Tennessee also proposing ban on e-cigs
- Thread starter Desert Willow
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I find this part a lot offensive
(a) It is an offense to distribute or sell any product or device containing or
delivering nicotine intended or expected for human consumption that is not a tobacco
product, as defined in § 39-17-1503, unless such product or device has been approved
by the United States food and drug administration for sale as a tobacco use cessation or
harm reduction product or for other medical purposes and is being marketed and sold
solely for that approved purpose.
So tobacco is still ok? and has the FDA even admitted that there is such a thing as a Harm reduction product? They are requiring the FDA to give an approval under a category that the FDA has not even admitted is real yet? Don't live there used to love to visit though. We probably would have similar problems here but we are distracted by "other" things right now. God Bless Wisconsin.
(a) It is an offense to distribute or sell any product or device containing or
delivering nicotine intended or expected for human consumption that is not a tobacco
product, as defined in § 39-17-1503, unless such product or device has been approved
by the United States food and drug administration for sale as a tobacco use cessation or
harm reduction product or for other medical purposes and is being marketed and sold
solely for that approved purpose.
So tobacco is still ok? and has the FDA even admitted that there is such a thing as a Harm reduction product? They are requiring the FDA to give an approval under a category that the FDA has not even admitted is real yet? Don't live there used to love to visit though. We probably would have similar problems here but we are distracted by "other" things right now. God Bless Wisconsin.
Seems to me that if the FDA can't get at ecigs federally, they will do it state by state. However, they will have a hard time stopping the internet.
Until they add "...or possession of such products" to to the verbiage. Something tells me it's only a matter of time.
The FDA isn't behind these state proposals. We have the alphabet soup of charities (American Lung Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and Tobacco-Free Kids), funded by the pharmaceutical companies, to thank.
The FDA isn't behind these state proposals. We have the alphabet soup of charities (American Lung Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and Tobacco-Free Kids), funded by the pharmaceutical companies, to thank.
Don't forget Americans for (Some) Nonsmokers Rights, whose model legislation is popping up word-for-word in some of these proposed laws. I blogged about them. The Truth About Nicotine: Americans for Some Nonsmokers' Rights
Dr. Siegel says “Perhaps the ALA's position is not surprising given the tremendous amount of pharmaceutical company support that it receives. In the second quarter of 2009 alone, the American Lung Association received more than $1.5 million from Pfizer, manufacturer of Chantix and Nicotrol. Moreover, Pfizer is a sponsor of the Lung Association's Freedom from Smoking program.”
ALA Refuses to Support Legislation Prohibiting Electronic Cigarette Sales to Minors
ALA Refuses to Support Legislation Prohibiting Electronic Cigarette Sales to Minors
I took that course. It freed me from some of my money.
One of the principles of instructional design is that you start with an analysis of the situation. What is the performance problem? What is causing the problem? If the cause is a gap in skills or knowledge, then properperly designed training can help solve the problem. If the problem isn't caused by lack of skills or knowledge, all the training in the world won't help.
What was causing my continued smoking was a chemical imbalance in neurotransmitters. Nothing they taught helped me to concentrate, remember, or reason more normally, or cured the deep depression triggered by smoking cessation. The ALA's course was all about carrying some hard candy around with you, eating right, getting enough sleep, and other not-so-helpful little tips.
They did talk about recognizing and avoiding your triggers to smoke--but they were thinking about mundane things like giving up your morning cup of coffee (*eeeek* As if I were not suffering enough!!!). My triggers were more like, "I need to drive somewhere in my car and get there without causing a serious accident because my concentration skills are no better than those of a drunk when I abstain from nicotine."
I spoke to Senator Overbey's aide, who also consulted with the Senator's secretary, and they're of the opinion that the bill only bans sales to minors. I expressed my concern over the language of the bill that would seemingly ban the product, and left my number for the Senator to call me on.
I'm going to take a look at all the laws that this law would amend.
I'm going to take a look at all the laws that this law would amend.
It does indeed ban sales of e-cigs to minors.
The problem, however, is Section 18, which is an entirely new provision . . . that's the section that would work as a de facto ban on all sales of products containing nicotine that are not tobacco products (and "tobacco products" is defined under Tennessee law so as not to include e-cigarettes) and which are not FDA-approved as tobacco cessation products, harm reduction products, or for medical purposes.
That's exactly what I told the aides. Hopefully this bill can get amended without significant efforts.
Have you heard anything back, Placebo? I was trying to sort this out in the Campaign Forum with some rather lengthy posts, and have spent the last three days scouring everything I can to make sense of it. I'm not convinced it is a total ban on all sales, but I think I'm in a minority (of one? *lol*)
I think it boils down to how they add the e-cig definition in section one. Is there another source to look at for how Tennessee defines tobacco products - other than 39-17-1503? They are going to add language defining the e-cig in that section, but it doesn't explicitly define it as a tobacco product the way it does "bidis" (if I spelled that right, I'm not looking at it right now). If they intend to ban all sales then there is no point to the over 17 sections (though it wouldn't be the first time something pointless was done).
Nope. I sent an e-mail to the Senator, as well as left a message in his home office, and I've thus far received no response.
