NE2: End to Vaped Stupidity Act (Passed)

[Deus Naturae]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Governor Dallasfan. Debate on this bill will last for 72 hours, or until Friday June 20 at 2:45 PM, unless otherwise modified or extended. The sponsor is encouraged to speak on behalf of this proposed legislation.

[Dr. Cynic]

I oppose dropping sales taxes on e-cigarettes entirely. If you want to lower the sales tax overall, that's one thing, but dropping it completely, I oppose, especially if you're only dropping it for e-cigs and not for other items. What makes e-cigs so special?

[Napoleon]

I support the bill as is.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

For starters, this will more likely than not be my last bill for the time being (hence Dallasfan's farewell.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The sales tax is only 1%, and we accrue a significant amount of revenue from it as is. This is specifically about exempting e-cigarettes from taxation.

Exempting items from taxation isn't an unprecedented idea. Several states exempt clothes and food. It's a popular idea in some political circles that punitive/excise taxes ought to be imposed in order to influence and change behavior. My opinion is that if taxes can be levied to change behavior, why can't they be waived?

New Jersey is currently considering imposing additional taxes on e-cigarettes. In addition, New York City is trying to restrict e-cigarette usage. I think proponents of these measures are knee-jerk reactionaries, and that we ought to do something about it, as New York and New Jersey are under our jurisdiction.

The whole point of this bill is to make e-cigarettes an attractive alternative to tobacco.  E-Cigarettes can be an avenue for quitting, for many people. Encouraging use of e-cigarettes as opposed to tobacco would help the poor, as well.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

citation

That's what makes them special. The potential positives (less people smoking, less cancer, et cetera) far outweigh the negatives (minimal loss in tax revenue, when we have had large surpluses.)

[SWE]

I support the bill as is.

As do I

[Barnes]

As a humble citizen, might I make a contribution here?

While I certainly sympathize with the prospect of e-Cigarettes being used as an avenue to curtail regular tobacco consumption, I know that there is a concerted effort being made by colleges and universities to eliminate all forms of smoking on their campuses.  As it is the purview of the Assembly itself to decide whether that is in itself an acceptable policy, I simply wish to know if this bill will address those regulations, which presumably would not be covered merely under "local ordinances"?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

As a humble citizen, might I make a contribution here?

While I certainly sympathize with the prospect of e-Cigarettes being used as an avenue to curtail regular tobacco consumption, I know that there is a concerted effort being made by colleges and universities to eliminate all forms of smoking on their campuses.  As it is the purview of the Assembly itself to decide whether that is in itself an acceptable policy, I simply wish to know if this bill will address those regulations, which presumably would not be covered merely under "local ordinances"?

Good question, Barnes.

Unless there's an oversight on my part, I imagine college boards and administrators would set their own policy on the matter. Ideally, public Northeastern universities would accommodate vaping.

[Simfan34]

I don't want to be sitting in a library or train or just about anywhere and have to deal with smoke in my face. This would reduce quality of life considerably for a lot of people.

[Simfan34]

So you're saying I have little-to-no right to not have this "vapor" in my face at all places?

A brief look at reviews of the literature show that the deleterious effects of e-cigarette smoke, although considerably less than that of cigarette smoke, are noteworthy:

http://healthland.time.com/2013/12/13/smoke-from-e-cigs-still-poses-some-second-hand-risk/

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-e-cigarette-harms-cdc-20140403-story.html

[Deus Naturae]

Sorry for the massive delay on this vote. My life has been unexpectedly hectic the past few days. We will now proceed to a final vote on this bill, as written:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor: Governor Dallasfan. Debate on this bill will last for 72 hours, or until Friday June 20 at 2:45 PM, unless otherwise modified or extended. The sponsor is encouraged to speak on behalf of this proposed legislation.
[/quote]

Voting will last for 48 hours or until all Representatives have voted.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That certain people are irresponsible in using these is not a very good reason to vote against this proposal. This is similar to Maureen Dowd eating an entire brownie.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Due to its association with tobacco, cancer and all other things undesirable, there's a degree of stigma surrounding nicotine.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

citation

E-cigarettes are a relatively new advent (or at least new in its proliferation) so the science is somewhat murky. I'm not purporting that it's completely harmless, but I know what also isn't harmless: tobacco. E-cigarettes are the future. Apologies to my buddy in the Assembly, but fighting the reactionary, ham-handed efforts of these communities in question would strike quite the blow to Big Tobacco.

I ask the Assembly to pass this bill.

[SWE]

Aye

[Dr. Cynic]

Aye

Goodbye guys. It was fun being back.

[Napoleon]

AYE

[Deus Naturae]

Aye, not sure how I feel about the sales tax exemption but on balance I support this.

[Deus Naturae]

By a vote of 4-0-0, with one Representative not voting, this bill passes and goes on to the Governor's desk for his signature or veto.

And that's the session. I would like to thank the Governor and all of my fellow Representatives for a productive and interesting legislative session.