New york sales ban next steps
- Thread starter yvilla
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Recieved a great e-mail from Assemblyman Joel Miller today, looks like a form letter, but it appears he is on our side. Thought you'd like to see it.....
Support Joel Miller!!! http://www.assemblymanjoelmiller.com/
Support Joel Miller!!! http://www.assemblymanjoelmiller.com/
Last edited:
Good letter Dr. Evil Z. What does he propose or want for the amendments? I would like to know if I lived in N.Y. and would voice my opinion depending on what he says. Personally I would call and inquire!
Your going to love this. Not about N.Y. but.
Our local Courthouse in cent. Fla. just banned e-cigs.
Wait for it,,,
Because they look like your smoking.
They said that it may lead people that see it to light up a real cig.
Our local Courthouse in cent. Fla. just banned e-cigs.
Wait for it,,,
Because they look like your smoking.
They said that it may lead people that see it to light up a real cig.
Next, they need to outlaw drinking root beer in places where alcohol isn't allowed. After all, it's brown, it foams, it looks like beer. People may misunderstand and try to drink real beer.
BRW: We have an official ruling from the Attorney General in Virginia that e-cigarettes are not included in the smoking ban. There have been no problems. You might want to send the folks at your local courthouse a couple of the CASAA stickers.
Last edited:
Suddenly, I posted the latest update on the "Legislation News" subforum, as that's seeming to get more traffic since the redesign of the forum index. Here it is;
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...81810-updated-new-york-state-call-action.html
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...81810-updated-new-york-state-call-action.html
Yvilla wouldn't that bill now be defunct for e-cigs due to wording since they've been classified?
Storm, not necessarily, or automatically.
The New York proposed bill states that any product containing nicotine that is not a tobacco product under the New York State definition of tobacco product, found in Section 1399-aa of the NYS Public Health Law, cannot be sold in New York, unless and until approved by the FDA as a smoking cessation drug product.
Although it may be arguable whether e-cigs would or should be deemed a "tobacco product" under that specific NYS definition, the bill's sponsors obviously believe that they would not fall within that definition, and intended the bill as a total sales ban, as they knew e-cigs were considered unapproved and illegal to sell "drug" products by the FDA.
So even though the FDA has now conceded to the court rulings, and announced it will begin to regulate e-cigs as tobacco products under the federal definition, e-cigs are still not approved by FDA as smoking cessation drug products. Also, the New York definition of "tobacco product" has not changed, and no one has officially determined that e-cigs would be considered tobacco products under the New York definition.
But of course, the FDA's concession to the court ruling gives us even more ammunition in our argument to New York legislators that the ban proposal is premised on a false belief that e-cigs are something they are not - a smoking cessation drug product - as well as completely misguided and wrong.
And more ammunition in our argument that they should simply trash Rosenthal's poorly written bill and support instead the two newer bill proposals that simply and cleanly ban sales to minors.
The New York proposed bill states that any product containing nicotine that is not a tobacco product under the New York State definition of tobacco product, found in Section 1399-aa of the NYS Public Health Law, cannot be sold in New York, unless and until approved by the FDA as a smoking cessation drug product.
Although it may be arguable whether e-cigs would or should be deemed a "tobacco product" under that specific NYS definition, the bill's sponsors obviously believe that they would not fall within that definition, and intended the bill as a total sales ban, as they knew e-cigs were considered unapproved and illegal to sell "drug" products by the FDA.
So even though the FDA has now conceded to the court rulings, and announced it will begin to regulate e-cigs as tobacco products under the federal definition, e-cigs are still not approved by FDA as smoking cessation drug products. Also, the New York definition of "tobacco product" has not changed, and no one has officially determined that e-cigs would be considered tobacco products under the New York definition.
But of course, the FDA's concession to the court ruling gives us even more ammunition in our argument to New York legislators that the ban proposal is premised on a false belief that e-cigs are something they are not - a smoking cessation drug product - as well as completely misguided and wrong.
And more ammunition in our argument that they should simply trash Rosenthal's poorly written bill and support instead the two newer bill proposals that simply and cleanly ban sales to minors.
If I understand this correctly, Rosenthal's bill would ban the sale of e-cigs and supplies, because they are not an FDA approved smoking cessation drug and not a tobacco product, under New York law ??
