Rhode Island Senate Bill - E-Cigarette Ban to Minors

[quonseteer]

Here's a piece of legislation to watch in RI - S 0622. While banning sales of e-cigarettes to minors (good thing), it does appear to apply the requirement of photo ID and signature-verified USPS delivery of e-liquid to RI consumers.

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText13/SenateText13/S0622.pdf

In a write-up about the bill currently waiting in the RI Senate's Judiciary Committee, co-sponsor Sen. Dominick Ruggerio justifies the legislation with an oft-touted issue:

“Manufacturers of these e-cigarettes claim their product was designed to help smokers quit.”

From GoLocalProv:

"Ruggerio’s legislation is modeled after a bill currently making its way through the Wyoming legislature and similar to proposals in over 12 other states, including Massachusetts and Connecticut."

Interesting...

GoLocalProv | News | RI State Report: EDC Nominees, Unemployment & An E-Cigarette Ban

While it doesn't really specify a tax regime for e-cigarettes, or rather, what they lump together with tobacco as "vapor products", the legislative council's explanation tacked on to the end of the amendment to ban sale to minors does state that:

"This act would amend the criminal and tax laws on cigarettes and tobacco to include all tobacco-derived products and vapor products among those items that are subject to taxation and those items that are prohibited to persons under the age of eighteen (18)."

So here we have a legislative hack job and perhaps a back door tax, all in the name of the children.

 

[Fiamma]

So a tobacco dealer's license required to sell 'vapor products' and a Photo ID and signature proving age to get delivery through any non face to face purchase from whatever source. Wonder if the P O is ready for lines of working adults wanting to get their juice at lunch time or right after work the day AFTER no one was home to sign.

I note they make NO PROVISION in this verbiage for NON NICOTINE 'vapor products'. All 'vapor product' is considered to have nicotine, the way this is written.

Money grab for the license, but I see no tax as such in what I read.

 

[Fiamma]

Is anyone from CASAA looking at this?

 

[kristin]

Yes, CASAA is already on it.

 

[Petrodus]

Yes, CASAA is already on it.

 

[Littlewing]

Here's a piece of legislation to watch in RI - S 0622. While banning sales of e-cigarettes to minors (good thing), it does appear to apply the requirement of photo ID and signature-verified USPS delivery of e-liquid to RI consumers.

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText13/SenateText13/S0622.pdf

In a write-up about the bill currently waiting in the RI Senate's Judiciary Committee, co-sponsor Sen. Dominick Ruggerio justifies the legislation with an oft-touted issue:

From GoLocalProv:

Interesting...

GoLocalProv | News | RI State Report: EDC Nominees, Unemployment & An E-Cigarette Ban

While it doesn't really specify a tax regime for e-cigarettes, or rather, what they lump together with tobacco as "vapor products", the legislative council's explanation tacked on to the end of the amendment to ban sale to minors does state that:

"This act would amend the criminal and tax laws on cigarettes and tobacco to include all tobacco-derived products and vapor products among those items that are subject to taxation and those items that are prohibited to persons under the age of eighteen (18)."

So here we have a legislative hack job and perhaps a back door tax, all in the name of the children.

Legislative hack job and back door tax? Yep, that's Rhode Island...

 

[Bill Godshall]

Somewhat similar to the Oklahoma legislation, SB 622 in Rhode Island is another RJ Reynolds sponsored bill that would ban e-cig sales to minors, but would require e-cig vendors in RI to obtain tobacco retail license, and would also ban delivery of e-cigarettes purchased over the Internet or mail order unless expensive age identification verification procedures occur.
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText13/SenateText13/S0622.pdf

Although the bill summary for SB 622 claims the bill would tax "tobacco-derived products" and "vapor products", the bill doesn't actually tax these products.

While its nice the Reynolds now supports laws banning e-cigarette sales to minors, and while its nice that Reynolds is lobbying state legislators to define e-cigarettes as "vapor products", Reynolds' bills in Rhode Island and Oklahoma would basically ban Internet purchases and sales of e-cigs in those states, or would ban mail deliveries of e-cigarette products to consumers in those states.

RI vapers and consumers should support the provisions of SB 622 that ban the sale of e-cigarettes to minors, but urge RI legislators to remove other e-cigarette sales and purchase restrictions by adult e-cigarette consumers, by Internet e-cigarette vendors, and/or by mail carriers.

While those additional restrictions were warranted for cigarettes (because cigarettes were illegally marketed to youth, and were sold on the Internet to evade cigarette taxes), there is no evidence that youth use e-cigarettes, that youth purchase e-cigarettes or that e-cigarette vendors market to youth.

 

[Bill Godshall]

A potential problem is that the lead sponsor of SB 622 is Dominick Ruggerio, who is the Senate Majority Leader.

 

[budynbuick]

The funny thing is the fed will soon come in & override all of this. The California state attorney gen stated recently, 'fed law trumps state law'. I heard/saw him say it with a straight face.. These legislators are wasting their time (which is what they do best). What a farce.

 

[Fiamma]

The funny thing is the fed will soon come in & override all of this. The California state attorney gen stated recently, 'fed law trumps state law'. I heard/saw him say it with a straight face.. These legislators are wasting their time (which is what they do best). What a farce.

California's Attorney General is female.

Furthermore she and the current Governor are ANTZ. California is entertaining a law now to ban e cigs where smoking is banned, it's listed in this forum now.

Federal laws do not trump state taxation or state rules about things like smoking bans, alcohol sales, etc.

