Yesterday my wife and I headed out to Sacramento and met up with other vapers and vendors to attend the Senate Governmental Organization Committee hearing on SB 648. The short version is that the hearing went well.
In case you aren't up on the details of SB 648 it was introduced by Senator Ellen Corbett last year. As originally written it would have banned the use of electronic cigarettes anywhere that smoking is banned. The bill languished in the Governmental Organizations committee for months. Until last week. Corbett removed much of the bill, leaving it as a prohibition against selling electronic cigarettes in vending machines. This is something we can all support, unfortunately the bill also contained language that would define an electronic cigarette as a “cigarette”. Or at least it did until late Tuesday when it was amended to remove the problematic language.
There was some very real concern that the latest amendment might be removed under pressure from the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, and the American Lung Association. The result was that when we arrived at the capitol building we still didn't know if we would be supporting or opposing the bill. But confirmation came just before the hearing, the amendment was in, the definition of electronic cigarettes as “cigarettes” was out, and we would be supporting SB 648.
The hearing itself started out the way these things normally do. Corbett addressed the committee, talked about the bill… yadda yadda yadda. Then the lobbyists for NJOY and VMR testified in support of the bill as amended. Followed by public testimony. Us. And this was the first bit of true amusement. As our small group of Northern California vapers and vendors approached to testify the committee chairman blurts out “Wait, this is testimony in support of the bill.”
Yes Mister Chairman it is, and yes, we’re supporting this bill, and yes, we know you’re confused, but just go with it…
So we all gave our support to SB 648 “as proposed amended”. Then came the oppositions turn. The very people who had been pushing for this bill were now going to testify against it. Why? because even though the bill does exactly what they claim to want, namely to keep electronic cigarettes out of the hands of minors, they didn't want to lose the language that would have defined e-cigs as cigarettes, they didn't want to lose the leverage that it would have given them to regulate and tax e-cigs as cigarettes. After all the opposition speakers were done GO Chair
Isadore Hall criticized them by saying “I am stricken that they would oppose a bill that would keep kids from getting e-cigarettes” and that “If they are against this bill they are for kids smoking.”
Schadenfreude!
It’s not often that we get to see our opponents treated this way. And it’s not every day that the ANTZ get pushed off of their self proclaimed moral high ground, toppled from their pedestal, and publicly disparaged.
This was a victory for California vapers. Maybe a small victory, but one with big implications as it leaves electronic cigarettes as separate from the definition of a “cigarette” or a “tobacco product” and leaves open the path for being legally treated a different class of product.
The ayes have it, the bill passed the committee, and now… well, now we wait and watch and prepare to fight again in the event that future amendments change the impact of this bill before it reaches the governor’s desk.
No comments:
Post a Comment