SE, NJoy vs FDA -- Discussion

[JustJulie]

It's good news, but this battle is far from being over.

Sadly, you're right Jerry . . . we've still got a fight on our hands.

The truth of Jerry's words is evident in what's happening in New York--unless you're living in a cave, you've heard that New York is at it again. Last year, NY fought a proposed bill that would ban the sale of e-cigarettes to minors AND adults. It was successfully stalled, and you'd think that would be the end of it . . . but the same bill has popped up again, one in the Assembly and one in the Senate.

Tuesday, 1/25/01, the Assembly Health Committee will be considering the Assembly version of the bill. This is a rare opportunity to actually stop a bill in its tracks, before it gets out of committee and before it gets voted on by the full Assembly (the equivalent of the House of Representatives in most states).

So I'm going to do something I've never done before on this thread--I'm going to ask a favor . . .

Folks have been emailing, calling, and faxing the members of the Health Committee. But it turns out the state's website wasn't properly updated, and four names were omitted from the list. We just found out about it late this afternoon, too late for most of us to call.

And now we come to the favor . . .

Christopher S. Friend
Albany Office
Room 720
Legislative Office Bldg.
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4538
fax 607 348 1500 (office says no Albany fax, they get from local office via email)

Andy Goodell
Albany Office
LOB 547
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4511
fax 518 455 4328

Edward P. Ra
Albany Office
LOB 544
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4627
fax 518 455 4643

Andrew P. Raia
Albany Office
LOB 629
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5952
fax 518 455 5804

Those are the names that were left off the list. If you don't have time to email/fax/call the full list provided at CASAA.org , would you please take a moment to email/fax/call the four people listed above? It would be extraordinarily helpful--especially phone calls--because they haven't really heard from us yet.

I know folks are busy, and time is short (the Committee is meeting at noon EST), but whatever help you can offer would be great.

The first call sometimes feels kind of awkward, but after the first one, you feel like an old pro. I've called everyone on the list (other than the four that were just added), and I was pleasantly surprised at how nice the staffers/secretaries were who answered the phone. Even more surprising, quite a few asked questions and seemed genuinely interested in what I had to say.

Here's the script I used:

Good morning. My name is _______________. I am calling to let the Assemblyman/Assemblywoman know that I am against Proposed Assembly Bill A01468, which would ban the sale of electronic cigarettes to adults. I would like the Assemblyman/Assemblywoman to propose an amendment to the bill which would remove Section 2, so that electronic cigarettes cannot be sold to minors, but adults of legal smoking age will still be able to purchase electronic cigarettes.

Electronic cigarettes are not smoking cessation devices. They are an alternative to smoking, an alternative that has worked so well that I have not smoked in ___________ months/years.

I am not a New York resident, but I wanted to share my views with the Assemblyman/Assemblywoman because I purchase my supplies from a company located in New York, and I would be devastated if that company were forced to close.

Thank you so much for taking the time to talk with me, and I appreciate your sharing my concerns with the Assemblyman/Assemblywoman.

Of course, it would vary a bit depending on the interest level of the person on the other end of the phone. Like I said, I had several great conversations, and I even suggested going to the CASAA site for more information. It helps that the CASAA site is so easy to rattle off . . . CASAA.org

Feel free to share your experiences, your thoughts . . . I just gave my script in case someone was feeling at a total loss.

We're finding that legislators are confused about e-cigarettes as smoking cessation devices . . . they keep hearing us say we quit smoking, and in their mind that means we're a smoking cessation device and need to be approved by the FDA as an NRT. So to avoid confusion, it would be helpful if you talked about SWITCHING rather than QUITTING . . . and then say that since you've switched to e-cigarettes, you haven't smoked. Yeah, I know . . . sounds silly, but if they hear it enough times, maybe they'll get it.

Getting off my soap box now . . . and for those who find the time to help out with some phone calls and faxes Tuesday morning, thank you so much!

And tomorrow, I'll be back to docket watch as usual. As Jerry said, it's not over.

[JustJulie]

Yesss! Great news! So does the case go back to Judge Leon now? I was also thinking about FDA appealing to the Supreme Court...would that be before or after Leon? And, am I remembering right that the SC only deals with constitutional issues? If so, what constitutional issue(s) would NJoy v. FDA present?

The case will go back to Judge Leon unless the FDA appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Seeing as the Supreme Court hears less than 100 cases a year, the chances of it agreeing to hear the case are pretty slim. The Supreme Court does not limit itself only to issues involving the Constitution . . . it also will hear cases involving, for example, interpretation of federal statutes (which is what we have here). Basically, it decides cases that it feels will have far-reaching consequences.

Hope that answers your question.

[Luisa]

Sadly, you're right Jerry . . . we've still got a fight on our hands.

The truth of Jerry's words is evident in what's happening in New York--unless you're living in a cave, you've heard that New York is at it again. Last year, NY fought a proposed bill that would ban the sale of e-cigarettes to minors AND adults. It was successfully stalled, and you'd think that would be the end of it . . . but the same bill has popped up again, one in the Assembly and one in the Senate.

Tuesday, 1/25/01, the Assembly Health Committee will be considering the Assembly version of the bill. This is a rare opportunity to actually stop a bill in its tracks, before it gets out of committee and before it gets voted on by the full Assembly (the equivalent of the House of Representatives in most states).

So I'm going to do something I've never done before on this thread--I'm going to ask a favor . . .

