 All right. Thank you. So we're back. And Jen, thanks for being here with us. We have S24 on the schedule to get a first look. And why don't you walk us through the bill? It's the flavored products bill that we passed last year out of committee. And then it went to finance and then it sort of ended there with COVID. And the committee never really had an opportunity to fully present the bill to the Senate. So we'll look at it again. Hey, do you want me to put the language up on the screen? Yes, please. Okay. Great. So for the record, Jennifer Carby, legislative council. And I will put this up. All right. Can you now see my screen? Great. So this is S24 as the chair said this was a bill that was worked on in this committee last year. It was S288. From the prior biennium. And the bill as introduced is as it left this committee last year. So this committee had made some changes and those are reflected in here. It's not the same as what was introduced last year. So we'll start out with a number of findings and I don't know if you want me to go through those or just note that they're here for another time. Why don't we skip them for now? And then we'll come back to them. They are, they are pretty important as an introduction, but let's skip them for now. Okay. So I'm going to put two then amends the chapter on tobacco products. It makes some changes in definitions. It tries to make some create some consistency between definitions in the tobacco taxes chapter entitled 32. And in this chapter, so that's this definition that you're seeing under tobacco products. Tobacco substitute. It expands the definition of tobacco substitute to capture some emerging products. So it talks about, for example, about components parts and accessories of electronic or battery powered devices. Also talks about inhalation or other absorption of aerosol vapor or other emission. And these are all we talk about tobacco substitute it's it's this statutory term we use for what people often call electronic cigarettes. Or vaping devices, things like that. These are things that have not been approved by the FDA for tobacco cessation or other medical purposes. So if it's a tobacco cessation device, it's not a tobacco substitute under our definition. So then it adds a definition of E liquid. This is the substance solution substance or other material used in or with a tobacco substitute that is heated or otherwise acted upon to produce an aerosol vapor or other emission to be inhaled or otherwise absorbed by the user, regardless of what it means nicotine. So this is a new definition but but a term we've been kind of describing in various ways. So one of the things this bill is doing is creating some consistency around the use of this term. It adds this E liquid terminology throughout the statute so you'll see in this next section about getting a license it specifically requires someone to have a tobacco license from the division of liquor control. And then you'll see on this page in the retail sale of E liquids as is required already for these other items. So a lot of this, a lot of the changes are just adding E liquids to the various existing provisions, or in this case, replacing substances containing nicotine or otherwise intended for use with a tobacco substitute with our new term E liquids. This is a cleaner and easier to use. So again, same changes in this section it's really amending the whole whole chapter on tobacco products, creating some consistency in various places so for example it just the display of tobacco products this would also add tobacco substitutes and E liquids. So this is an exemption for what has to be where things can be displayed. If it's in an establishment where no one under 21 is permitted to enter again adding E liquids. This piece here in section 1005 eliminates the ban on and penalty for possession of cigarettes E cigarettes and tobacco paraphernalia by people who are under 21 years of age so it keeps the ban on on and penalty for purchasing attempting to purchase and using false identification to purchase or attempt to purchase these products for E liquids, but it gets rid of the, the ban and penalty for possession. So that piece that we have again adding E liquids, then somewhere in here we get to you. This is sort of correction of the name, this, this tobacco evaluation and review board became part of one one board that was folded into the substance misuse prevention advisory council added some provisions to the contraband and seizure statute to reflect the various items that are not allowed to be sold offered or in some cases possessed. And then adding it to adding the tobacco substitutes E liquids and tobacco paraphernalia and the appropriate cross references for those. Then, again, changing a definition or changing a term to use this shorter E liquids term that we have defined in full. And then adding tobacco substitutes E liquids and tobacco paraphernalia to part of the to the description of what somebody would be assessed a violent penalty for for violating if they made a shipment in violation of the law. Again, here using the term E liquids containing nicotine instead of liquid nicotine. And