FDA Response from Missouri Senator Roy Blunt on FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act

[trentenmarschel]

So I've sent some email to my state senators a few months ago using one of the filled out templates. I just now got a response from Roy Blunt, and I wanted to ask if anyone else has gotten responses from their senators and if they are similar to this one. Here is the full email.

Roy Blunt

Dear Trenten:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Deeming Authority Clarification Act.


As you know, the FDA finalized a rule in May 2016 extending their regulatory authority over e-cigarettes, cigars, and other products. The rule would specifically require these newly regulated tobacco product manufacturers to register all products and ingredients with the FDA, market new tobacco products only after FDA review, and provide health warnings on products.​

The Deeming Authority Clarification Act would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the FDA to make the grandfather date for newly deemed tobacco products begin when the FDA regulation was finalized, as opposed to implementing the regulation from the first effective grandfather date of February 15, 2007.
​

Currently, the bill is pending in the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. Should this legislation come before the full Senate for consideration, I will be sure to keep your thoughts and concerns in mind.​

Again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to continuing our conversation on Facebook and Twitter about the important issues facing Missouri and the country. I also encourage you to visit my website to learn more about where I stand on the issues and sign-up for my e-newsletter.​

Sincere regards,

Roy Blunt
United States Senator

 

[Kent C]

So I've sent some email to my state senators a few months ago using one of the filled out templates. I just now got a response from Roy Blunt, and I wanted to ask if anyone else has gotten responses from their senators and if they are similar to this one. Here is the full email.

Roy Blunt

....​

The Deeming Authority Clarification Act would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the FDA to make the grandfather date for newly deemed tobacco products begin when the FDA regulation was finalized, as opposed to implementing the regulation from the first effective grandfather date of February 15, 2007.
​

Currently, the bill is pending in the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. Should this legislation come before the full Senate for consideration, I will be sure to keep your thoughts and concerns in mind.​

...

​

Roy Blunt
United States Senator

While he doesn't 'show his hand' as far as supporting or not supporting the bill.... he (or someone on his staff) seems to fully understand issue - something that many other Senators and Representatives don't seem to grasp, where what they write has no relation to what you wrote to them :- )

 

[WillyZee]

the middle 3 parts seem to be a generic Gov canned response.

 

[trentenmarschel]

the middle 3 parts seem to be a generic Gov canned response.

Yea, I suspected some of it was generic. That's why I wanted to see if anyone else has heard from him.

 

[Pamawoman]

This is what I got yesterday from Bill Nelson. Short, sweet and pretty much meaningless. I usually get the same from Rubio. Rubio hasn't bothered to respond in awhile.

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 1136, the FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act. I understand your concerns and appreciate your taking the time to be involved and informed about matters important to Florida and our nation.
Introduced by Representatives Cole and Sanford Bishop, this legislation is pending before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Please know that I will keep your views in mind if this issue is considered before the full Senate. If you have any other concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.


Sincerely,

Bill Nelson

 

[dyanaprajna]

Generic, meaningless responses. Our tax dollars at work, our great electorate doing a wonderful job (and...end sarcasm).

 

[DC2]

Standard political spewage.

We are aware of this issue.
We appreciate your concern.
We'll keep your views in mind.

Meanwhile, it's quite like not nobody never read it.
Probably got a robot to scan for buzzwords to automatically pull up the desired reply.


Yeah, that's right, I used a triple-negative.
Even I don't know what it meant.

 

[halbgott]

Good for you reaching out.
Not impressed by the response of information you probably already knew on his end. It looks like a pretyped response written by a lawyer to me. You think these guys would get by now that people can see when they dodge a question. If he felt strongly about your concerns he would have agreed.

Just my opinion.

 

[WillyZee]

Good for you reaching out.
Not impressed by the response of information you probably already knew on his end. It looks like a pretyped response written by a lawyer to me. You think these guys would get by now that people can see when they dodge a question. If he felt strongly about your concerns he would have agreed.

Just my opinion.

listen to Justin Trudeau ... he is the master of blah blah blah.


Sent via iPhone

 

[retired1]

Good for you reaching out.
Not impressed by the response of information you probably already knew on his end. It looks like a pretyped response written by a lawyer to me. You think these guys would get by now that people can see when they dodge a question. If he felt strongly about your concerns he would have agreed.

Just my opinion.

The Senator never even saw the letter. 99.999999999999% of all correspondence is read and replied to by staff flunkies.

 

[JustWondering1]

So I've sent some email to my state senators a few months ago using one of the filled out templates. I just now got a response from Roy Blunt, and I wanted to ask if anyone else has gotten responses from their senators and if they are similar to this one. Here is the full email.

Roy Blunt

Dear Trenten:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Deeming Authority Clarification Act.


