The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

Big Tobacco funded groups urge Congress to include Cole-Bishop amendment in 2018 Spending Bill

Discussion in 'FDA Regulations' started by Bill Godshall, Mar 7, 2018.

Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. Bill Godshall

    Bill Godshall Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Apr 2, 2009
    More than a dozen Big Tobacco funded organizations (led by ATR) urge Congress to include Cole-Bishop Amendment in 2018 Federal Spending Bill (which Congress must pass this month), falsely insinuate it would keep many/most 2016 vapor products legal to market beyond 2022.
    Coalition Urges Congress to Rein in FDA Overreach as Part of FY18 Spending Bill
    https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/Coalition%20Letter%20on%20ColeBishop%20FY18.pdf

    While Cole-Bishop would keep some tobacco company 2016 e-cigs legal beyond 2022, it also:
    - retains FDA’s Deeming Rule that bans >99.9% of vapor products (as <1% of vapor companies have ever submitted an SE report to FDA, and adequately prepared to do so on August 8, 2016),
    - requires FDA to impose tobacco product standards that would ban many/most vapor batteries, characterizing flavors and anything else FDA desires in 2021 (a year before FDA’s 2022 ban), and
    - would sabotage efforts by THR and vapor advocates to rescind FDA’s cigarette protecting Deeming Rule, and replace it with reasonable and responsible vapor standards like those in Duncan Hunter’s bill (HR 2194).

    Please see my January 9, 2018 post: Clarifying Cole-Bishop’s Impact on the Vapor Industry at
    Clarifying Cole-Bishop's Impact on the Vapor Industry

    The Cole-Bishop amendment is Section 753 (pages 99-103) of the 2018 House Agricultural Appropriations Bill, with the amendment’s most impactful clause“below”
    https://appropriations.house.gov/uploadedfiles/bills-115hr-sc-ap-fy2018-agriculture-agriculture.pdf
    “(b)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not later than 21 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish a product standard for vapor products pursuant to section 907 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 387g) to include but not limited to—
    (A) characterizing flavors; and
    (B) batteries.
    (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, not later than 36 months after the effective date of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate a final rule pursuant to such notice.”


    Big Tobacco funded Vapor Technology Association (VTA) falsely claims Cole-Bishop amendment would PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, tries duping naïve vapor companies to urge Congress to include Big Tobacco’s Cole-Bishop amendment in 2018 Federal Spending Bill.
    HOME - SAVE VAPOR
    TAKE ACTION NOW! Support Cole-Bishop Amendment to Protect America’s Youth.
    Big Tobacco funded VTA now falsely claims Cole-Bishop amendment would:
    - PROTECT OUR CHILDREN (since the Deeming Rule already banned vapor sales to youth, 48 states banned sales to youth, and because Cole-Bishop would have virtually no impact on youth),
    - Ban print advertising in all but adult-only publications (as Cole-Bishop’s definition of adult publications allows up to 15% youth readers, and up to 2 million youth readers),
    - Ban self-service displays and vending machine sales (as Cole-Bishop allows self-service-displays and vending machine sales at retailers that don’t allow youth to enter),
    - Ban sales of e-cigarettes in kiosks (as Cole-Bishop doesn’t ban vapor sales in kiosks),
    - Require FDA to implement standards on flavors within 12 months (as Cole-Bishop requires FDA to propose tobacco product standards for characterizing flavors, batteries and any other vapor standard FDA wants within 21 months, and requires FDA to issue a final rule within 36 months),
    - Protect children by restricting youth access (as Cole-Bishop doesn’t restrict youth access), and
    - Provide strict standards for product safety to ensure the well-being of all adult customers (since the FDA tobacco product standards mandated by Cole-Bishop would ban many/most vapor products a year before FDA’s 8/8/2022 vapor sales ban, and since the tobacco product standards would ban many/most vapor products have been protecting millions of adults from cigarettes).

    VTA also falsely claims Vapor Technology Association has worked aggressively to restrict marketing and teen access to vapor products (as the two-year-old VTA has never worked to restrict marketing and teen access to vapor products).

