WDAZ: Devils Lake landlord honored for going tobacco-free

By Kelsie McMahon

DEVILS LAKE, ND (WDAZ-TV) – The secondhand smoke from even one tenant smoking indoors can cause health problems for people in multiple other units.

In North Dakota it is legal to smoke inside an apartment, but one landlord is making a difference in Devils Lake.

Dan Lagein, Lagein Apartments owner: “Probably over a year ago we went smoke free.”

Dan Lagein was honored today for being the first landlord in Devils Lake to make five of his apartment units tobacco-free.

Lagein: “With Liz’s help here we’ve got all the signage and the verbiage for our contracts, so that started all that probably about six months ago.”

Liz Bonney, Lake Region District Health: “Well right now the law reads you can actually smoke inside your apartment within the confines, but not in any common areas and not within 20 feet of the building. What Dan has done is he has taken the state policy, our motto policy I should say, and kicked it up a notch.”

Signs show smoking is prohibited inside the building and within 20 feet of the entrance.

Lagein says there were several requests from tenants to go smoke free.

Lagein: “The smoke that resonates through the whole building, the tenants were just tired of the smoke smell for the small percentage that do it, it affects everybody involved.”

In North Dakota 18%of people smoke, but secondhand smoke can affect everyone.

Bonney: “The larger population needs to be acknowledged and they need to have a place to go and a place to rent that is, you know, protects them and their kids and is tobacco free.”

The hope now is that it will create a domino effect for other property owners.

Bonney: “Now that other property managers and property owners are going to see that he’s taken the step, it’s kind of like the first domino falling and maybe tenants will start speaking up.”

Lagein says while people may still sneak a smoke, the change has made a difference in the smell of the building.

Lagein: “It’s a great day for all of us and especially for the young ones involved or anybody involved that is sensitive to smoke or doesn’t appreciate it, you know, it just gives them their rights too.”

A move by one landlord that could make a difference for housing in the whole community.

Officials say secondhand smoke can cause cancer, heart attacks, and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.

To read more or watch the video:

Fargo Forum: WF high school rethinking assignment to urge lawmakers to hike tobacco tax

WEST FARGO – Add to North Dakota’s tobacco tax or leave it alone?
That’s a question Sheyenne High School teachers agree would have been better left up to students to decide.

On Friday, senior government class students teamed up with a freshman health class in a collaborative project to write letters to local legislators about the tobacco tax rate in North Dakota. The students thanked lawmakers who voted to increase the tobacco tax in the state during the last session, and encouraged those who didn’t support a higher tax on tobacco to consider doing so in the future.
“For our state, we have very strict laws as far as tobacco in public buildings, but as far as tobacco tax, we are one of the lowest in the nation, and that’s what we are trying to deter,” health teacher Tom Kirchoffner told WDAY-TV.
The original intent was to send the letters to the legislators, but that’s not what happened.
“After this group of teachers did the project, they sat down and they debriefed it. What were the strengths of that project … and what were some of the areas for improvement?,” district spokeswoman Heather Konschak said Tuesday.
That debriefing took place Friday, she said.
“They realized as they chatted about it that one of the areas for improvement would have been that they gave the student group their perspective,” Konschak said. “The students weren’t able to discuss it and come up with their own perspective. And from a government class standpoint, that’s not what you do. You allow kids to discuss and form their own perspective and viewpoint.”
The teachers “decided that because that’s not what happened in the project, that they weren’t going to send the letters,” because it is possible that’s “not an accurate depiction of what the kids would have picked if they had been given the opportunity to do it on their own,” Konschak said.
The decision was “there should have been more open dialogue,” to let the students choose their positions on the issue, Konschak said.
Konschak said one of the teachers got the idea from a conference. The project was in addition to the required curriculum, she said.
Kirchoffner didn’t immediately return a phone message seeking comment Tuesday. He was unavailable because he’s a basketball coach and was traveling to a game, Konschak said.
North Dakota’s tax per pack of cigarettes is 44 cents, which puts it at 48th in the nation. Minnesota’s per pack tax is $2.90, putting it at No. 8 in the U.S., according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.
New York has the highest state tax per pack at $4.35, while Missouri has the lowest state tax at 17 cents per pack. The national average is $1.60 per pack, the campaign reports.
Those figures do not include local taxes. The highest state-local tax combination per pack is $6.16 in Chicago, with New York City second at $5.85 per pack, the campaign reports.

NBC News: Cigarette Smoke Might Cause Infertility, Early Menopause, Study Shows

Tobacco smoke might do more than cause cancer, heart disease and lung damage. It might also injure fertility in women, researchers reported Tuesday.
Women who smoked the most, and who started at the youngest ages, went through menopause almost two years earlier than women who never smoked, Danielle Smith of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo and colleagues reported.
Women who remembered breathing in the most secondhand smoke went through menopause an average of 13 months earlier than women who didn’t think they’d ever breathed any in, the team reported in the journal Tobacco Control.
The team studied more than 93,000 women taking part in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study between 1993 and 1998. They filled out very detailed questionnaires on lifestyle habits, health problems and medical diagnoses.
They found that women who smoked 100 cigarettes or more in their lives had a 14 percent greater risk of infertility and a 26 percent greater risk of going through menopause before they turned 50.
The study helps confirm other studies that have linked smoking with early menopause.
Women who grew up with a smoker in the house for 10 years or more, those who lived with a spouse who smoked for 20 years or more, and those who worked with smokers for 10 years or more were 18 percent more likely to have had infertility problems than women who had never been passive smokers.
Overall, about 15 percent of the women said they had struggled to conceive for a year at a stretch or more, and 45 percent said they went through menopause before they turned 50.
There’s a debate over whether fertility rates have fallen, and many people have blamed chemicals known as endocrine disruptors in cans, bottles and in water supplies. But tobacco also contains these.
The toxins in tobacco smoke can interfere with the production of hormones related to fertility cycles, they can damage the production of egg cells, they can hurt the embryo before it gets implanted in the wall of the uterus, and they can restrict the processes that prepare a womb for pregnancy, the researchers said.
“Tobacco toxins also seem to lower the age of natural menopause by reducing circulating estrogen,” they wrote.
Smoking can also affect men in specific ways. For instance, it seems to damage the male Y chromosome especially badly.
Smoking is on the wane in the U.S. Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported the percentage of U.S. adults who smoke cigarettes declined from 20.9 percent in 2005 to 16.8 percent in 2014.
And smoking bans have made secondhand smoke in the workplace and public areas a thing of the past in most states.

Fargo Forum editorial: Tobacco cessation succeeds

There is good news in the war against tobacco use: North Dakota is winning.
The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids said last week that North Dakota is the only state spending at levels recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on tobacco cessation programs. That level is 50 percent of funds designated from the 1998 tobacco settlement lawsuits.

But it’s about more than spending dollars where they were meant to be spent. It’s about results, and on that score North Dakota is a leader. For example, a portion of the money was spent to fund a study of secondhand smoke’s effects in Grand Forks, the results of which were pivotal in that city passing a 2010 law that outlawed smoking in bars, casinos and truck stops. Several North Dakota cities, using information compiled locally and by the North Dakota Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy, easily approved ordinances directed at ending secondhand smoke in public places and businesses. Most of the cities were ahead of a Legislature that remained in the thrall of the state’s tobacco lobby, and it took a 2012 ballot measure to impose statewide restrictions on smoking and secondhand smoke.
There has been some grousing and whining about how tobacco settlement money is being spent in North Dakota. It’s come mostly from special interests that lost the tobacco cessation battle years ago. They were wrong then and are wrong now about the effects of the expenditures. For example, during the time that education and public service efforts were ratcheted up, smoking among youths plunged to 11.7 percent this year after hovering at about 20 percent the eight previous years.
Anti-tobacco programs work. The statistics are unambiguous. Tobacco settlement money has been well-spent in North Dakota, and the CDC and others recognize the state’s success. That’s good news.
Forum editorials represent the opinion of Forum management and the newspaper’s Editorial Board

Grand Forks Herald: Report: North Dakota only state spending enough on tobacco prevention

