FDA About the Senatorial No-Shows at Harkins' Hearing . . .

[EleanorR]

For us vapers (current and future), vaping is literally a matter of life and death.


There has been much disappointment (from myself included) at the fact that only a handful of Senators who are on the relevant Committee even showed up.

However: I think the obvious answer is that Harkins scheduled this little circus for the exact same time as another hearing, at which a Cabinet-level Secretary (Shinseki) was being grilled about wide-spread corruption and dysfunction in the Veteran's Administration, and actual deaths of American veterans that occurred thereby.


Remember that this stinking morass we call a "government" deals in matters of life and death for us in uncountable ways! (Depressing thought for the day! )

 

[MorpheusPA]

It's not infrequent for Senators to have multiple invitations to multiple hearings or sessions all at the same time.

Prioritization is a must, and they may send staff to attend the hearing or delegate responsibility to one Senator who will report back to others. In this instance, I would much rather see the Senators attend the VA hearings. I'd also prefer that the House leaders be chained to seats there and then be forced to vote for some actual, realistic funding for the VA, but that's another story.

 

[EleanorR]

Funding for the VA has skyrocketed since 2001. This is not a problem that throwing more money at will make disappear.

 

[pamdis]

Except that the VA hearing was not at the same time. It started at 10am and was over at 2pm. FDA was scheduled for 2:30 and didn't start until 3:30. They could have attended both and had lunch in between. If they are giving this as an excuse, they are lying.

 

[Gato del Jugo]

I didn't go down the list, but I'd imagine for some of them their seat is up for grabs this November..

With all the media smear of e-cigs, this might be considered to be a bit of a divisive issue.. They're probably thinking, Why rock the boat?


Goes to show where their priorities are -- even with the lives of millions at stake...

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

I didn't go down the list, but I'd imagine for some of them their seat is up for grabs this November..

With all the media smear of e-cigs, this might be considered to be a bit of a divisive issue.. They're probably thinking, Why rock the boat?

Goes to show where their priorities are -- even with the lives of millions at stake...

Only Hagan (D-NC) is facing a tough re-election battle this year. If she loses, she will be the ninth sen. to be absent next year, out of 17 to vote against the tobacco act: U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote

 

[Gato del Jugo]

Only Hagan (D-NC) is facing a tough re-election battle this year. If she loses, she will be the ninth sen. to be absent next year, out of 17 to vote against the tobacco act: U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote

There are 22 on the US Senate HELP Committee..

Surely there has to be more than one who, with the e-cig issue perhaps combined with another issue between now & Nov, might get pushed over the edge, or even close enough to it, no?


I wonder how much of our kicking & screaming had to do with some of these no-shows...

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

There are 22 on the US Senate HELP Committee..

Surely there has to be more than one who, with the e-cig issue perhaps combined with another issue between now & Nov, might get pushed over the edge, or even close enough to it, no?


I wonder how much of our kicking & screaming had to do with some of these no-shows...

Apparently vapers' activities were not good enough to get the other eight GOP sen.s to show up. Of those, Isakson (GA), Hatch (UT), and Roberts (KS) all voted against the tobacco act (FSPTCA). So did Alexander (TN), who didn't say much, and didn't stay long.

Among the other Repub. no-shows, one would've have hoped to see Scott (SC), at least because of his general political stances, and also the fact that SC is basically tied w/ VA and TN as the #3 tobacco-growing state in the nation: Best and Worst States: Smoking States and Tobacco Producing States

Two other GOP no-shows both voted for the FSPTCA: Murkowski (AK) and Enzi (WY). There's also Kirk of IL, who wasn't in the sen. when the tobacco act was passed (he was first elected in '10).

None of the GOP party poopers come from the three states with anti-vaping GOP Gov.s: MI (Snyder), NJ (Christie), or OH (Kasich). Although UT is a rabidly anti-vaping state, which might help to explain Hatch's absence as a possible champion, despite his vote against the Tobacco act.

Speaking of tobacco production - KY is #2, right after NC. So where was Rand Paul, the nation's highest Libertarian office holder, and scion of Ron?

 

[Dave_in_OK]

It's not unusual for Politicians to show up only after it's proven to their handlers that it's in their best interest to do so. Unless it's one of their pet projects which, tells me we may have 2 strong allies in the Senate and a although powerful foe his arguments can be attack as hypothetical / straw-man where as the opposite of his claims can be proven as fact. The question is how can we get the rest to the table and to support our position?

The Libertarians, Conservatives, and Centrists should be easy as what we want in this issue is typically in their platforms(Smaller Government, lower taxes, individual freedom/ responsibility, etc.).