    Vaping 360 article falsely claims Cole-Bishop amendment can save vaping industry, urges vapers to contact Congress, fails to reveal that Big Tobacco has been funding the groups lobbying Congress to include Cole-Bishop Amendment in 2018 Federal Spending Bill.
    Can Cole-Bishop Still Save the Vaping Industry? - Vaping360

    In December, VTA also made many false claims about Cole-Bishop to deceive vapor companies, and to dupe them into urging Congress to include Cole-Bishop in the 2018 Federal Spending Bill
    https://cqrcengage.com/vaportechnology/file/XOLQm3lTzSS/Cole%20Bishop%20One%20Pager%20December%202017%20-%20FINAL.pdf
    My January 9, 2018 post exposing those false claims by VTA about Cole-Bishop is at:
    Clarifying Cole-Bishop's Impact on the Vapor Industry
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Rossum

    Rossum Surly Curmudgeon Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Dec 14, 2013
    NE FL
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. Brotherblues

    Brotherblues Full Member

    I am beyond confused. This goes against what I'm seeing from a lot of legit pro-vape people.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Rossum

    Rossum Surly Curmudgeon Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Dec 14, 2013
    NE FL
    You're not the only one. You may want to have a look at the other thread Bill linked above:
    Clarifying Cole-Bishop's Impact on the Vapor Industry
     
    • Useful Useful x 2
  5. Fidola13

    Fidola13 Prepper Verified Member

    Supporting member
    Dec 20, 2017
    Boston
    I’m even more confused reading that linked thread :cry:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Rossum

    Rossum Surly Curmudgeon Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Dec 14, 2013
    NE FL
    I understand. TBH, I'm not sure what the correct approach is here. I have philosophical differences with Mr. Godshall, but I have to say, a lot of his insights and predictions have turned out to be correct.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. mcclintock

    mcclintock Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 28, 2014
    Neither are good options. The Hunter bill has no support and is still intolerable. The Cole-Bishop is far worse. The government has no right to interfere substantially with an industry that for the most part is regulating itself and saving lives. The government has no right to try and decide if information could be harmful by making something they don't like seem more appealing. They do have the responsibility to make sure true and sufficient information is available for adults to make their own decisions. The evidence is they are not acting in good faith and should not be trusted.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. zoiDman

    zoiDman My -0^10 = Nothing at All* ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Apr 16, 2010
    So-Cal
    I think this is a Very Good Point.

    It is like Voting in an Election where you Don't Like (or even Hate) each candidate. But are left to Choose the Lesser of 2 Evils.

    I Understand Bill G's position. And I agree with Some of it. But to be Honest, I don't Know which would be Better for Many/Most current Vapers? Or those who will decide to Switch in the Future?

    Because the Choices were Easier when we were Dealing with the Previous FDA/Administration. Going into what Everyone thought would Basically be the Same FDA / Similar Administration. But that Landscape has Significantly Changed.

    And just like the Current Landscape has changed, it could Very Likely Change Again in 2020.

    So I have heard arguments that We Should be trying to get something Statuary now, even if it that something is far from perfect, than to keep going down this Road and Hope that things continue the same after 2020.

    Where Others have Argued that Time is on Our Side. And that the Longer we can go, the More that Real Science will support what we Already know. And that Reasonable Policy(ies) towards e-Cigarettes and THR will be Easier to achieve.

    I don't Know? Some days it seems like I see in One Hand Bread and in the Other a Stone. And on other days it seem like a Glimmer of Adult Thinking with regards to Public Health Policy is starting to emerge.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Bill Godshall

    Bill Godshall Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Apr 2, 2009
    Cole-Bishop was not included in the 2018 Spending Bill because vapor prohibitionist NY Sen Chuck Shumer wouldn't agree to including it in the bill, which all Cole-Bishop campaigners have known all along would likely be the outcome (but they didn't tell vape shops owners and vapers that fact when urging them to contact Congress).
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
  10. Wooots

    Wooots Full Member

    Mar 25, 2018
    Soooo.. if i understand that correctly, that cole bishop think as for role to take down vaping hardware inovation.
    So, for a change, only to advantage tabaco industry... Guess thoses guys arent only cancer through their cig.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice