Bill defeated in Virginia!
- Thread starter TraceyS
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I obviously erred in thinking I asked a very simple question:
"What exactly defines a candidate for political office as "qualified?"
If we can educate all voters, there will never be any problems to address again."
Look at how many adults right here on ECF have no clue how the three branches of government work.
I guess I was not exact enough in the sentence following my question. I thought it was fairly clear I meant to educate them how to identify if/how a candidate is "qualified."
That's all nice and all, but wouldn't that only apply to politicians previously holding an elected position? What do I look for that will tip me off on a first time candidate?
Seems to me it has been "the will of the people" to pay a lower tax rate (I could add plenty more, but in the interest of brevity...). The re-elected politicians must have changed their "will of the people" stance or most of the newly elected officials fooled us. Or a combination of both? And I am sure there is never any pressure on the newly elected politicians to "play the game" if they want to advance their political careers.
If it is as simple as electing politicians that vote based on the "will of the people", in effect, majority rules, we may just as well cut out the middle man and hold monthly or weekly votes. Think of the money we could save in wages for all politicians and their staffs, extensive retirement packages, and expense reimbursements. That might even be "the will of the people."
How about we agree, we are on different ends of the spectrum. I applaud you for your enthusiasm, dreams, and efforts. I choose to temper mine with a touch of reality. I'm not influencing you, nor you, I. So, to once again attempt to spare readers the boredom (guess nobody has used the
yet, anyway) of our discussion and the risk of killing this celebratory thread, I'll bow out of this debate.
"What exactly defines a candidate for political office as "qualified?"
If we can educate all voters, there will never be any problems to address again."
Look at how many adults right here on ECF have no clue how the three branches of government work.
I guess I was not exact enough in the sentence following my question. I thought it was fairly clear I meant to educate them how to identify if/how a candidate is "qualified."
That's all nice and all, but wouldn't that only apply to politicians previously holding an elected position? What do I look for that will tip me off on a first time candidate?
Seems to me it has been "the will of the people" to pay a lower tax rate (I could add plenty more, but in the interest of brevity...). The re-elected politicians must have changed their "will of the people" stance or most of the newly elected officials fooled us. Or a combination of both? And I am sure there is never any pressure on the newly elected politicians to "play the game" if they want to advance their political careers.
If it is as simple as electing politicians that vote based on the "will of the people", in effect, majority rules, we may just as well cut out the middle man and hold monthly or weekly votes. Think of the money we could save in wages for all politicians and their staffs, extensive retirement packages, and expense reimbursements. That might even be "the will of the people."
How about we agree, we are on different ends of the spectrum. I applaud you for your enthusiasm, dreams, and efforts. I choose to temper mine with a touch of reality. I'm not influencing you, nor you, I. So, to once again attempt to spare readers the boredom (guess nobody has used the
yet, anyway) of our discussion and the risk of killing this celebratory thread, I'll bow out of this debate.
Correct me if I am wrong but, I was under the assumption the House represents the voice
of the people and the Senate decides and provides leadership.
This is to prevent the old four wolves and one sheep voting on supper and all
that.
Regards
Mike
As a proud born and raised, current resident of the great commonwealth of Virginia......... I have to wonder when the other shoe will drop and we find out what the real motive is behind the BT backing........
Me neither, I still have one that I bought 6 months ago and I barely touched it... I am sure they have more powerful devices at work in there research and development department waiting to invade the market when time will come.
I wrote a letter to Rob Wittman (Member of Congress) and i live in Virginia. This is his response letter back to me...
Dear Jody:
Thank you for contacting me to express your support for vapor and electronic cigarette products.I appreciate you taking the time to contact me. I value your views on the important issues facing our Commonwealth and the Nation.
As you may know, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed a rule that would require e-cigarette manufacturers to attain "premarket" approval for any products released after February15th, 2007 as part of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, and for those products to attain an approval within two years. The proposed rule has been published in the Federal Register and additional information can be found by following this link.
You may be interested to know, that in an effort to address this rule, Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma introduced H.R. 2058, the FDA Deeming Authority Act of 2015. This legislation would prevent the FDA from banning vapor and electronic cigarette products that have been released on the market since 2007, moving the effective date from 2007 to the date of the finalized deeming regulation by the FDA. By doing so, the bill would allow all vapor and electronic cigarette products to remain on the consumer market, pending approval by the FDA. I am pleased to you inform you that I am a cosponsor of H.R. 2058.
Currently, H.R. 2058 has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce and the subcommittee on Health. Please be assured that as a cosponsor of H.R. 2058 I will keep your thoughts in mind should the bill come before the full House of Representatives for a vote. I am continuing to receive and evaluate comments on this bill from the constituents of the First District and will monitor this issue as it evolves and progresses through the legislative process.
Thank you again for sharing your views and opinions with me on the important issues facing our Nation.I pledge to you that I will continue to work hard on your behalf and to fight for the principles that will continue to make this Nation great. I honestly would not be able to serve the First Congressional District of Virginia without hearing from great folks like you. As we move forward, your input on these pivotal issues will be extremely important, so please keep in touch with me via telephone at (202) 225-4261, through my website (www.wittman.house.gov), on Facebook (www.facebook.com/reprobwittman), or via Twitter (www.twitter.com/robwittman).
Dear Jody:
Thank you for contacting me to express your support for vapor and electronic cigarette products.I appreciate you taking the time to contact me. I value your views on the important issues facing our Commonwealth and the Nation.
As you may know, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed a rule that would require e-cigarette manufacturers to attain "premarket" approval for any products released after February15th, 2007 as part of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, and for those products to attain an approval within two years. The proposed rule has been published in the Federal Register and additional information can be found by following this link.
You may be interested to know, that in an effort to address this rule, Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma introduced H.R. 2058, the FDA Deeming Authority Act of 2015. This legislation would prevent the FDA from banning vapor and electronic cigarette products that have been released on the market since 2007, moving the effective date from 2007 to the date of the finalized deeming regulation by the FDA. By doing so, the bill would allow all vapor and electronic cigarette products to remain on the consumer market, pending approval by the FDA. I am pleased to you inform you that I am a cosponsor of H.R. 2058.
Currently, H.R. 2058 has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce and the subcommittee on Health. Please be assured that as a cosponsor of H.R. 2058 I will keep your thoughts in mind should the bill come before the full House of Representatives for a vote. I am continuing to receive and evaluate comments on this bill from the constituents of the First District and will monitor this issue as it evolves and progresses through the legislative process.
Thank you again for sharing your views and opinions with me on the important issues facing our Nation.I pledge to you that I will continue to work hard on your behalf and to fight for the principles that will continue to make this Nation great. I honestly would not be able to serve the First Congressional District of Virginia without hearing from great folks like you. As we move forward, your input on these pivotal issues will be extremely important, so please keep in touch with me via telephone at (202) 225-4261, through my website (www.wittman.house.gov), on Facebook (www.facebook.com/reprobwittman), or via Twitter (www.twitter.com/robwittman).
Canned Response! Have received the Exact same from 3 representatives
So they were all cosponsor of H.R. 2058 ? That's good news!
No, most of the body of the text is cut and paste:
And
With a couple of personal touches - likely also canned per representative.
What I truly wonder is just how many Representatives have given any consideration to truly becoming educated on the topic of e-cigs/vaping?
More forward approach:
Running - Win again! 100 x Movkin Luggy VT60W & 100 Mini's up for grabs!
Not the thread, I'll refrain.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