then we get to section, a new section here section seven vs a 2013. And this is flavored tobacco products flavored tobacco substitutes and flavored E liquids prohibited. We start out with a definition here of characterizing flavor. It means a taste or aroma other than that of tobacco imparted either prior to or during consumption of a tobacco product or tobacco substitute or component part or by product of a tobacco product or tobacco substitute. Tastes or aromas relating to any fruit chocolate vanilla honey maple candy cocoa dessert alcoholic beverage mint menthol wintergreen herb or spice or other food or drink, or to any conceptual flavor that imparts a taste or aroma that is distinguishable from tobacco flavor, but may not relate to any particular known flavor. So let's pause here for a moment a lot of the terms in this section came from some rules and emergency rules that were adopted in other jurisdictions. A couple of years ago when there was a lot of concern about in particular youth using flavored vaping products. So this was largely a list of their tastes or aromas, although I added maple because we're Vermont and it seems wrong to have a list of flavors that did not include maple. And this idea of a conceptual flavor you'll hear about things like unicorn puke, and, and things like that that are not any actual known flavor but are based on the descriptions not tobacco flavor. A little background there. Sender lines. Go ahead. Yeah. In all of that description. Last year this thing fell on its sword on menthol does this ban menthol cigarettes. Yes it does. Okay, that's why it didn't come off the wall and finance last year. That will be a significant part of our consideration and testimony. Yeah so one of the characterizing flavors here is menthol. And then we get to flavored eliquid is any eliquid with a characterizing flavor. It's very flavored, if a licensee manufacturer or their agent or employee has made a statement or claim directed to consumers or the public whether express or implied that the product has a distinguishable taste or aroma, other than that of tobacco. Flavor tobacco product means any tobacco product with a characterizing flavor. It's presumed to be flavored. If there is any statement or claim express or imply that it has a distinguishable taste or aroma other than that of tobacco. So all of these items are pulling in this characterizing flavor definition which includes menthol. And then flavor tobacco substitute again any tobacco substitute with a characterizing flavor and that same language about the presumption for flavors. And then a tobacco retailer is anyone who owns operates or manages the retail establishment with a tobacco license from the division of liquor control. So then this this bands says no person shall engage in the retail sale of any flavored tobacco product flavored eliquid or flavored tobacco substitute. If a tobacco retailer or their agent or employee violates the section, the retailer so not the employee or agent but the retailer is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $100 for a first offense, and not more than $500 for second offense this is for the same as what it would be for as same as the existing penalties for sales to a minor and action under the section be brought in the same manner as for a traffic violation. So that means in the judicial bureau within 24 hours of the occurrence of the alleged change section three then gives the judicial bureau jurisdiction over violations of the ban on the sale of flavored products. It also makes a conforming change to reflect that the possession would not be subject of by minors is not subject to penalty that the purchase is of tobacco products generally. In section four is conforming change adding eliquids to an exception in the default penalty provisions for all of title seven section 16. I say section five is entitled 16 it adds eliquids to a ban on the use of tobacco products and e cigarettes on public school grounds. Section six makes conforming changes to the substance misuse prevention oversight and advisory council. So again using the eliquids term instead of longer description. Section seven makes some clarifying changes to the definition of other tobacco products for purposes of the tax on e cigarettes. And then section eight directs the attorney general's office to report by December to this committee and to the economic development committee and to various committees in the house about whether and to what extent Vermont can legally restrict advertising and regulate the content of labels for electronic e cigarettes and other vaping related products in this state. Now there has been a fair amount of interest in what the state can do, and it seemed like a good idea to get you some, some information from those who would be in a position to defend the law, if you were to enact one. Act on September 1, which was the same September was when you also had the change in the, in the use of tobacco by minor statute, to give some time for enforcement to be ready, but also have it up and running approximately the time that the kids start back in school for the fall. Thank you, Jen. You know, I guess, as the lead sponsor on the bill, I would like to say a few words of introduction to the bill and why I feel it's important, and you can look at the findings that are there in the bill and I think the first finding is particularly important that we spend Vermont spends over $348 million annually to treat tobacco related illnesses. And that's 87.2 million and Medicaid dollars. That's a lot of money. That's a, the long term goal for reducing those chronic illnesses is something that we sometimes cannot see, because we're, we keep our eyes on the short term revenue price. So we'll have a, we'll have a fiscal note regarding this, but much more compelling to me is the data that's coming out about the increase of youth utilization for cigarettes, and particular men fall cigarettes so if you look at some of the, some of the information you'll find that in 2017 between 2017 and 2019 there was a 20% increase in the use of men fall cigarettes that was by over 20% by kids. High school students who smoke use men fall cigarettes of 54.5% of Vermont high school students who smoke use men fall cigarettes that engages them, not just in the use of the cigarette but in an addiction that may carry on for time over time. The 8.4% of middle school students use men fall cigarettes, those who smoke use men fall cigarettes. So the flavors have become extremely attractive and we're going to hear testimony that next week, that I think will help us understand the inequity that is out there, not just in the advertising but then in the result of the use of tobacco and flavored products generally. So we know that African Americans and LGBTQ are much more likely to use flavored e-cigarettes and tobacco including men fall. We'll get some data on that, but the attractive nature of advertising has resulted not just in in equity of use but now in equity of health. And so we see that some of our minority populations are being greatly affected by inhalation by smoke by nicotine addiction. So we'll hear testimony about that and I find it extremely compelling. The vulnerability to diseases cannot be understated for our African American black population, particularly during COVID, and we have seen recent articles and I don't know whether I put them on the webpage or not but we'll get some an article or two out on the effect of the relationship between smoking and COVID. So there is a, there is a great deal for us to put our heads into in terms of the significant public health issues related to the use of flavored e-cigarettes and flavored tobacco, including men fall. I know there are some misconceptions about men fall and we'll try to sort those out. I call it the men fall mask. The men fall mask is that it doesn't feel bad when you inhale it, but you're still getting damaged to the trachea, the bronchi and the lungs. So we'll get testimony about whether or not men fall actually causes helps people to quit. We've heard that and yet we know that nine in 10 black adults utilize men fall cigarettes and that perpetuates in the that cohort so there's a lot of data out there, a lot of information and I think one of the things this bill does for me is it highlights some of the public health issues around inequality and around the inequities that we are seeing with our BIPOC and LGBTQ populations. So I will say no more but I do encourage you to read through the findings we may find that we want to add, subtract or modify some of those to be representative of the current information as we hear testimony. So Senator Taranzini has very patiently waited with his hand up, but as lead sponsor I did want to introduce the bill and we'll probably we will go through the bill again as we hear more from folks who testify so that we can fully understand what what Jen has presented today. So, Senator Taranzini. Thank you Senator Lyons. Thanks for the explanation gives me a better understanding of the bill as this is my first time looking at it, just for my clarification and I believe the question but so menthol cigarettes and then flavored liquids or whatever you put in an e cigarette with chewing tobacco be a part of this flavored chewing tobacco. Good question I don't remember let me scroll down look at the definition. Is another tobacco product. Right I think I think it is I think it is a good question. And this is our adults and children, right. Right, I mean purchase purchase and purchase would be banned for anyone under 21, regardless of whether it's flavored or unflavored that that's already the case. So tobacco products and our statutes is cigarettes little cigars roll your own tobacco snuff cigars new smokeless tobacco which I think is chewing tobacco and any other product manufactured from derived from or containing tobacco that is intended for human consumption by smoking by chewing or in any other manner. So yes. Thank you for the clarification Jennifer. Sure. Other other questions for Jen on the bill. Jen, I do have a question. I know that there's a, a, the purchase use and possession. The pup provisions. So there was a bill there's a bill introduced an economic development on that and I'm, but is none is that as you went through the bill I apologize I was probably too glazed over my own bill but how much of the pup is included in this bill if any. A fair amount is, I think I'd have to look at them side by side I don't remember which pieces there's certainly a lot of the sort of general cleanup provisions are in both. But there are some differences I'd be happy to look at that and get back to you. Okay. Yeah, that would be good. I just want to make sure that we're coordinated with whatever comes out of economic development. Senator Hardy. I'm sorry I didn't catch what is pup I didn't catch what that was and coordinating with what I'm sorry. So it's purchase use and possession. So currently there are on on the books Jen maybe you could explain the, the fines that are on the books of the legality of purchase use and possession for underaged folks. Right and I'm just, I'm pulling up the other bills and then I can. One of the things as we took, have taken testimony in the past and we actually I think it was Senator Cummings who originally brought up the idea that if if an underage. African American male is driving in his car smoking there that could be considered an opportunity by public safety to pull them over. So under the exit so under the existing law. There's a prohibition on anyone under 21 years of age, possessing purchasing or attempting to purchase tobacco products tobacco substitutes or tobacco paraphernalia, unless they're an employee. There's also a specific ban on misrepresenting age to purchase or attempt to purchase these products, and then there is a $25 civil penalty for someone who possessed from minor who possesses these items in violation of this prohibition and then there's a larger penalty for someone who misrepresents their age by presenting false, false identification that's civil penalty of up to $50 or 10 hours of community service or both. So all of that would be repealed in the bill that is in Senate economic development it's s 41. There are also a couple of other provisions in it that that are related. That would be modified as well. So the bill s 24 that you're looking at would would similarly eliminate the prohibition on possession by minors but would keep the penalty for purchase and attempting to purchase. So one of them is getting rid of penalties on purchase use and possession the other. One, the purchase piece still remains against the law in s 24 but the use and possession I mean there isn't really a big distinction and in there between use and possession. So there isn't. So what I guess what I'm saying is there isn't a specific, you can possess but you can't use distinction somewhere or you can use but you can't possess so you think of it as purchase purchase and possession. So that's what the one in economic development gets rid of possession is what s 24 would get rid of but it would still penalize purchase. And I think that some of the arguments that people had provided for wanting to get rid of the possession penalty had to do with the addiction addictive qualities of some of these items and and concern about penalizing an addiction. Go ahead, Senator Cummings that first is that answer your question, Senator Hardy. Yeah, I think so and this bill, our bill that we're looking at gets rid of the possession stuff to in most of the cases and an s 41 the other bill does a more comprehensive it's beyond tobacco or is it just related to tobacco products. Right, so they are different it is just related to tobacco. Tobacco products it doesn't get into the flavor ban the flavor ban actually only has a ban on the retail sale. So there are some distinctions between the two of them that get hard to, to abstractly generalize, but I can, I can, if it's helpful I can put something together that compares them or moving targets at this point right in terms of the committees are both are is that bill being actively worked on center lines. I don't know at this point. Okay, I don't need to know this now I just you know curious moving. No, I think it's important for us to understand there's another bill out there that could be in play, but we can focus just on what this bill does at this point. I don't want to hear your comments. Okay. Anything other than what tobacco tastes from possession and use from sale, or just sale, just sale retail sale. It's a flavored tobacco in Vermont. And it's not illegal to possess other things. I believe last time we had testimony from a smoke shop owner who literally move 50 yards over the border and open to store in New Hampshire and close to Vermont store, because his customers can walk to New Hampshire. So a teenager can go to New Hampshire by base. Come back here. And there's no penalty or smoking right. Right. And the bill as introduced that's right. You know what, but we can't get it into back anymore do we know what New York does. I'll stop my head but I can. We know we know Massachusetts has passed this the bill before us the full ban. Senator Cummings I don't know is everyone else hearing the strange. Yes, yes. Audio is really weird and it's. Okay. I will shut it off. It sounds like there may be a problem with the microphone. Yeah. You sound like a little grizzly bear. Well, I haven't changed anything. Well we can we can understand what you're saying is just that there's a little growl that comes through. Okay, I haven't changed anything. Well, don't I mean, do you have anything else that you wanted to add or ask at this point. No. All right. Any any other any questions about this. So, so Jen just to clarify. One more time for for those of us who are really have the. I need to understand thoroughly the can you explain to us. Sort of the overarching provisions of the bill. So the bill. Bans what allows for the, for the purchase of what for the use of what for the possession of what so that I think those, those kind of the bottom line areas for the bill. Bans the retail sale, but not the possession of flavored cigarettes, e-cigarettes and e-liquids. So only tobacco flavored products would be allowed. This includes a ban on menthol cigarettes. It's not prohibit, as I said, possession of any of these items by anyone regardless of age because it eliminates the ban and penalty for possession by minors and by minors in this case that it is under 21. Retail sale you could people 21 and over could only purchase tobacco flavored products at retail sale. But possession of anything it would be allowed. Although I should, I should clarify that I mean that the retail sale piece also incorporates the, the ban on internet direct sales so that would be included as well. Right, but if, as long as there's a state over the border you can go and purchase and then bring it back and use it. Bring it back and yes, and use it. And then Senator Taranzini. So this would also include all of those old time tobacco or pipe tobacco products like cherry tobacco and, and the like. Correct. I believe that's accurate based on the definition of tobacco products. Okay. Senator Taranzini. Thank you. Are there any other states that currently outlaw these products that we know of. That's a really good question the answer is yes. And it's not really outlaw it's really just ban but the outlaws of. That's an interesting phrase. It works. It works. Okay, so I know I know Massachusetts does and I know they're there. I think some other states have since passed that law but will. This is a question that we'll have to ask folks as they come into testify. And I can certainly as well. Yeah. I'm not, I'm not a cigarette smoker so I'm, I don't, I don't know but if I was in Massachusetts and wanted to pick up a pack of smokes and they were menthols I could, I could not you're saying essentially. Yes, that's right. And you couldn't get any flavors anywhere. Gotcha. Yeah, so and, you know, I had thought about having someone in from Massachusetts and we may well do that as time goes on to hear what what's happened there. I don't think it's had the. We have a, we have a full day of testimony scheduled for next Wednesday and then after that will will be bringing other folks in to get perspective. Your center lines you're trying to make it so I'm never welcome at a family reunion again. No, I'm not. No, I'm not. You, you are working for the, for the health and welfare of the people of the state. That's that's our goal. I mean the Constitution does provide for the public health and welfare and this. This is this. I know it's not easy. Any other questions, Senator Hooker. Just a comment that Massachusetts was the first state to do this and then, whoops. New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and California have also banned them. I have to look at that I'm not. I think there may be some nuances or some of it was done by by regulation. Yeah, some by law. So let me let me look into it and get why don't why don't you sort that out and when we when we bring you back on this one. We'll have we'll maybe look at what other states have done a little bit with is that something you can provide or should we reach out to someone else for that. I will do my best I may reach out to to some of the advocates or if they have information and want to provide it to me that is also great. Okay. Senator. How is my audio now. You're still a little grizzly bear. I'll stop the video. Does that help? No, no. It's good when we can see you because then we can lip read. All right, well maybe I'll just shut down my computer and restart. I think if we're going to hear from other states. I'd like to know how successful they've been in cutting out or reducing smoking. Because it's kind of interesting we just legalized cannabis on the argument that prohibition doesn't work. We are not pro inhibiting strawberry flavored vodka or or any of the other youth focused alcohol. I want to know before we do this doesn't work and see if some of those other states can tell us. So I guess that's a that's a that's a point that we may will we want to hear about but remember something about our alcohol sales in this state it's highly regulated. Strawberry flavored vodka can only be purchased in certain places and there's, you know, and we've had a lot of very, a lot of focus on that similarly with cannabis so I'm not sure the analogy is going to be something that helps us but we'll certainly look at it. They, the amount of money that we put into chronic conditions as result of tobacco is significant. And we want to try to begin to get rid of that you know the 348 million dollars a year is just overwhelming for me but I think I would say that's a significant reduction and have other states seen any any decrease in those expenditures. It's probably too short of time really to get results but I don't know we'll, we'll find out. Senator alliance. Yeah. So last year, this bill went through your health care committee and ended up in finance is that what I was understanding. But it ended up in finance and the discussion and focused on some information about menthol tobacco. As far as I know, but that's, you know, I think the issue and about money. I mean, the finances money. I don't know what it stayed on the wall because there were several strong polls and support with the mental band. I believe you with three pro votes. Oh, have the support. So we didn't bring it out. Okay, that helps. All right. So, I think, yes. So what I think is that it will be incumbent on whatever this committee decides to ensure that we have a very focused argument for whatever we pass out. We never really had the opportunity to share the information that we learned and committee. So, she's going to come back I know that. All right, Senator Tarenzini go ahead. Two quick questions. When was voted out of health and welfare and the last biennium was it a unanimous vote. Yes it was. Number two, will we hear testimony from, say like the Vermont roasters association or one of those about their about the impacts to the financials of that industry. Yes, we will. Okay, thank you. And we'll hear from them will hear from the tobacco industry will hear from a number of folks. Next week is really focused on the health health issues and the inequity that we see as a result of advertising from the industry so we'll, but we will, we will look at all those. The other areas. I'm back is my audio any better. Awesome. Yes. When in doubt shut it down. I won't say it but it did sound a little bit like you had been smoking. Okay, no. I have never smoked. My father would have disowned me if I looked at a cigarette. Amazing times times have changed. All right. Any questions for Jen on S 24. And so I'm hearing I'm hearing some of the interest in who we should hear from so to the extent practicable. We want to hear about other states and we'll try and get information from those other states whether it's directly or through some compilation of information available from those states. Also, I do have the Vermont Grocers Association on my list I do have the tobacco industry on my list. And I would like also to hear from some youth who are very engaged in the area of youth tobacco prevention so we'll hear from them. I also have some researchers advocates and some national national figures who have been very much involved in the issues around in equity will be coming in that. I mean given the focus that we have in the state right now on equitable treatment. And I think that's one of our for that BIPOC and LGBTQ this this this bill to me really represents an opportunity to look at that issue in health and welfare. So let me know if you have other ideas about who you want to hear from. And we'll, we'll try to get everyone scheduled in on another day we have one day full we'll try and get another day full. So we can fully understand the bill and we'll have Nolan put together, or Graham Campbell I guess, a fiscal note so we understand some of the fiscal consequences of what we send out probably over somewhere, if it goes to finance. Senator Hardy. Thank you. I was going to ask, and you already mentioned that to have some of the youth groups and who've been working on this issue so thank you for that. I'm going to question about a slightly different topic. If, if we're as soon as we get to closure on this one, absolutely. All right, reserve my, my question for her. Okay, you got it. Questions for Jen comments. I'm not really ready for full discussion until we have the data in front of us. Remember, our goal here is to look at the health implications of what we learn about flavors. There's a lot to learn so we'll go with that. Okay. No other questions, comments. Senator Hardy, you have a question for Jen. Yeah, Jen or Nolan, I see Nolan's on the screen too. I'm wondering if either of you have the link to the audio only report that that that I, I, the reason I'm asking I read it at one point, but I cannot find the link I just asked Nellie and Nellie wasn't able to find the link either. So if you can send that to the whole committee, I just like to review it again before we talk about that issue again. Sure. And it should also be available if you go back into the documents and look under I think my name. Katie and I had presented that list of all the reports that are due to the committee. It's a link right on that as well. But, but thank you. Yeah, but if you have it available that would just be. It's there I was just reading it the other day so you'll find it. I'm sure it's fascinating reading. Very good. And I just as an update now that let's, that's a good segue actually thank you.