I did, however, speak to one Republican representative on the Agriculture Committee. She was very interested in the matter, as she was not accustomed to receiving e-mail blasts like she'd been getting from people using the VapeBans.com list.
I spoke to a very nice aide for another Republican rep, and while she was also very nice and actually interested in buying an e-cigarette, she did tell me that form e-mails with no address attached are almost always deleted and disregarded.
Take a look at response #23, where I parsed the text of the proposed bill. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...te-bill-910-ban-e-cigs-sloppy-language-3.html
Julie is correct. Section 18 amends Title 39 Chapter 17 Part 1, which contains miscellaneous criminal offenses such as "False academic degrees" and "Transportation of Illegal Aliens." http://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2010/title-39/chapter-17/part-1/
Whoever dreamed up this bill was so cunning that they fooled their fellow legislators. Chapter 17 Part 1 is obviously not limited to minors. Minors are addressed in Chapter 17 part 15.
Julie is correct. Section 18 amends Title 39 Chapter 17 Part 1, which contains miscellaneous criminal offenses such as "False academic degrees" and "Transportation of Illegal Aliens." http://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2010/title-39/chapter-17/part-1/
Whoever dreamed up this bill was so cunning that they fooled their fellow legislators. Chapter 17 Part 1 is obviously not limited to minors. Minors are addressed in Chapter 17 part 15.
Last edited:
I gave a call back and spoke to Senator Overbey's assistant. She, like the person I spoke to yesterday, was surprised to learn that the bill applied to people other than minors. I explained what Elaine just posted, and she stated she would talk to the lawyer who drafted the bill, and get back to me if the lawyer believes something different.
I tried Senator Overbey at his home office, but again didn't get an answer.
I tried Senator Overbey at his home office, but again didn't get an answer.
Definitely look and see if your representative in the TN Assembly is on the Agriculture Committee, or even if there is someone in a neighboring district, as an identical bill was introduced in the Assembly.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
The best strategy is to urge Tennessee legislators to remove Section 18 from the SB 910 and HB 1729, and then pass the rest of the bill (which bans e-cigarette sales to minors).
Letters/calls regarding SB 910
Tennessee General Assembly » Legislation
should go to sponsor Doug Overbey and the Senate Commerce Labor and Agriculture Cmte Senate Commerce, Labor & Agriculture Committee - TN General Assembly
Letters/calls regarding HB 1729
Tennessee General Assembly » Legislation
should go to sponsor Joe Armstrong and cosponsor Harry Tindell and to the TN House Agriculture Committee
House Agriculture Committee - TN General Assembly
The good news is that Joe Armstrong and Harry Tindell (cosponsors of HB 1729) are both Democrats, and the Republicans control the TN House. But SB 910 is sponsored by Doug Overbey, a Republican, and Republicans control the TN Senate.
Vocalek wrote:
Please note that ANR has not been advocating any e-cigarette sales bans, but rather ANR has been advocating indoor e-cigarette usage bans (wherever smoking is banned).
Meanwhile, ACS, AHA, ALA have been lobbying for e-cigarette sales bans (for adults), and for indoor e-cigarette usage bans.
Letters/calls regarding SB 910
Tennessee General Assembly » Legislation
should go to sponsor Doug Overbey and the Senate Commerce Labor and Agriculture Cmte Senate Commerce, Labor & Agriculture Committee - TN General Assembly
Letters/calls regarding HB 1729
Tennessee General Assembly » Legislation
should go to sponsor Joe Armstrong and cosponsor Harry Tindell and to the TN House Agriculture Committee
House Agriculture Committee - TN General Assembly
The good news is that Joe Armstrong and Harry Tindell (cosponsors of HB 1729) are both Democrats, and the Republicans control the TN House. But SB 910 is sponsored by Doug Overbey, a Republican, and Republicans control the TN Senate.
Vocalek wrote:
Please note that ANR has not been advocating any e-cigarette sales bans, but rather ANR has been advocating indoor e-cigarette usage bans (wherever smoking is banned).
Meanwhile, ACS, AHA, ALA have been lobbying for e-cigarette sales bans (for adults), and for indoor e-cigarette usage bans.
Last edited:
I could be wrong, but all they need to do is add "For purposes of this chapter, electronic cigarettes or e-cigarettes shall be considered a tobacco product" to the e-cig definition theyll be adding to 39-17-1503. This same language is included with the definition for bidis.
Then everything would make perfect sense. Section 18 of the bill, I believe, makes it an offense to sell nicotine if it's not a tobacco product and/or you make health claim that are not FDA approved (because making claims puts you under different regulation). That covers e-cigs, smokless tobacco and any other new invention that comes up. This section could use some work too, but the addition of "for this chapter" in 39-17-1503 would cover e-cigs as customarily used (without health claims), as a tobacco product.
Then everything would make perfect sense. Section 18 of the bill, I believe, makes it an offense to sell nicotine if it's not a tobacco product and/or you make health claim that are not FDA approved (because making claims puts you under different regulation). That covers e-cigs, smokless tobacco and any other new invention that comes up. This section could use some work too, but the addition of "for this chapter" in 39-17-1503 would cover e-cigs as customarily used (without health claims), as a tobacco product.
- Status
