SB 1571
Adds a definition of "nicotine" and expands the definition of "tobacco products."
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
93%
Oppose
7%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
Senate Bill 1571 clarifies the definitions of "nicotine" and "tobacco products" to more comprehensively cover related products. It expands the definition of ‘tobacco products’ to include inhalant delivery systems and oral nicotine pouches, while also specifying that certain inhalant delivery systems used for tobacco cessation are exempt. The bill also establishes civil penalties for selling tobacco or inhalant delivery systems to minors and requires specific labeling and packaging standards.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of Senate Bill 1571 urge the committee to regulate nicotine pouches due to their addictive nature, ease of concealment, and potential harm to youth. They emphasize the need for common sense regulation to protect Oregon's kids from flavored, discreet, and easy-to-hide products that can lead to widespread use among adolescents. Advocates highlight the lack of state regulation in Oregon, allowing these products to be sold widely without restrictions, and express concern about the industry's history of using flavors and marketing tactics to attract young users. Many testifiers share personal experiences with the devastating effects of tobacco addiction on themselves and their families, underscoring the need for stronger regulation to prevent Big Tobacco from targeting youth and marginalized communities.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of SB 1571 express concerns that the legislation will overly restrict age-restricted product sales, potentially harming businesses and hindering progress in reducing minors' access to these products. Many argue that Oregon's existing regulatory framework is working and should be allowed to continue improving without new rules, citing education, enforcement, and collaboration as key drivers of progress. Additionally, some opposition due to concerns about increased taxes and additional regulations, while others emphasize the need for a comprehensive approach to address nicotine addiction and public health risks associated with age-restricted products.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.