The other groups I see no clear way to get their support as Big government, using taxes / laws to form social out comes is their standard procedures. So we'll need a vast grassroots type movement to force their hand. Without them I don't think we can win.

This as always is just my

 

[Kent C]

What Bill G had to say on the other thread:

"Also, please don't criticize Senators for not showing up at yesterday's hearing, as many had other more pressing (in thier minds) matters to deal with (e.g. yesterday's Senate hearing on the VA hospitals was packed with Senators, as all Senators want to be perceived as very concerned about veterans, especially when many veterans have reportedly died because of incompetence by VA hospitals).

I was pleased that Harkin was the only D at the hearing, because other liberal Ds probably would have joined forces with Harkin in criticizing e-cigs."

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ommittee-thursday-2-30pm-22.html#post13170516

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

It's not unusual for Politicians to show up only after it's proven to their handlers that it's in their best interest to do so. Unless it's one of their pet projects which, tells me we may have 2 strong allies in the Senate and a although powerful foe his arguments can be attack as hypothetical / straw-man where as the opposite of his claims can be proven as fact. The question is how can we get the rest to the table and to support our position?

The Libertarians, Conservatives, and Centrists should be easy as what we want in this issue is typically in their platforms(Smaller Government, lower taxes, individual freedom/ responsibility, etc.).

The other groups I see no clear way to get their support as Big government, using taxes / laws to form social out comes is their standard procedures. So we'll need a vast grassroots type movement to force their hand. Without them I don't think we can win.

This as always is just my

Sometimes I think vapers are like the proverbial social outcast in seventh grade. When someone popular of the opposite sex seems to pay attention to us, we assume that they're doing so because of who we are. When they don't, we figure it's because they don't know what we're really like. Likewise, when we get beaten up by the bully, we assume that the bully has something against us in particular - instead of merely picking an easy target, so they can show off.

We fail to realize that all these folks each have their own agendas, and that who we are matters not a whit to them. So we want to read all kinds of things into their actions which may or may not be there.

These hearings could've become a circus - a spectacle for the media in which liberal Dem NE sen.s shouted from the rooftops (or at least a dais) about the horrors of poisoned children who will later die as a result of Big Tobacco's alleged tobacco cigarette smoking gateway. We like to think they didn't show up because of all the contacts vapers made to their offices.

By the same token, Rand Paul and many other administration opponents could've grilled Zeller about the CTP's sclerotic processes and penchant for wasting money, along with standing up for Individual Responsibility, The Cause of Liberty, and against the Evils of Big Government. We like to think that they didn't show up because they just didn't realize how Noble our Quest for what's Objectively Right truly is.

Perhaps the attractive member of the opposite gender isn't paying any attention to us on a particular day, because they just don't even really recall who we are, and wouldn't care even if they did. Maybe the bully isn't intimidated by us in the least, but instead has forgotten that beating us up might be a good way to show off, and/or just has other priorities.

It's hard to come to terms with one's own apparent lack of importance in the eyes of others, and/or the fact that one's own view of the world simply isn't shared by others.

EDIT: Italicized words in the above sentence added to clarify the meaning.

 

[Dave_in_OK]

Perhaps the attractive member of the opposite gender isn't paying any attention to us on a particular day, because they just don't even really recall who we are, and wouldn't care even if they did. Maybe the bully isn't intimidated by us in the least, but instead has forgotten that beating us up might be a good way to show off, and/or just has other priorities.

It's hard to come to terms with one's own lack of importance, and/or the fact that one's own view of the world simply isn't shared by others.

Like in school it's our responsibility to make that member pay attention to us and know who we are.

As to ones own lack of importance that really is a interesting statement.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Like in school it's our responsibility to make that member pay attention to us and know who we are.

As to ones own lack of importance that really is a interesting statement.

I've edited the post.

"one's own lack of importance"

has been changed to:

"one's own apparent lack of imporance in others' eyes"

in order to make it clear that I did not mean:

"one's intrinsic [or inherent] lack of importance".

 

[Kent C]

URGENT! Tomorrow's Meeting Regarding E-Cigarettes (Message From CASAA) | Peace . Gold . LOVE

See 'About' - not really Ron or Rand Paul. I've searched and haven't found any comments by Paul but I haven't done a government hearing/meeting search. Fitzie (or was it pam?) found that statement by Burr in a committee meeting, but I never saw it on google.

 

[EleanorR]

Except that the VA hearing was not at the same time. It started at 10am and was over at 2pm. FDA was scheduled for 2:30 and didn't start until 3:30. They could have attended both and had lunch in between. If they are giving this as an excuse, they are lying.

Oh, thanks Pam, I did not realize that. Nevertheless, it would not surprise me if the earlier (VA) hearing had galvanized some of those senators to spend the rest of the day doing "something" about that situation.

