FDA US House Appropriations Cmte bill would prevent FDA from banning e-cigs now on the market
- Thread starter Bill Godshall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Which in essence is yes, unless the rda maker has a ton of cash and a friend with the FDA. While this is better then the previous option of 2007, I still oppose it. Hardware should have no place in this.
If you give a mouse a cookie... and such
That is how I understood it.
Parallel Appropriation Bills (I think 12 Bills in total for Discretionary spending) in Both the House and the Senate both needing to be Passed by their Respective House.
Then the House and the Senate versions go to a Senate Conference Committee to be have the Differences worked out and be Unified into a Unified House/Senate Appropriation Bill.
Then this Unified Appropriation Bill goes back to the House and Back to the Senate for Passage.
So my Original point was Shouldn't ECF Members contact their Rep in Both the House and the Senate and tell them that they are in Favor of Sec. 747 of the House's Agriculture committee Appropriations Bill?
BTW - If I described the Approval Process incorrectly, please Correct me. I am by No Means a Expert on all this.
Sounds like a good idea to me
Bill did say he would pop back in and update and I am hoping CASAA and those in the more direct knowledge path will give us some guidance what our next best move is too.
Should the grandfather date be moved forward, that will still limit future development for all but those with deep pockets. ...better to have no date limit, if that can be done.
Exactly what I am saying. I do not support this one or the 2007 grandfathering. Both are illogical.
We are not talking about rolled up leafs here. In the context of vaping, this grandfathering nonsense makes no sense.
How would we go about finding out who was brilliant enough to include it?....you have to admit this was a brilliant move including this in the appropriation bill
United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
- Robert Aderholt, Alabama, Chairman
- Kevin Yoder, Kansas
- Tom Rooney, Florida
- David Valadao, California
- Andy Harris, Maryland
- David Young, Iowa
- 1 vacancy[6]
- Sam Farr, California, Ranking Member
- Rosa DeLauro, Connecticut
- Sanford Bishop, Georgia
- Chellie Pingree, Maine
It does make no sense. None of it. I view these as mere stopgap measures.
Yes, but I wonder if there was a specific somebody(ies) who came up with the idea.
If our choice is the 2007 grandfathering date, or a much later grandfathering date...
It's all a question of how far are we willing to bend over really...
Yes, none of us wants to bend over at all.
And it would be GREAT if we could sell off our stockpiles of Vaseline.
I'll just leave that there for now.
:shrug:
I'm glad John Boehner is a vaper.
And I know there are more than just him.
The more politicians that vape, the better off we are.
And the more politicians that know someone who vapes, the better off we are.
In fact, it might be the only thing that has an actual and real potential to save us.
And I know there are more than just him.
The more politicians that vape, the better off we are.
And the more politicians that know someone who vapes, the better off we are.
In fact, it might be the only thing that has an actual and real potential to save us.
I was thinking about that this morning.
Every second that goes by we have a better chance of some politician or somebody they love or know saving their lives by vaping. That's one of the reasons I'm so adamant about vaping in public. Some people think that has a negative effect but to me it's all about exposure. One of these days Barbara Boxer's going to be wearing a flat-billed ball cap that says "U Vape, Bro?" on it.
I've seen local vaping bans stopped in their tracks by one member who is a vaper.
Or loves someone who is a vaper.
That's what we need.
In spades.
The grandfather date concept is something that runs through all legislation not just FDA. Altering it in this case could set a precedence
that could have ramifications far beyond this Bill.
In doing right by E-cigarettes could this cause bigger problems else where ?
that could have ramifications far beyond this Bill.
In doing right by E-cigarettes could this cause bigger problems else where ?
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
AVA's excellent and accurate press release on the bill is at
Congress Moves to Protect the Vapor Industry from the FDA's Deeming Ban - The American Vaping Association
Big Pharma funded ALA's fear mongering press release is at
American Lung Association Statement on House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations Action to Undermine Tobacco Control Act - American Lung Association
Although ALA's press release contains many more false fear mongering claims, they finally acknowledged that FDA’s proposed deeming regulation would ban virtually all nicotine e-cigarettes now on the market (by acknowledging that the deeming regulation would require all e-cigs now on the market to obtain premarket approval by the FDA in order to remain legal).
