor products, components of vapor products, or cigarette wrapping
44 papers, the person shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor; provided, however, persons under
45 the age of 18 may be enlisted by police or local sheriffs' departments to test compliance if the
46 testing is under the direct supervision of that law enforcement department and written parental
47 consent is provided; provided further, that the Department of Health and Human Services shall
48 have the authority, pursuant to a written plan prepared by the Secretary of Health and Human
49 Services, to use persons under 18 years of age in annual, random, unannounced inspections,
50 provided that prior written parental consent is given for the involvement of these persons and
51 that the inspections are conducted for the sole purpose of preparing a scientifically and General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2013
Page 4 S530 [Edition 3]
1 methodologically valid statistical study of the extent of success the State has achieved in
2 reducing the availability of tobacco products to persons under the age of 18, and preparing any
3 report to the extent required by section 1926 of the federal Public Health Service Act (42 USC
4 § 300x-26).
5 (e) Statewide uniformity. – It is the intent of the General Assembly to prescribe this
6 uniform system for the regulation of tobacco products products, tobacco-derived products,
7 vapor products, and cigarette wrapping papers to ensure the eligibility for and receipt of any
8 federal funds or grants that the State now receives or may receive relating to the provisions of
9 G.S. 14-313. To ensure uniformity, no political subdivisions, boards, or agencies of the State
10 nor any county, city, municipality, municipal corporation, town, township, village, nor any
11 department or agency thereof, may enact ordinances, rules or regulations concerning the sale,
12 distribution, display or promotion of (i) tobacco products or cigarette wrapping papers on or
13 after September 1, 1995.1995, or (ii) tobacco-derived products or vapor products on or after
14 December 1, 2013. This subsection does not apply to the regulation of vending machines, nor
15 does it prohibit the Secretary of Revenue from adopting rules with respect to the administration
16 of the tobacco products taxes levied under Article 2A of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes.
17 (f) Deferred prosecution. – Notwithstanding G.S. 15A-1341(a1), any person charged
18 with a misdemeanor under this section shall be qualified for deferred prosecution pursuant to
19 Article 82 of Chapter 15A of the General Statutes provided the defendant has not previously
20 been placed on probation for a violation of this section and so states under oath."
21 SECTION 2. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, the
22 invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of this act that can be given effect
23 without the invalid provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this act are
24 severable.
25 SECTION 3. This act becomes effective December 1, 2013, and applies to
26 offenses committed on or after that date
.............................................................
Now, also on the ncleg.net bill SB530 there is a 'SIN0530v1' under the fiscal notes.... That document talks about the cost impact on the NC court system resulting from convictions of selling tobacco/ecigs to minors. The document refers to expanding the scope of existing sale of tobacco to minors to include 'vapor products'. For the class2 misdemeanor and infraction offenses it clearly says that jail terms were imposed - quote of the text from fiscal document...

'In FY 2011-12, 29% of offenders convicted of a Class 2 misdemeanor were sentenced to active sentences
for an average length of 39 days; 1% received intermediate sentences; and 70% received community
punishments.'

The link to this document is here and also available as hyperlink on ncleg.net SB530 page.

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/FiscalNotes/Senate/PDF/SIN0530v1.pdf

I do not want to clutter up this thread and send any false alarms. If I am incorrect about any of the above information, please don't hesitate to let me know. I been vaping since 2009 and have been revolted by all the government clampdowns and outright attempts to ban ecigarettes.

 

[Berylanna]

Hey Berylanna,
I live in Oak Ridge NC and I'm the person who posted about this in both forums. I'm not quite sure what or who you mean is lying or should be sued?

The CDC and other Gov't bodies have been busted for using federal monies to lobby cities and states, AND of giving federal grants to cities and states for the purpose of lobbying for tighter tobacco control. I believe some courts have told the Feds to stop that.

So, it seems to me that either there are NO grants in danger from not enacting this bill, in which case someone is lying, or there ARE illegal grants being offered to pass this bill, in which case someone in the Federal gov't needs to get busted in court, the mechanism for that being a lawsuit.

