Democrats blast feds' delays in e-cigarette, tobacco rules

[DCBD]

Democrats fight back and want deeming regulations to go into effect immediately. From the article:

The senators also urged the Administration to make the finalized rule as strong as possible by explicitly banning the use of flavorings and marketing to appeal to children, and by ensuring that the “grandfather” date is not moved from February 15, 2007.​

@Endor, get your hard-hat on.

 

[nicnik]

Democrats fight back and want deeming regulations to go into effect immediately. From the article:

The senators also urged the Administration to make the finalized rule as strong as possible by explicitly banning the use of flavorings and marketing to appeal to children, and by ensuring that the “grandfather” date is not moved from February 15, 2007.​

@Endor, get your hard-hat on.

The article says that if the grandfather date is changed as is being discussed, products currently on the market "would be exempted forever from reviews to ensure that the products are safe to use." That's not true, and the Democrats haven't made that claim, as far as I know.

Now let's see how many Republicans will take on this fight against the Democrats. They'd be sacrificing some campaign funding, but I believe the political benefits will greatly outweigh the political damage if they do it right. This could potentially get really interesting here on in. I'm hoping for a very big fight.

 

[Frenchfry1942]

Jumps ship...

 

[DCBD]

The article says that if the grandfather date is changed as is being discussed, products currently on the market "would be exempted forever from reviews to ensure that the products are safe to use." That's not true, and the Democrats haven't made that claim, as far as I know.

Now let's see how many Republicans will take on this fight against the Democrats. They'd be sacrificing some campaign funding, but I believe the political benefits will greatly outweigh the political damage if they do it right. This could potentially get really interesting here on in. I'm hoping for a very big fight.

Yep, I've been waiting for this for some time. I didn't expect it to turn into a political/partisan issue, but now that it's shaping up to be, I can't think of two better contenders for a big fight!

 

[azb8496]

I wish this wasn't a fight of parties. This just goes to support the theory that even when it comes to millions of people's lives; money, power, and thus, partisanship takes priority in our governmental system.

 

[nicnik]

I wish this wasn't a fight of parties. This just goes to support the theory that even when it comes to millions of people's lives; money, power, and thus, partisanship takes priority in our governmental system.

Both parties get anti-vaping funds. The Democrats get more.

It's still a situation of both parties being corrupt regarding THR, with the Democrats being a lot worse. However, there're pro-vaping attitudes gaining ground in the Republican Party, especially nationally. I think the Republicans will unite on our side, soon. Not much hope for the Democrats without them first taking a huge beating over it, unfortunately.

A partisan fight would be better than both parties fighting us. I'll take one party on our side over none.

 

[azb8496]

"A partisan fight would be better than both parties fighting us."

Individuals thinking on their own pretense would be better. Our supportive evidence would make opposition a footnote.

 

[nicnik]

"A partisan fight would be better than both parties fighting us."

Individuals thinking on their own pretense would be better. Our supportive evidence would make opposition a footnote.

Definitely part of what I envision in a better world.

 

[DCBD]

"A partisan fight would be better than both parties fighting us."

Individuals thinking on their own pretense would be better. Our supportive evidence would make opposition a footnote.

I would like to see this too, but I'm a realist. The system is corrupt and there's not much any of us can do about it. I've just learned to live with it.

Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist.

-- George Carlin​

 

[azb8496]

Definitely part of what I envision in a better world.

I agree with what you've said. I just want to be clear that we should be aimed at not just our immediate cause, but also the roots that triggered our resentment. Hence the "wish"full thinking. In our current reality, I agree with you completely.

 

[azb8496]

I would like to see this too, but I'm a realist. The system is corrupt and there's not much any of us can do about it. I've just learned to live with it.

Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist.

-- George Carlin​

Germans learned to live with their apathy in the 1930's as well.

 

[snork]

I tweeted Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell a little message. Somebody told me the only way to get anything done is to tweet.
I feel so powerful.