A report released this week argues almost every state in the country is not spending enough money on tobacco prevention and cessation programs—every state, that is, except for North Dakota.
The report, released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, focuses in part on the billions of dollars states have received since they settled lawsuits against major tobacco companies in 1998. With $10 million set aside for fiscal year 2016, North Dakota is the only state to spend at levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and was one of five states to spend at least 50 percent of what the CDC recommends.
“It’s so frustrating because it’s such a critical investment, and we’re talking about such a small amount of money,” said John Schachter, director of state communications for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “When there’s a pot from which to draw from logically—tobacco taxes and the settlement—as we say, it’s a no-brainer.”
States spent as much as $717.2 million on tobacco prevention programs in fiscal year 2008, but that dropped during the recession and bottomed out at $459.5 million in 2013, according to the campaign’s report. Spending will reach $468 million in fiscal year 2016, a fraction of the estimated $25.8 billion they will collect in settlement funds and tobacco taxes, though the budgets for two states were not yet available.
Tobacco companies spend about $9.6 billion a year on marketing, according to the campaign’s report.
“We believe states should use (settlement) payments to fund tobacco cessation and underage tobacco prevention programs at levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control,” Brian May, a spokesman for tobacco giant Philip Morris, wrote in an email to the Herald.
While tobacco companies cannot advertise on television or the radio, Schacter said “it’s pretty clear the industry is out there in force.” He said the industry spends most of its marketing dollars at “point of sale,” such as displays at convenience stores and gas stations.
“The states still know it’s an issue, but for whatever reason, they’re deciding to spend the money elsewhere,” Schachter said.

N.D. in the lead

The campaign’s report highlights North Dakota as an example for the rest of the states to follow, citing a drop in high school student smoking rates in recent years.
But North Dakota hasn’t always been a leader in tobacco prevention spending. In fiscal year 2009, it spent just $3.1 million on those programs, or one-third of CDC-recommended funding. That changed with the passing of a measure in 2008 requiring a portion of the settlement dollars be used to reduce tobacco use.
“The settlement did not dictate how the money from the settlement was spent, but it did point out that the settlement was entered into because of the unacceptable behavior of the tobacco industry,” said Jeanne Prom, executive director of the North Dakota Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy.
North Dakota’s tobacco tax revenue is not used for prevention efforts, she said.
Minnesota will receive $791.7 million in total tobacco revenue in fiscal year 2016 but will spend only $21.5 million on prevention programs, less than half of what the CDC recommends, according to the campaign’s report.
Laura Oliven, the tobacco control manager at the Minnesota Department of Health, called the CDC recommendations “aspirational.” She also pointed out the campaign’s figures don’t capture Blue Cross Blue Shield’s Center for Prevention in Minnesota.
Minnesota’s adult smoking rate has dropped to 14.4 percent, the lowest it has ever recorded, the health department announced in January.
“We do a lot to maximize the funds we have,” Oliven said. “I guess the theme here really is that while we’ve made a lot of great strides, there’s still considerable work to be done.”

Local outcomes

Haley Thorson, a tobacco prevention coordinator at the Grand Forks Public Health Department, said tobacco settlement dollars helped fund a study asking residents about second-hand smoke. She called that a “pivotal piece of information” in Grand Forks passing a law in 2010 that outlawed smoking in bars, casinos and truck stops.
“That policy was passed by the City Council because we really did have the pulse of how the community supported that policy,” she said.
North Dakota passed a similar statewide law in 2012.
The health department receives about $300,000 annually from the Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy, or BreatheND. Thorson said it focuses much of its efforts on tobacco-related policies.
“We used to go into schools and educate kids on the harms of tobacco use, but the better bang for our buck is to establish a comprehensive tobacco-free school policy that allows them to be educated in an environment where they’re not exposed to tobacco use,” she said.
Those efforts appear to be working.
The percentage of North Dakota high school students who smoked at least once in the past month plunged to 11.7 percent this year after hovering around 20 percent for the eight previous years, according to survey results provided by Thorson.
“For the states that aren’t spending anything or next to nothing, they need to see results like these,” Thorson said.

