A petition once again that leaves me with more questions for a CTA that I can't actually get behind. The specific language in that petition that I take issue with is:
But Sections 905 and 910 would ban all e-cigarettes, and other provisions of Chapter IX would also decimate the e-cigarette industry, protect cigarette markets and otherwise threaten public health.
I've now reviewed those sections for my 3rd or 4th time and don't read it as a ban on all eCigs. I have looked at other areas of CASAA website that do cite small portions from those sections and then inflates the theory of all out ban, ya know like the one that was surely going to happen in April of 2013.
I do think the eCig industry would be, to some degree, decimated. But as we currently are living in a gray market for eCigs, I think that is to be expected going forward. Would I prefer it be different? Yes. But my approach to this broad topic and the principles I care to argue for aren't the exact same as other vapers. I don't expect them to be. Yet, our 'strength in numbers' position is also decimated unless we are all on the same page. I am not on the same page, I think, as CASAA in petitioning government to ease restrictions or challenge those that I see as going too far, i.e. get rid of all flavors other than tobacco and menthol. CASAA and I might agree on this one, but I honesty put it as #1 thing to get behind, whereas I don't see it as CASAA's #1 item on the agenda.
And then go here:
Find Your Representative · House.gov and find your Congressperson and here:
U.S. Senate: Senators Home and find your Senator.
These sort of links are always helpful. Thanks.
And send them a personal email -- you can simply copy and paste from the petition or better yet write in your own words why it's important to you --
I also send links to good articles and studies on e-cigs to my Congresspeople! Once you find them and have their email, it's easy to forward to them.
And they do pay attention to emails -- my son worked for a Congressman and for a Senator as an intern when he was in college and he read every email and letter and kept track of what was being said --
Another good suggestion. I wish we had the strength in numbers and could create a cohesive message that all vapers could sign onto and thus send one message with say 100,000 signatures. But alas, that remains my wish. Perhaps someday, the cause will be more clear and direct in its scope.
IMO, the oppositions' argument stems from the 'all about the kids' talking point. I think this gets lost in the shuffle when having to parse language on something like FSPTCA, just to figure out what constitutes a 'tobacco product.' Vast majority of citizens, I believe, could care less about that parsing, while vapers/smokers are very interested in finding loopholes in that language. And ANTZ are there to try to plug loopholes as they become aware of what opposition is doing today to circumvent the issue. So, the two sides are seen as diametrically opposed and fighting an everlasting technical battle. One side gets to keep coming back to the principled position of "think about the kids" while other side gets to hang its hat on idea that it is looking out for those self destructing, and very dangerous, smokers.
To this day, I despise the eCig industry and vapers who need to compare vaping to smoking, and sell products based on this ideology. Its like a cigarette but better/less dangerous when we seek to attract more vapers, but nothing remotely similar to a cigarette when we are dealing with ANTZ. My asking the eCig industry to get away from all comparisons to smoking is about as likely to occur as my asking the FDA to not regulate eCigs in any way, shape or form. I realize I could ask, but chance of success on both fronts seems less than 1%.
IMO, once they win on the flavors thing, and I'm not convinced they will, the other provisions/deeming regulations won't be too hard to pass. Am always glad to talk about this one in further detail, especially as it relates to the 'for the kids' position, but for now I'll just keep it short.
Cause reality is, that it is a gray market that could go the way of the black market (via bans), but I simply do not see it going this way. Some of you all were grossly mistaken about April 2013 and yet so certain prior to that period that you were absolutely right. I think the market is destined for change, that likely includes some unwanted regulations. I will likely learn to live with those regulations as I did with the smoking ones, almost all of which I disagree with. But as regulations are actually proposed, I will take a stand that I see as extremely pro-vaping, though not so ready to back down when the 'for the kids' thing is put forth. IMO, kids can vape too. Just not sure anyone under 15 ought to be vaping nicotine. Even while some reading this smoked nicotine at that age, and are magically alive to tell about it 20+ years later.