Close

The Battle in CA: AB768, SB24, SB140 and SB151

2015 has brought the ANTZ to a frenzy- please check the NorCal Vaping Advocacy or California Vaping Advocacy Facebook pages

Guide to contacting your legislative representives: http://www.vapersclub.com/protect/legislative-packet/

>>  Subject to change: http://senate.ca.gov/dailyfile  <<

~~~~~

APRIL 7, 2015 9am at the State Capitol, Room Asm Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media

AB 768, also known as the “Tobacco Free Baseball Act”, is slipping through the crack of the legislative net. This bill is all about banning tobacco as baseball venues but defines vapor products as tobacco products.

Bloom (A) , Leno (S)

(4) “Tobacco product” includes all of the following:
(A) A product made or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, and snuff.
(B) An electronic device that delivers nicotine or other substances to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an electronic cigarette, cigar, pipe, or hookah.
(C) A component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold separately.
(D) “Tobacco product” does not include a product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes where the product is marketed and sold solely for that approved purpose.
~~~~~~

APRIL 8, 2015-SB24 and SB140 -Meet on the front steps by 12:45PM

Dress for success- perception is critical.

SB24: The STAKE Act — Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement Act

Senator Mimi Walters [R] Primary Sponsored Bills SD-037 FollowTheMoney
This bill would change the STAKE Act’s definition of tobacco products to include electronic devices, such as electronic cigarettes, that deliver nicotine or other substances, and make furnishing such a tobacco product to a minor a misdemeanor.
Existing law, the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003, requires the State Board of Equalization to administer a statewide program to license manufacturers, importers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers of cigarettes and tobacco products. Under existing law, a violation of this act is a misdemeanor.

 SB140:

This bill would change the STAKE Act’s definition of tobacco products to include electronic devices, such as electronic cigarettes, that deliver nicotine or other substances, and make furnishing such a tobacco product to a minor a misdemeanor.

(c) (1) “Tobacco product” means any of the following:
(A) A product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, or snuff.
(B) An electronic device that delivers nicotine or other substances to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an electronic cigarette, cigar, pipe, or hookah.
(C) Any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold separately.
(2) “Tobacco product” does not include a product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes where the product is marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose.

(Principal coauthor: Senator Pan)
(Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Ting)
(Coauthor: Senator Hernandez)(Coauthors: Senators Hernandez, McGuire, and Stone)
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Chiu)

INTRODUCED BY Senators Leno and Steinberg (Principal coauthors: Senators Hancock and Jackson) (Coauthors: Senators Beall, Block, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Hill, Lieu, Liu, Monning, Pavley, Roth, Rubio, Wolk,and Wright) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Ammiano and Blumenfield) NOTE: hover over each name for District # and link (was originally announced for March 25)

>>  Subject to change: http://senate.ca.gov/dailyfile  <<

1:30 p.m. – John L. Burton Hearing Room (4203)
BILLS HEARD IN FILE ORDER
S.B. No. 19 Wolk. Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment
form: statewide registry.
S.B. No. 24 Hill. STAKE Act: electronic cigarettes.
S.B. No. 36 Hernandez. Medi-Cal: demonstration project. (Urgency)
S.B. No. 140 Leno. Electronic cigarettes.
S.B. No. 151 Hernandez. Tobacco products: minimum legal age.
S.B. No. 275 Hernandez. Health facility data.
~~~~~

My comments on SB140:

In the heat of the health scare hysteria ginned up by anti-nicotine entities, these groups have flexed their muscles into creating overreaching legislation from the municipal to State level. California Dept. of Health Services is spending millions of dollars to smear, vilify, and confuse the public about the efficacy and how much safer vaping is for adults who want to switch for reasons such as  tobacco harm reduction (THR).

Why, you may ask would people who are paid to publicly denounce smoking, who want to thwart the use of tobacco leaf, whether combusted or not come out SO rabidly against vaping when they had no problem with the current NRT (Nicotine Replacement Therapies) products available over-the-counter and by prescription? Have you seen how expensive even store brand patches are? More than the cost of a carton of cheap cigarettes for 14 patches. Flavored lozenges. Gums. Aerosols.

You think they would be jumping for joy that at last, there is an effective and affordable alternative to smoking or chewing tobacco leaves.

Instead, they are pulling in large amounts of resources to kill off the open systems to leave the market to the pharmaceutical companies, not Big Tobacco. Those “cig-alikes” you see at convenience stores are crappy and the sales have dropped off significantly since the wider awareness of the most humble open system personal vaping device (510/eGO style).

Again, why are they using lies and misleading information to fuel this effort to thwart a new industry?

You know as well as I do- common sense points to money. Unknown to most, US States receive a bribe payment from the tobacco conglomerates every year going back to 1999. See for yourself how much your State and your County have been given with the vague direction towards abatement.

Here’s CA’s  totals: 1999-2014 PDF

You can find your own State’s totals by going to your Secretary Of State site.