As you know, the FDA finalized a rule in May 2016 extending their regulatory authority over e-cigarettes, cigars, and other products. The rule would specifically require these newly regulated tobacco product manufacturers to register all products and ingredients with the FDA, market new tobacco products only after FDA review, and provide health warnings on products.​

The Deeming Authority Clarification Act would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the FDA to make the grandfather date for newly deemed tobacco products begin when the FDA regulation was finalized, as opposed to implementing the regulation from the first effective grandfather date of February 15, 2007.
​

Currently, the bill is pending in the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. Should this legislation come before the full Senate for consideration, I will be sure to keep your thoughts and concerns in mind.​

Again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to continuing our conversation on Facebook and Twitter about the important issues facing Missouri and the country. I also encourage you to visit my website to learn more about where I stand on the issues and sign-up for my e-newsletter.​

Sincere regards,

Roy Blunt
United States Senator

I got a very similar letter from my Congressman in Texas. The politicians are masters of using a lot of words to say absolutely nothing!

 

[zoiDman]

The Senator never even saw the letter. 99.999999999999% of all correspondence is read and replied to by staff flunkies.

Nope, He didn't read or see that Letter.

But somewhere a Staffer just Check a Box on a Screen. And in a db the Pro e-Cigarette field was just Increased by 1 unit.

And later when some e-Cigarette Legislation hits the Senate floor, the Senator asks a Staffer to please do a db Report to show what type of Correspondence He has received regarding e-Cigarettes.

Both Pro. And Con.

It's Easy for a Rep to Not get behind things or to Not Co-Author a Bill when Very Few contact Him/Her. It's even Easier when the Majority of correspondences are Against it.

And He/She Doesn't need to read a Single Letter/e-Mail to see that.

 

[retired1]

Provided, of course, the staffer does their due diligence, does their job correctly and doesn't pad one side and ignore the other.

 

[zoiDman]

Provided, of course, the staffer does their due diligence, does their job correctly and doesn't pad one side and ignore the other.

True. But that goes with All topics/issues. And padding can work Both ways.

I have run into a few Die Hard Ant-Vape people before. Not say'n I haven't. But the Overwhelming Majority of people I know/have run into really Don't Care what you or I do.

I think the Media tends to Blow things out of Proportion.

 

[trentenmarschel]

True. But that goes with All topics/issues. And padding can work Both ways.

I have run into a few Die Hard Ant-Vape people before. Not say'n I haven't. But the Overwhelming Majority of people I know/have run into really Don't Care what you or I do.

I think the Media tends to Blow things out of Proportion.

Agreed. It doesn't help when the media is against us. My doctor told me last week that she would like it if I were to stop vaping. She said that it's not as safe as people originally thought. I told her that I've heard those claims, and I did a research paper about vaping last semester, and I don't make E-juice that contains diacetyl or any other dangerous chemicals including sugar. This is one reason I am glad I make my own juice now. Plus it's a lot cheaper than store/online bought juice.

 

[zoiDman]

Agreed. It doesn't help when the media is against us. ...

Whereas Science should be driving the Conversation about the Health and Safety of e-Cigarettes, unfortunately it is a Mainly Biased Media that is in the USA.

In many (Most?) aspects today, the Media does Not Report the News. They Make/Invent the News. For the purpose of Financial and or Political gain.

 

[mcol]

Yea, I suspected some of it was generic. That's why I wanted to see if anyone else has heard from him.

Yeah sounds almost exactly like the response I got. Claire on the other
hand never bothered to respond at all.

 

[trentenmarschel]

Yeah sounds almost exactly like the response I got. Claire on the other
hand never bothered to respond at all.

Same here I never heard back from her.

 

[KODIAK (TM)]

My doctor told me last week that she would like it if I were to stop vaping. She said that it's not as safe as people originally thought.

My doc of 20 years did the same thing a while back. I called her bluff by giving her a summary of PG, VG, flavoring, "popcorn lung", and debunked that silly-assed formaldehyde test. I asked her what her opinion is based on and what she had read on the subject? She didn't want to admit her knowledge was rooted in all the media heresy.

Got up. Said good-bye. Walked out of her office. Told her I'd find someone else and to not bill me for this visit.

These days I don't tell anyone that doesn't know me that I vape. Especially those people poking and prodding my body. Once I do they'll blame everything they find on vaping.

 

[trentenmarschel]

My doc of 20 years did the same thing a while back. I called her bluff by giving her a summary of PG, VG, flavoring, "popcorn lung", and debunked that silly-assed formaldehyde test. I asked her what her opinion is based on and what she had read on the subject? She didn't want to admit her knowledge was rooted in all the media heresy.

Got up. Said good-bye. Walked out of her office. Told her I'd find someone else and to not bill me for this visit.

These days I don't tell anyone that doesn't know me that I vape. Especially those people poking and prodding my body. Once I do they'll blame everything they find on vaping.

Agreed. Some institutions don't need to know certain things like insurance providers for example.