Folks have been emailing, calling, and faxing the members of the Health Committee. But it turns out the state's website wasn't properly updated, and four names were omitted from the list. We just found out about it late this afternoon, too late for most of us to call.

And now we come to the favor . . .

Christopher S. Friend
Albany Office
Room 720
Legislative Office Bldg.
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4538
fax 607 348 1500 (office says no Albany fax, they get from local office via email)

Andy Goodell
Albany Office
LOB 547
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4511
fax 518 455 4328

Edward P. Ra
Albany Office
LOB 544
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-4627
fax 518 455 4643

Andrew P. Raia
Albany Office
LOB 629
Albany, NY 12248
518-455-5952
fax 518 455 5804

Those are the names that were left off the list. If you don't have time to email/fax/call the full list provided at CASAA.org , would you please take a moment to email/fax/call the four people listed above? It would be extraordinarily helpful--especially phone calls--because they haven't really heard from us yet.

I know folks are busy, and time is short (the Committee is meeting at noon EST), but whatever help you can offer would be great.

The first call sometimes feels kind of awkward, but after the first one, you feel like an old pro. I've called everyone on the list (other than the four that were just added), and I was pleasantly surprised at how nice the staffers/secretaries were who answered the phone. Even more surprising, quite a few asked questions and seemed genuinely interested in what I had to say.

Here's the script I used:


Of course, it would vary a bit depending on the interest level of the person on the other end of the phone. Like I said, I had several great conversations, and I even suggested going to the CASAA site for more information. It helps that the CASAA site is so easy to rattle off . . . CASAA.org

Feel free to share your experiences, your thoughts . . . I just gave my script in case someone was feeling at a total loss.

We're finding that legislators are confused about e-cigarettes as smoking cessation devices . . . they keep hearing us say we quit smoking, and in their mind that means we're a smoking cessation device and need to be approved by the FDA as an NRT. So to avoid confusion, it would be helpful if you talked about SWITCHING rather than QUITTING . . . and then say that since you've switched to e-cigarettes, you haven't smoked. Yeah, I know . . . sounds silly, but if they hear it enough times, maybe they'll get it.

Getting off my soap box now . . . and for those who find the time to help out with some phone calls and faxes Tuesday morning, thank you so much!

And tomorrow, I'll be back to docket watch as usual. As Jerry said, it's not over.

You might remove Cucunelli(sp),the Rep from Westchester County. He is no longer on this committee. He is a newly elected Republican in a heavily Democratic District. I had a nice conversation with one of his staffers. Should this bill come out of committee as is,he would probably help us in the future vote.

[freakindahouse]

Hi, all,

In case anyone's interested, ECITA is right behind you on this, and we have been blogging again...

ECITA Blog - UK Vapers

The community over at UKV is still sending letters through for faxing, and I would like to send a HUGE thank you to Julie for processing all our letters, and faxing them to the Assembly.

Keep up the good work guys - if we pull together, we really CAN make a difference!

[PoliticallyIncorrect]

The case will go back to Judge Leon unless the FDA appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Seeing as the Supreme Court hears less than 100 cases a year, the chances of it agreeing to hear the case are pretty slim. The Supreme Court does not limit itself only to issues involving the Constitution . . . it also will hear cases involving, for example, interpretation of federal statutes (which is what we have here). Basically, it decides cases that it feels will have far-reaching consequences.

Hope that answers your question.

That answers some of mine. What I'm still wondering about is the fate now of the seized shipments—not only Njoy's, but all the others.

The FDA must be aware of their chances with the Supreme Court, but might they go in that direction anyway as part of some vindictive scorched-earth strategy? And continue grabbing cartomizers and eGo batteries at their port of entry in the meantime?

[Rosco]

Hi, all,

In case anyone's interested, ECITA is right behind you on this, and we have been blogging again...

ECITA Blog - UK Vapers

The community over at UKV is still sending letters through for faxing, and I would like to send a HUGE thank you to Julie for processing all our letters, and faxing them to the Assembly.

Keep up the good work guys - if we pull together, we really CAN make a difference!

That is Most Excellent. Thank you so much. I love it when everyone can Unite for a cause

[Thulium]

That answers some of mine. What I'm still wondering about is the fate now of the seized shipments—not only Njoy's, but all the others.

The FDA must be aware of their chances with the Supreme Court, but might they go in that direction anyway as part of some vindictive scorched-earth strategy? And continue grabbing cartomizers and eGo batteries at their port of entry in the meantime?

This is only my personal opinion, but I am mostly expecting FDA to petition for a Writ of Certiorari to seek a Supreme Court review as an attempt to further delay the process and distract from the fact that FDA has had authority to promulgate regulations for modified risk tobacco products including e-cigarettes when the Tobacco Act was signed into law two years ago.

[CJsKee]

Yes, thanks, Julie. I tend to agree that the Supremes would probably deny an FDA writ. I also agree, PI, that they'll try anyway!

[mpetva]

This is only my personal opinion, but I am mostly expecting FDA to file a Writ of Certiorari to seek a Supreme Court review as an attempt to further delay the process and distract from the fact that FDA has had authority to promulgate regulations for modified risk tobacco products including e-cigarettes when the Tobacco Act was signed into law two years ago.

"A writ of certiorari is a writ, or order, sent from a higher court to a lower one which orders the lower court to turn over transcripts and documents related to a specific case for review. In general, a writ of certiorari is issued by the highest court in a nation after a request from a petitioner. The decision to grant such a writ is made at judicial discretion."

[Rosco]

I love learning...thanks ya'll.