Since they are now classified as a tobacco product by the FDA (and I assume that means also by the federal government), wouldn't the states have to abide by that classification ??
Since they are now classified as a tobacco product by the FDA (and I assume that means also by the federal government), wouldn't the states have to abide by that classification ??
Jerry, again not necessarily, although I'm not going to say I'm 100% certain how that specific question would come out. The issue of federal preemption over state laws is quite complex, and varies from legal area to legal area, and depending on how any given federal statute expressly addresses it.
The FSPTCA does reserve certain rights to the states to put stricter regulations or restrictions in place on sales and marketing of tobacco products, but that is one part of the statute that I have not reviewed as carefully as other parts. LOL, it is an 84 page pdf, and quite dense overall! I have literally spent hours and hours poring over it already, so forgive me if I don't immediately wade back in to try to more definitively answer this question.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi...=111_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ031.111.pdf
And a PS to my answer: Remember, Monday was just an announcement of intent and future action. Ecigs are still not actually classified a tobacco product, as of right now. It will likely be years before that actually occurs.
Last edited:
Some have told me it is a process to ban sales of ecigs, but things look promising.
Lets hope they don't!
Write a letters, set up an interview with your assemblyman, etc. Do what you can.
To be honest, I don't see why they would bother to ban sales in NYS anyway. Given the fact the FDA claim to regulate ecigs as a "tobacco product", they can now collect more $$$ in taxes for it.
IMO, the gov't would just loose extra $$$ in taxes on ecigs, so from a money POV, it would be a dumb move to ban it.
Lets hope they don't!
Write a letters, set up an interview with your assemblyman, etc. Do what you can.
To be honest, I don't see why they would bother to ban sales in NYS anyway. Given the fact the FDA claim to regulate ecigs as a "tobacco product", they can now collect more $$$ in taxes for it.
IMO, the gov't would just loose extra $$$ in taxes on ecigs, so from a money POV, it would be a dumb move to ban it.
Thanks Yolanda. We will just have to wait and see how it all plays out.
Pigelty, that's a good point, but like Yvilla said, it will take years for them to be classified as tobacco products. In the meantime, the states are making good money on cigarettes and nothing on e-cigs.
Pigelty, that's a good point, but like Yvilla said, it will take years for them to be classified as tobacco products. In the meantime, the states are making good money on cigarettes and nothing on e-cigs.
Plus, pigelty, being "tobacco products" does not automatically mean taxes are imposed and collected. Each individual class of tobacco product is taxed independently, by means of both state and federal tax legislation. Cigarettes, for example are taxed according to their own rate, set by the feds and by each state according to their own particularized taxing scheme, and smokeless products by their own rate, and cigars by their own rate, etc, etc.
Before ecigs could possibly be taxed in NYS under its tobacco taxation scheme, they would first have to be declared tobacco products for purposes of NYS law. And then a whole new tax law reaching ecigs would have to be passed in NYS as well.
Before ecigs could possibly be taxed in NYS under its tobacco taxation scheme, they would first have to be declared tobacco products for purposes of NYS law. And then a whole new tax law reaching ecigs would have to be passed in NYS as well.
I’m sure that NYS has already been well informed of the current FDA standing on E-Cigs and are already planning arguments and amendments to the bill to retain its original content. NYS especially NYC is simply against smoking in all forms, vapor as well as smoke. They are strict followers of the looks like a duck, quacks like a duck adage.
And if I’m not mistaken i don’t think any state has to follow "Guidelines" laid out by the FDA. Only laws as written by the government. Beings how the government hasn’t put anything out as of yet it pretty much leaves every state to make its own laws regarding e-Cigs. Kinda like smoking is legal some places but not in others. Or like alcohol being banned in some states but most it is fine.
At this point NY can pretty much still do whatever they like. It’s still our "right to fight" that is the only thing that can keep it from happening.
And if I’m not mistaken i don’t think any state has to follow "Guidelines" laid out by the FDA. Only laws as written by the government. Beings how the government hasn’t put anything out as of yet it pretty much leaves every state to make its own laws regarding e-Cigs. Kinda like smoking is legal some places but not in others. Or like alcohol being banned in some states but most it is fine.
At this point NY can pretty much still do whatever they like. It’s still our "right to fight" that is the only thing that can keep it from happening.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