What you have pointed out here is that someone is HALF-lying, probably. Notice the weasely wording I highlighted in your quote below. To quote Spock(s): "You lied!" ..... no, "I implied."

It scares me that NC is in danger of losing its vendors, I hope something can be done. With revenue as tight as it is in some states, I fear the implication that there is money at stake might be enough to get votes.

this bill has passed the NC Senate. I do not know if it has to pass in the NC House? Start reading at page 3, line 36 -Here is link to and reprint of that text from the bill.

....................................................................................


http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/Bills/Senate/PDF/S530v3.pdf

[HUGE snip]


5 (e) Statewide uniformity. – It is the intent of the General Assembly to prescribe this
6 uniform system for the regulation of tobacco products products, tobacco-derived products,
7 vapor products, and cigarette wrapping papers to ensure the eligibility for and receipt of any
8 federal funds or grants that the State now receives or may receive relating to the provisions of
9 G.S. 14-313. To ensure uniformity, no political subdivisions, boards, or agencies of the State
10 nor any county, city, municipality, municipal corporation, town, township, village, nor any
11 department or agency thereof, may enact ordinances, rules or regulations concerning the sale,
12 distribution, display or promotion of (i) tobacco products or cigarette wrapping papers on or
13 after September 1, 1995.1995, or (ii) tobacco-derived products or vapor products on or after
14 December 1, 2013. This subsection does not apply to the regulation of vending machines, nor
15 does it prohibit the Secretary of Revenue from adopting rules with respect to the administration
16 of the tobacco products taxes levied under Article 2A of Chapter 105 of the General Statutes.
17 (f) Deferred prosecution.
.......
Now, also on the ncleg.net bill SB530 there is a 'SIN0530v1' under the fiscal notes.... That document talks about the cost impact on the NC court system resulting from convictions of selling tobacco/ecigs to minors. The document refers to expanding the scope of existing sale of tobacco to minors to include 'vapor products'. For the class2 misdemeanor and infraction offenses it clearly says that jail terms were imposed - quote of the text from fiscal document...

'In FY 2011-12, 29% of offenders convicted of a Class 2 misdemeanor were sentenced to active sentences
for an average length of 39 days; 1% received intermediate sentences; and 70% received community
punishments.'

The link to this document is here and also available as hyperlink on ncleg.net SB530 page.

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/FiscalNotes/Senate/PDF/SIN0530v1.pdf

I do not want to clutter up this thread and send any false alarms. If I am incorrect about any of the above information, please don't hesitate to let me know. I been vaping since 2009 and have been revolted by all the government clampdowns and outright attempts to ban ecigarettes.

Well, I'm a customer of Mad Vapes and I think a threat to Mad Vapes is a threat to all of us, especially hardware DIY'ers. But I was hoping a legislative guru could tell us if they can stop Mad Vapes from selling to California. Someone already said they can NOT stop out-of-staters from selling over the internet to NC, but that is not quite the same.

 

[hoogie76]

I called, I wrote, but unfortunately this bill really seems like a no brainer to get passed. We already enforce an 18 yrs or older policy at our stores. Our website will have to use age verification software which we already have implemented but it's turned off for now. Really shouldn't affect too much if passed, from how I'm reading it anyway..

hoog

 

[Bill Godshall]

To clarify several things.

The NC Senate passed SB 530 yesterday with a vote of 48-1, and the bill now goes to the House (where it will be assigned to a cmte).

The text of the existing NC law
to ensure the eligibility for and receipt of any 8 federal funds or grants that the State now receives or may receive relating to the provisions of 9 G.S. 14-313.
refers to the 1992 federal Synar Law (that I campaigned to enact) that since 1996 has required states to more aggressively enforce their laws banning cigarette sales to minors (and by conducting compliance checks using youth) or face losing tens of millions of dollars in federal block grants from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

But please note that provision (and most other provisions) of the law (which are the words in the bill that are NOT underlined) was enacted 15-20 years ago, and it was actually written and lobbied for by PM, Reynolds, Lorillard, and tobacco retail trade associations because it contains a local preemption clause (which I collaborated with ACS, AHA, ALA, CTFK in opposing back in the 1990's).