Two news stories so far (in The Hill and an AP article)
House agriculture bill takes aim at FDA e-cig rules | TheHill
House bill aims for less e-cigarette regulation - Yahoo News
We should still be pushing Tom Cole's bill (HR 2058) because it would amend the Tobacco Control Act (to change the grandfather date for newly deemed products from 2007 to 2015).
While the House Approps bill prohibits FDA from using funds to implement the 2007 grandfather date (for newly deemed tobacco products), the Approps bill only lasts for one year and would need to be reauthorized every year in the future to prevent FDA from enforcing the 2007 grandfather date for newly deemed products.
Congress Moves to Protect the Vapor Industry from the FDA's Deeming Ban - The American Vaping Association
Big Pharma funded ALA's fear mongering press release is at
American Lung Association Statement on House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations Action to Undermine Tobacco Control Act - American Lung Association
Although ALA's press release contains many more false fear mongering claims, they finally acknowledged that FDA’s proposed deeming regulation would ban virtually all nicotine e-cigarettes now on the market (by acknowledging that the deeming regulation would require all e-cigs now on the market to obtain premarket approval by the FDA in order to remain legal).
Two news stories so far (in The Hill and an AP article)
House agriculture bill takes aim at FDA e-cig rules | TheHill
House bill aims for less e-cigarette regulation - Yahoo News
We should still be pushing Tom Cole's bill (HR 2058) because it would amend the Tobacco Control Act (to change the grandfather date for newly deemed products from 2007 to 2015).
While the House Approps bill prohibits FDA from using funds to implement the 2007 grandfather date (for newly deemed tobacco products), the Approps bill only lasts for one year and would need to be reauthorized every year in the future to prevent FDA from enforcing the 2007 grandfather date for newly deemed products.
There's been many grandfather dates that have been changed. In fact the term "grandfather' in relation to this, came from voting restrictions that were repealed:
wiki:
After Democrats took control of state legislatures again after the Compromise of 1877, they began to work to restrict the ability of blacks to vote. Paramilitary groups such as the White League, Red Shirts and rifle clubs had intimidated blacks or barred them from the polls in numerous elections before the Redemption. Nonetheless, a coalition of Populists and Republicans in fusion tickets in the 1880s and 1890s gained some seats and won some governor positions. To prevent such coalitions in the future, the Democrats wanted to exclude freedmen and other blacks from voting; in some states they also restricted poor whites to avoid biracial coalitions.
Conservative whites [my edit - this should be read as 'conservative' - not as Republicans but those white Democrats who wanted to 'conserve' the restrictions in voting as stated in the above paragraph]... developed statutes and passed new constitutions creating restrictive voter registration rules. Examples included imposition of poll taxes and residency and literacy tests. An exemption to such requirements was made for all persons allowed to vote before the American Civil War, and any of their descendants. The term grandfather clause arose from the fact that the laws tied the then-current generation's voting rights to those of their grandfathers. According to Black's Law Dictionary, some Southern states adopted constitutional provisions exempting from the literacy requirements descendants of those who fought in the army or navy of the United States or of the Confederate States during a time of war.
Grandfather clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That may be one of the biggest advantages
repealing all of the EPA, FDA and other interventions into our lives.I believe there should be no specific dates (such as 2015) but just a rule like "24 months after the final rules for each new category become effective". Imagine that in 3 years someone comes up with a completely new category of devices (let's say pneumatic cigs) that are even better from a safety pov than anything else. Do we want to have the grandfathering discussion again?
Agreed but... if they offered to drop taxes from 41% to 10% I'd be for it, although I think the income tax should be completely abolished. But you're right - whatever date they decide upon will be the end of innovation and creativity (except in the black market) for ecigs.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