 

[nicnik]

I tweeted Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell a little message. Somebody told me the only way to get anything done is to tweet.
I feel so powerful.

I think tweeting is a powerful tool for vaping activists. It would be difficult for me to take part there, but the chaotic atmosphere on twitter would be very suitable for me. I'm thankful there are so many vaping supporters doing a great job on twitter.

 

[DCBD]

I tweeted Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell a little message. Somebody told me the only way to get anything done is to tweet.
I feel so powerful.

Why didn't I think of that?!? Now, where's that thing that does the tweeting stuff...

 

[Grimwald]

It only seems to be partisan at the national level. At the local level, both parties are rushing to find tax revenue at our expense. Just going thru this is deeply red Kansas. I still believe that the key to success, if it's possible, is informing and educating voters regardless of party.

 

[snork]

Why didn't I think of that?!? Now, where's that thing that does the tweeting stuff...

I figured it would make some sort of impact. After all, how many tweets could the HHS Secretary get?

 

[DC2]

I still believe that the key to success, if it's possible, is informing and educating voters regardless of party.

Damn skippy.

 

[Kent C]

It only seems to be partisan at the national level. At the local level, both parties are rushing to find tax revenue at our expense. Just going thru this is deeply red Kansas. I still believe that the key to success, if it's possible, is informing and educating voters regardless of party.

Much has been made of this, and to a certain extent this is true. There are factions of both parties who think they know what's best for others - it's rampant in one party and there is a faction of puritanical types in the other. Much of the initial state and local legislation/laws re: ecigs, were to stop sale to minors and in that case, there were officials from both parties who advocated the ban on the sale to minors - hence, it was 'said' that both parties are "against ecigs' when in fact it was both parties were against sale to minors. In fact, there were Democrats who didn't think the sale to minor legislation/laws 'went far enough'. So some Dems didn't vote for such laws. That didn't mean they were 'pro-ecigs' anymore than Republicans that voted just for sale to minors were 'against ecigs'.

At the national level, there is no question - it is quite clear with every 'letter' from Representatives to the FDA or HHS.

 

[Endor]

Democrats fight back and want deeming regulations to go into effect immediately. From the article:

The senators also urged the Administration to make the finalized rule as strong as possible by explicitly banning the use of flavorings and marketing to appeal to children, and by ensuring that the “grandfather” date is not moved from February 15, 2007.​

@Endor, get your hard-hat on.

Hard hat applied.... I'm going in.

 

[Endor]

Much has been made of this, and to a certain extent this is true. There are factions of both parties who think they know what's best for others - it's rampant in one party and there is a faction of puritanical types in the other. Much of the initial state and local legislation/laws re: ecigs, were to stop sale to minors and in that case, there were officials from both parties who advocated the ban on the sale to minors - hence, it was 'said' that both parties are "against ecigs' when in fact it was both parties were against sale to minors. In fact, there were Democrats who didn't think the sale to minor legislation/laws 'went far enough'. So some Dems didn't vote for such laws. That didn't mean they were 'pro-ecigs' anymore than Republicans that voted just for sale to minors were 'against ecigs'.

At the national level, there is no question - it is quite clear with every 'letter' from Representatives to the FDA or HHS.

The letter referenced in this article is a bit interesting from a political perspective.

You have a Republican-led effort to move the grandfather date for e-cigarettes, and a group of Democrats that blast that effort specifically in the letter. Ok, you can chalk that up to partisan politics, especially with a presidential election ramping up ("See, those evil Republicans want to kill your children by addicting them to tobacco! Hilllary for President!"). But, in the same breath, they lambaste the current administration (currently the same party) for not doing enough. Of course, Obama is lame duck.... so I'm guessing they are distancing themselves and giving Hillary a talking point about "saving the children" on the campaign trail?

Either way, it is sickening that e-cigarettes are becoming such a political pawn.