 

[quonseteer]

Legislative hack job and back door tax? Yep, that's Rhode Island...

yep...

I'll keep an eye out to see if it gets a committee hearing during this session. I'm not too far from the state offices (heck, no one in RI affected by this really is), so I'd be happy to help if action's warranted soon. Wonder what kind of vendor help we have locally? I know of one supplier in the Pawtucket area, one mall kiosk and my mailman.

 

[Berylanna]

Back to....if we can prove it is RJ Reynolds backing these laws we need to bring it to peoples' attention that the REAL issue is to prevent competition with RJ Reynolds.

 

[Placebo Effect]

CASAA: Call to Action! Rhode Island Proposes Strangling Online Sales of E-Cigarettes -- SB 622

Rhode Island: Bill to Severely Restrict Online Sales of E-Cigarettes -- SB 622

​

[full text of SB 662]​

​

This bill would:
Ban e-cigarette sales to minors, but would also greatly restrict online sales of nicotine-containing products by treating e-cigarettes the same as traditional tobacco products.

Specifically, the bill would require a retailer conducting an online sale to: (1) Obtain a copy of the buyer's driver's license; (2) Obtain a statement from the buyer affirming that they are the person pictured; and (3) Send the package through a service that checks the ID of the buyer at delivery. Retailers would be required to perform this check every time a consumer places an order.

SB 622 would also require e-cigarette retailers in Rhode Island to obtain a tobacco license and only buy their e-cigarettes from licensed wholesalers or distributors.

SB 622 is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee has not scheduled SB 6222 for a hearing, but it may happen soon. If you are in or around Rhode Island and can travel to Providence to attend and speak at a hearing, please e-mail us at board@casaa.org with the subject line "Rhode Island Testimony." Please help out in any way you can.

---

Please call, write or fax the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee below

(continuing reading CTA at above link)

 

[JerryRM]

This doesn't surprise me, it's typical RI politics. What the leaders of this state want, they get. It's probably already a done deal.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Today, the RI Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled S-622 for a hearing and/or consideration on April 9.

http://status.rilin.state.ri.us/documents/agenda-9312.pdf

Senate Bill No. 622
BY Ruggerio, Ciccone, Lombardi, Jabour, Ottiano
ENTITLED, AN ACT RELATING TO CRIMINAL OFFENSES -- CHILDREN AND
RELATING TO TAXATION -- CIGARETTE TAX {LC1993/1}
03/06/2013 Introduced, referred to Senate Judiciary
04/03/2013 Scheduled for hearing and/or consideration

 

[Bill Godshall]

RJ Reynolds lawyers/lobbyists screwed up in drafting definitions for a "tobacco-derived product" and a "vapor product" in the RI bill (as well as in the bill that was approved by the OK Senate, which is why they'll be introducing a Committee Substitute at next Tuesday's OK House Health Cmte meeting to change the definition of "vapor product"). There may be a similar Committee Substitute offered at next Tuesday's RI Senate Judiciary Cmte.

Please look carefully at the highlighted (in red) definitions of "tobacco-derived product" and a "vapor product" below, and you will see that a "tobacco-derived product" is NOT a vapor product, but that a "vapor product" is a "tobacco-derived product".

(15) "Tobacco-derived product" means any non-combustible product derived from
14 tobacco that contains nicotine and is intended for human consumption, whether chewed,
15 absorbed, dissolved or ingested by any other means, but does not include a vapor product or any
16 product regulated by the United States food and drug administration under chapter V of the food,
17 drug and cosmetic act.

18 (16) "Vapor product" means any non-combustible tobacco-derived product containing
19 nicotine, such as an electronic cigarette, that employs a mechanical heating element, battery or
20 electronic circuit, regardless of shape or size, that can be used to heat a liquid nicotine solution
21 contained in a vapor cartridge as well as any vapor cartridge containing liquid nicotine solution
22 that can be used with or in a vapor product. "Vapor product" does not include any product
23 regulated by the United States food and drug administration under chapter V of the food, drug
24 and cosmetic act.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I urge all vapers in RI to contact the Senate Judiciary Cmte staff tomorrow, and ask them what is required to sign up to testify at Tuesday's hearing on S 622, and ask them how much time they would have to speak. Every state legislature has different procedures for signing to testify, and its important that RI vapers and vendors find out this info (as we need to make sure that folks who go to the hearing are permitted to testify).

I was told the Sen. Judiciary Cmte hearing will begin at around 4PM on Tuesday, and the Committee Chair will decide the order of bills that are considered at Tuesday's hearing. Since there are several dozen bills that are to be considered by the Senate Judiciary Cmte., this hearing could go on until midnight.

 

[Bill Godshall]

A Winston Salem Journal article just out exposes that Reynolds is sponsoring the "vapor product" bill in North Carolina, but it doesn't mention the similar Reynolds sponsored bills in OK and RI bills that would really screw e-cigarette companies.
Bill would close loophole allowing e-cigarette sales to minors - Winston-Salem Journal: Local

Craver did cite the Reynolds sponsored bill in OK. Unfortunately, Craver and the editor made it appear that Reynolds' bills are intended to fix "loopholes" and to "protect children".

 

[Berylanna]

It's kinda weird how many different states have April 9 actions. It would sure make it hard for CASAA folks to travel to all of them, or even coordinate all of them from home. RI, OK, Contra Costa County CA. Is that just how April goes in the legislative world?

 

[Bill Godshall]

Reynolds is sponsoring an identical bill (to S 622) in the RI House, its H 5876
http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText13/HouseText13/H5876.pdf