No one gave me this as an excuse; I did not contact any congresscritters following the hearing.

 

[MorpheusPA]

Oh, thanks Pam, I did not realize that. Nevertheless, it would not surprise me if the earlier (VA) hearing had galvanized some of those senators to spend the rest of the day doing "something" about that situation.

No one gave me this as an excuse; I did not contact any congresscritters following the hearing.

My thoughts as well. Plus it's not like they don't have other things to be doing. Grubbing for re-election money. Selling themselves to the largest corporation that will have them. That kind of thing.

What, me cynical? Never.

The simple matter is we simply don't blip on their radar very much or very well. The numbers are currently too small, the economic power is fractured among dozens of moderately-sized companies and hundreds of tiny ones.

Taking a page out of previous victories by smaller and/or less powerful groups, one good strategy would be to build coalitions with like-minded groups, increase general positive exposure, and begin at the beginning--the local level.

So far, I mostly see a ton of people touting their favorite politician as the Magic Wand to solve it all. Hint: no.

 

[aubergine]

And look. Neither Rand Paul nor any Tea Party elected representative nor any elected liberal is going to very insistently back a product that they believe might be dangerous, or that's widely perceived to be unhealthy, any more than they're going to go all out to let you drive your baby around without a seatbelt or fight for the rugged individual's right to set up a roadside stand selling hard drugs.
I know that all you libertarians think that this is a big Human Rights issue, but it's not. It's a public health issue with dirty money in it. It's a stupidity issue, largely.
For a politician, it's much more a problem of individual/public perception on the one hand ("some sort of smoking gadget, chemicals, who knows? - meh, not going there, next?"), and big money interests that in fact have as many Republican as Democrat hands in the till on the other - plus, as Roger noted, the problematic relative insignificance of the issue in the larger scheme of things for everyone except vapers.

Democrats have traditionally been the most protective of public health (FDA likewise, ie, you get in trouble if you sell yoghurt full of salmonella, plus it gets recalled, pretty evil, right?), often at the expense of business interests, which Republicans traditionally represent. So, we have these non-elected crazy ANTZ with their various special interests aiming their appeal at Dems, some elected Dems making (sometimes willfully) misinformed noise, and most elected Repubs (including 'libertarian' ones) sitting silent.

Any politician on either side publicly defending a controversial and relatively new product that might have health ramifications would be crazy. Rand Paul wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. Unless we had really significant numbers of single-issue voters, in which case we'd hear from Dems too, but we don't and we won't.

That's somewhat primitive and rough, but my 2 cents worth, which will hopefully not provoke long screeds designed to "wake me up" to the deep truthiness of 21st century style American libertarianism. Which, incidentally, does NOT resemble Classical Liberal libertarianism of yore. But at this point I cease and will speak no more. Just, don't be counting on Rand et alia.

 

[Kent C]

And look. Neither Rand Paul nor any Tea Party elected representative nor any elected liberal is going to very insistently back a product that they believe might be dangerous, or that's widely perceived to be unhealthy, any more than they're going to go all out to let you drive your baby around without a seatbelt or fight for the rugged individual's right to set up a roadside stand selling hard drugs.

I don't think you're right on 'only harms self' with Paul. Baby - much different situation. He's been pro-legalization of drugs for quite a while. The fact that he's a doctor may be why he's not vocal. My doctor was glad I quit smoking but pretty sure he wouldn't advocate vaping.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

I don't think you're right on 'only harms self' with Paul. Baby - much different situation. He's been pro-legalization of drugs for quite a while. The fact that he's a doctor may be why he's not vocal. My doctor was glad I quit smoking but pretty sure he wouldn't advocate vaping.

If we can't persuade the top Libertarian politician in the country to support harm reduction on scientific grounds and public health grounds because he's an MD, then we are in deep trouble.

(EDIT: Although Dr. Ross of ACSH doesn't seem to have that problem, ditto Joel Nitzkin of R Street. So maybe the problem isn't the "Libertarian" part, or the "MD" qualifier. That leaves the "politician" attribute, perhaps?)

 

[Stosh]

Except that the VA hearing was not at the same time. It started at 10am and was over at 2pm. FDA was scheduled for 2:30 and didn't start until 3:30. They could have attended both and had lunch in between. If they are giving this as an excuse, they are lying.

and right after the VA hearing was a media circus, every senator was trying to get their mug or quotes on every paper, radio or tv outlet they could manage. If they are up for re-election or not in 2014, they want to be seen as strong supporters of the VA, along with baseball and apple pie....

It's how politics works, both parties, if someone shows up with a camera, that's where the pols want to be.