Regarding the penalties (that are already law) for sales to minors, I'm not aware of anyone who has EVER spent even one day in jail upon conviction for selling cigarettes to a child (in any state), and the NC law has so many defenses against prosecution (authored by tobacco industry lobbyists) that very few citation are ever issued, with the very few convictions resulting in small fines (i.e. <$100)

Of potential importance, the provision in SB 580 (b2) saying Internet sellers
"shall perform an age verification through an independent, third party age verification service that compares information available from public records to the personal information entered by the individual during the ordering process to establish that the individual ordering the ... vapor product, components of vapor products is 18 years of age or older."
does NOT impose any penalties upon violators.

While 14-313(b) of the law would make it a Class 2 misdemeanor if convicted of selling a "vapor product" to a minor, 14-313(b) goes on say that its a Class 2 misdemeanor for failing to ID a youth tobacco purchaser "if the person has reasonable grounds to believe that the prospective purchaser is under 18 years of age," which is yet another defense against prosecution (that was inserted by tobacco lobbyists).

Since subsection (d) of the existing law makes it a crime for anyone to solicit a minor to buy (or attempt to buy) a tobacco product (yet another clause written by tobacco lobbyists to criminalize compliance checks I and others used to conduct on tobacco retailers to see if they sold to minors), it would be a crime for anyone except the NC DHHS to conduct a compliance check using youth.

I'm not aware that the DHHS even has the legal authority to charge a person with a Class 2 misdemeanor (as in PA, only police and prosecutors are legally authorized to charge anyone with a crime), and I suspect that DHHS has NEVER charged a tobacco retailer (who was caught selling cigarettes to a minor) with a Class 2 misdemeaner.

I also suspect that all previous NC DHHS compliance checks (during the past 15 years) have resulted in no citations (as nearly all Health Dept compliance checks in other states only result in warning letters for violators).


The best arguments against this legislation include:
- it would put Internet e-cigarette vendors in NC out of business, and give their business to Internet retailers outside of NC (as NC DHHS cannot enforce laws outside NC).
- there is no evidence that youth use or buy e-cigarettes online,
- third party age verification services/software are expensive, piss off adult consumers, don't always verify ages (which prevents any sale), and result in many/most adult consumers leaving the website without making a purchase.

It would be helpful to know more about third party age verification services/software.

The only time I've ever tried using age verification software to enter a website (i.e. RJ Reynolds), it refused to verify that I was an adult and denied me access to the website (after I correctly typed in my name, my PA driver's license number, and my home address). I suspect that Reynolds is fully aware that adult consumers hate their age verification software, and don't buy anything from their website, which is probably why they want to require it for all e-cigarette Internet retailers in NC.

 

[Alexander Mundy]

Sorry, I am unfamiliar with Internet age verification software since I am older than the zip code. Can someone explain the workings of it?

 

[Myrany]

Sorry, I am unfamiliar with Internet age verification software since I am older than the zip code. Can someone explain the workings of it?

I am guessing there are many forms of it out there.

One online game I used to be involved with had the option to get age verified to be able to enter certain unrestricted zones. All I had to produce was a name, zip code and either a Drivers License# or the last 4 digits of my SS#.

 

[Berylanna]

I called, I wrote, but unfortunately this bill really seems like a no brainer to get passed. We already enforce an 18 yrs or older policy at our stores. Our website will have to use age verification software which we already have implemented but it's turned off for now. Really shouldn't affect too much if passed, from how I'm reading it anyway..

hoog

If this passes, I volunteer to be one of the beta-testers for the software. You can put it up under an alternate URL so that only people who have volunteered to beta-test go through the software, but afterwards they're on the regular site like anybody else.