States Most Impacted by Tobacco Do Least to Reduce Smoking’s Toll

From Parnership for Drug-Free Kids
States most impacted by tobacco use often do the least to reduce the toll of smoking, according to an analysis by USA Today. Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, West Virginia and Mississippi are doing the worst job in terms of tobacco control, the newspaper found.
USA Today found big tobacco-growing states, including Kentucky, Georgia and Tennessee, have the poorest and sickest residents, but spend less than one-fifth of the federal government’s recommended minimum for tobacco education and enforcement.
States hardest hit by tobacco use are the least likely to restrict smoking in restaurants and workplaces, the analysis found. These states impose penalties of $100 or less on businesses that sell tobacco to children, compared with $10,000 in states with the most aggressive enforcement.
Tobacco taxes in states with the most smokers are 60 cents or less, compared with $4.35 in New York and $3.75 in Rhode Island, the newspaper found.
USA Today created two scores for states. States’ “impact score” combined youth and adult smoking rates with public perception about the risks of smoking. States’ “aggressiveness score” combined cigarette taxes, smoking bans, how state spending compares with federal recommendations, ad restrictions, and penalties on cigarette sales to young people.
The states that scored high on aggressiveness and low on tobacco impact included Hawaii, New York and Utah. States scoring low on aggressiveness and high on tobacco impact included Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, West Virginia and Mississippi.
According to Brian King, a Deputy Director in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office of Smoking and Health, the most effective ways to reduce smoking are to regulate it, increase cigarette taxes, run powerful anti-tobacco campaigns and adequately fund tobacco control efforts. He notes that government anti-smoking efforts are “outgunned” by the tobacco industry, which spends about $1 million an hour advertising tobacco.

STAT: E-cigarettes widely seen as harmful in STAT-Harvard poll

WASHINGTON — Most Americans believe electronic cigarettes are harmful to people’s health, according to a new national poll — even though scientists have not reached a consensus on the risks of the increasingly popular products.
The results of the poll, by STAT and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, could bolster the Food and Drug Administration as it moves to regulate e-cigarettes for the first time. There is solid support for a broad range of government restrictions among both Democrats and Republicans, with virtually no partisan differences to be found.
E-cigarettes have been around only since 2004 — too little time for researchers to have completed definitive studies on their health effects — but already they are more popular among teenagers than conventional cigarettes.
Manufacturers market the products as safer than tobacco cigarettes and as an effective way to help people stop smoking. The poll results, however, suggest that the public isn’t buying this pitch.

Read the full poll results here

E-cigarette users don’t inhale cancer-causing tobacco smoke. Instead, the devices produce a vapor from heated liquid nicotine. For many public health experts, though, the concern is that they still contain nicotine — which is addictive — and may expose users to various toxic chemicals.
Americans do think they’re less dangerous than tobacco cigarettes, but that doesn’t mean they think the products are safe. The survey found that 65 percent of adults believe e-cigarettes are harmful to the people who use them. That’s less than the 96 percent who say tobacco cigarettes are harmful, but more than the 58 percent who say the same thing about marijuana.
Those results appear to be the main reason the public is ready to embrace regulations that would treat e-cigarettes largely like tobacco cigarettes, including rules that go beyond what are actively being considered at the federal level.
“They believe it’s less harmful than tobacco, but they do think it is harmful, and that sets off all the other answers,” said Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy and political analysis at Harvard who directed the poll.

Roughly 9 out of 10 Americans support banning the sale of e-cigarettes to minors under age 18 — a law already passed in most states. A similar number favor requiring warning labels stating that e-cigarettes contain nicotine.
About 7 out of 10 say people shouldn’t be allowed to use e-cigarettes indoors in public places like restaurants and workplaces, and 6 out of 10 say the government should ban e-cigarette ads on TV, just as it bans ads for tobacco cigarettes.
Even the biggest partisan differences are slight. The warning labels on e-cigarette packages are supported by 98 percent of Democrats and 87 percent of Republicans.
And on taxes — a subject that usually sets off food fights in Washington — there is solid support from both parties: 63 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Democrats say they support taxing e-cigarettes in the same way that tobacco cigarettes are taxed.
The results suggest that Americans have largely made up their minds on how e-cigarettes should be treated, and that they’re using tobacco cigarettes as their frame of reference — even as scientists are still trying to determine what the health consequences of e-cigarettes are.
“For a new product … you wouldn’t have expected that people would have reached as firm a judgment about this as they have,” said Blendon. On the proposed policies the poll asked about, he added, “their responses are nearly identical to what you find asking about tobacco cigarettes.”
That’s how Anna Glasscock, a Republican retiree who lives near Springfield, Ill., decided her views on e-cigarettes. She’s a former smoker who knows the health risks of tobacco and said e-cigarettes “shouldn’t even exist” because “any addictions are not good.”
Glasscock, one of the people in the poll who agreed to a follow-up interview, said e-cigarettes should be regulated and taxed — she considers it a “sin tax.” Even though e-cigarettes are different from tobacco cigarettes, she said, “I don’t see that replacing one with the other makes any difference.”
Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Association, the main advocacy group for e-cigarette makers, blamed the poll results on “unethical propaganda campaigns” against e-cigarettes that have led to “a confused populace.”
“This poll is not measuring public opinion, but the effectiveness of a well-funded corporate strategy to destroy a category that is eroding a cash cow for Big Pharma,” he said.
But Vince Willmore, a spokesman for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said it was “not surprising that the public wants to apply common-sense regulations to e-cigarettes” and urged the Obama administration to issue the FDA’s e-cigarette regulations as soon as possible.
The one issue the public is split on is whether to ban the sale of flavored nicotine cartridges — an issue that doesn’t have any parallel with tobacco cigarettes. Fewer than half of Americans think that’s a good idea.
Supporters argue that flavored cartridges attract young people to start using e-cigarettes, and that they will later move on to tobacco cigarettes.
The telephone poll of 1,014 adults was conducted Oct. 7-11 and has a margin of error of 3.7 percentage points.
John Dunn of Garland, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, said he has used e-cigarettes to quit smoking tobacco cigarettes. But a friend who tried the same thing got hooked on e-cigarettes.
“I think they’re pretty different, but also I’ve seen people get on the vapors and not be able to stop,” said Dunn, 33, a Democrat. He’s in favor of some regulation, including warning labels: “They should know they might get addicted.”
E-cigarette makers say that e-cigarettes help smokers quit, and there is some evidence from a small number of studies that they do — although scientists say more research is needed. The survey found that 38 percent of Americans believe e-cigarettes can help people quit smoking, but that 47 percent don’t think they’re effective.
At the same time, public health advocates — and government regulators such as the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — have strong concerns that e-cigarettes serve as a “gateway” for non-smokers to start using tobacco products. More than half of Americans — 56 percent — believe e-cigarettes make teenagers more likely to try tobacco cigarettes, according to the poll.
At a panel discussion on e-cigarettes last month, CDC Director Tom Frieden declared that e-cigarettes are “highly addictive” and that the goal should be to “keep kids away from all forms of nicotine.” The CDC reported earlier this year that e-cigarette use tripled among high-school and middle-school students from 2013 to 2014.
The FDA is preparing to issue a final version of a rule that would extend the agency’s authority to regulate e-cigarettes. The proposal, recently submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget for final revisions, would likely require pre-market reviews of e-cigarettes — a process that is used to prove whether potentially risky products are safe. The FDA is also expected to ban e-cigarette sales to minors under age 18 and require warning labels stating that the products contain nicotine. The regulation drew 135,000 comments from the public when the original proposal was published.
The agency is also considering a separate proposal that could require broader warnings about the dangers of nicotine — especially accidental exposure to infants and children — and possibly require child-resistant packages for e-liquids, which are liquid nicotine combined with colorings and flavorings.
Some in Congress, however, are trying to prevent the FDA from taking action that might damage the industry. A House spending bill includes a provision by Representative Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) that would keep the FDA from requiring premarket review for e-cigarettes that are already being sold in stores. Aderholt’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
Even if much of the public is ready to regulate e-cigarettes, Aderholt will find at least some support from those who don’t think they are dangerous enough to need new rules.
“They’re not a cigarette. The only thing you’re inhaling is vapor,” said Chris Grieser, a Republican from Cheyenne, Wyo. who participated in the survey. “That’s no different from standing over a pot of boiling water.”
Researchers aren’t so sure about that, though. One study earlier this year found that e-cigarette vapor can contain cancer-causing formaldehyde at levels far higher than those found in tobacco cigarettes.
The original e-cigarettes were manufactured by small companies, but when it became clear that they were catching on, the more established tobacco companies such as RJ Reynolds and British American Tobacco bought out or partnered with some of these smaller businesses, or launched their own divisions. This has given more clout to industry groups such as the American Vaping Association.
This is the first of a series of monthly polls being conducted by STAT and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Devils Lake Park Board: Tobacco use policy to be drawn up

The Devils Lake Park Board is one step closer to solidifying guidelines for the use of tobacco products at its outdoor facilities.

By Harry Lipsiea, Devils Lake Journal Reporter

The Devils Lake Park Board is one step closer to solidifying guidelines for the use of tobacco products at its outdoor facilities.

At Monday’s regularly-scheduled meeting, the board voted unanimously to have director Terry Wallace write up a proposed policy and present it to the board for its approval.

Last month, Liz Bonney, Ramsey County Tobacco Prevention Coordinator with Lake Region District Health, brought the idea of a policy to limit areas in which tobacco products could be used at city parks.

The board looked at models currently placed in communities throughout the state of North Dakota. Ultimately, one seemed to jump out to board members as a policy that could fit well in Devils Lake.

“I like what Williston has done with its policy,” board member Kale Stromme stated. “It’s pretty cut and dry specifically when it talks about banning cigarettes in any area where youth are playing.”

The board agreed noting that the policy should include a ban of tobacco products near playground equipment. The board also felt that at baseball and softball diamonds, tobacco will be off limits during youth activities.

The only concern about such a policy was how to enforce the rules.

“There is no way to police the use of tobacco products at the park 100 percent of the time,” Bonney stated.

She pointed out that the policy would inform the public of rules in place. Bonney feels signage, to potentially be provided by Lake Region District Health, would be extremely beneficial.

“I don’t expect anyone to be out there at all times and stop what they are doing if they see someone smoking. That’s not realistic,” Bonney added. “This is a self-policing policy. I think the public will be compliant once they know there are guidelines in place.”

The board then voted for Wallace to form a policy similar to the one in Williston. It is expected to be presented for board approval at a future meeting.

In other business, the park board looked over an initial agreement proposal for the Creel Bay Golf Course. The golf course committee is set meet to go over items on a one-on-one basis later this week.

Also, the newly-added viewing area at the Mike Dosch Memorial Pool has been a hit, manager David Kerlin told the board.

“We have a gotten a lot of positive comments on it,” he stated.

E-cig shop fails smoke-free compliance check

By Anne Millerbernd, Fargo Forum

FARGO – One of five Fargo businesses failed a smoke-free law compliance check Thursday.

Fargo police checked the shops to ensure that electronic cigarettes weren’t being used in a prohibited area, and E-Cig Empire at 4900 13th Ave. S. failed, according to a release from Fargo Cass Public Health.

It’s the second time the business has failed a compliance probe within 12 months. A report was sent to the Cass County State’s Attorney’s office for consideration of charges.

People who smoke in prohibited areas can be fined up to $50. Business owners who fail to comply can be fined up to $100 on the first violation, $200 the second time and up to $500 each time after within the same year. A business owner could also lose his or her permit or license.

The state’s smoke-free law includes vaping and Fargo police conduct compliance checks quarterly or on a need basis.

LA Times: California Senate votes to restrict e-cigarettes as tobacco products


The state Senate on Tuesday approved a bill that would ban electronic cigarettes from restaurants, theaters and other public places in California where smoking is prohibited to address health concerns.

Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) said his bill would treat e-cigarettes, also known as “vaping” devices, as tobacco products because they often use nicotine and are popular with teenagers.

Youth e-cigarette use rising; heart group calls for regulation

“Of great concern is that the fastest growth segment of new users is among middle and high school students who are now smoking electronic cigarettes,” Leno told his colleagues. “They are advertised on television. They are advertised on billboards.”

The measure, which would also subject e-cigarettes to the same licensing requirements as tobacco, was approved by a 24-12 vote, with Sen. Jeff Stone of Murrietta the only Republican to vote for the bill.

Senate Republican leader Bob Huff of Diamond Bar said e-cigarettes work on vapor that does not spread as much as tobacco smoke, so they should be treated differently in public.

“E-cigs are used by people trying to kick the tobacco habit,” Huff said. He voted against the bill, saying the state should wait until the federal government takes action.

Stone noted that his mother was a former smoker who died of cancer. He said the tobacco and vaping industries are marketing e-cigarettes to young people with flavors including watermelon, tutti frutti and cotton candy while the vapor has nicotine derived from tobacco. He said “vaping” is a gateway to cigarette smoking.

“Now we are exposing a whole new generation of millenials to this fashionable way of smoking tobacco in a way that is going to jeopardize their lives,” Stone said. The measure next goes to the Assembly for consideration.