Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[DC2]

The American Action Forum predicts that given the current House and Senate calendars, President Obama will have until May 17, 2016 to issue significant regulations without fear the next Congress and succeeding administration will use the CRA to repeal the regulations.

Is it just me, or did these deeming regulations come out right about before then?

Seriously, I thought this topic was low on the political radar.
But if they purposely pushed this out given the timing noted above?

Yeah, maybe it wasn't a back-burner topic.
Maybe it was something important to people who have a lot of money.

Oh, wait, we already knew that.
This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

And I don't even know what that phrase means, but it seem very appropriate.

 

[jmur]

This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

And I don't even know what that phrase means, but it seem very appropriate.

I'm just hearing that the FDA will begin prelimanry testing to determine just what are the components of that "stink" and whether or not they need to take actions to preserve the public's health. Details forthcoming...

 

[Katya]

So saying it's just water may technically not true,it's truer than we think.

Right, it is not technically true. Truer? I don't know. I believe in hard cold facts. And I like science. You may say it's "mostly water vapor," (approximately 66% water?), but not "just water vapor." That was the point I was trying to make.

Analysis of electronic cigarette vapor

"I wanted to examine this research because there is an ongoing issue with Suppliers publishing various statements about the content of e-cig vapor, apparently without there being any evidence to support these statements, such as, "It's only water vapor", and so on.
...
4.
The most complete result showed, approximately:
66% water
13% alcohol
3% PG
1.4% nicotine
...and around 17% not accounted for."

We've been having this discussion here for years... About "just water vapor" and "PG in asthma inhalers."

Just the facts, Ma'am.

 

[Pictor]

It has finally dawned on me which part of vaping the FDA believes is made of a tobacco product: THE NAME! vaping is hated for no other reason than word association. And that name association comes with a lot of well nurtured negative connotations. It elicits an emotional response from millions of people and guess who else, "their leaders". Rational thought goes out the window as soon as they hear the name e-cigarette. There is no way anything good can come from something with the word cigarette!! Oh and its also hated because of loss of revenue.

If what we were all using was called an electronic personal vaporizer or an e-vape how much different would all of this ludicrous mess look?

Stay strong out there and fight for what you KNOW is right!!

Similar was mentioned in the debate in our own House of Lords, and the term 'vaping device' was mentioned.

I do agree with the thoughts in this that the term 'e-cigarette' were undoubtedly the worst term that could have been applied to these items, although no-one in the beginning could have possibly foreseen the reason.
Vaping Device is definitely a less antagonistic name to give them. Perhaps a drive should begin to change the name of such equipment.

 

[zoiDman]

Is it just me, or did these deeming regulations come out right about before then?

Seriously, I thought this topic was low on the political radar.
But if they purposely pushed this out given the timing noted above?

Yeah, maybe it wasn't a back-burner topic.
Maybe it was something important to people who have a lot of money.

Oh, wait, we already knew that.
This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

And I don't even know what that phrase means, but it seem very appropriate.

Much of what we See in Government seems Random or at times, Arbitrary. But Most/Almost All of it Isn't.

 

[wiredlove]

Lots of stuff kinda like that has been done, and there are good studies showing vaping has great success for smoking cessation. FDA is ignoring all that, for politcal reasons.

And they've written in that Vaping is tantamount to smoking, even if it's 0 nic. So even if you've quit smoking but are still Vaping you're still smoking. It's a neat trick that.

 

[bobwho77]

I would nominate you, DC. I think lobbying is a priority. PR is great but iffy, would take much longer to have an impact. JMO, of course.

I may share an example of lobbying and the power of it when I feel up to typing it all out. Related to the addiction field, not vaping.

Lobbying, and PR go hand. Without more widespread public support (More than just us vapers) any lobbying efforts are going exactly NOWHERE

 

[Lessifer]

Good point. The testimonials should be released to a site that is absolutely public that we can then link to.

@kristin or @JustJulie (if you even get on ECF anymore )

I definitely think we need to push our messages public, we have not done a good job with that. It's great that we make eachother feel better, but we need to make the rest of America care.

I'm thinking of starting a poll...

What is the best way to utilize our resources?
--Lobbying
--Funding legal battles
--Public relations

The obvious answer is all three.
But if we have limited resources, how should they be allocated?

It must be nice to have unlimited funds, like our opponents.

I think the legal front is on the vendors, though we can support them by supporting their businesses.

I don't know if we can win the lobbying game, they have more money and more experience.

PR is something that we, as consumers, can actually have an effect on.

 

[nicnik]

Similar was mentioned in the debate in our own House of Lords, and the term 'vaping device' was mentioned.

I do agree with the thoughts in this that the term 'e-cigarette' were undoubtedly the worst term that could have been applied to these items, although no-one in the beginning could have possibly foreseen the reason.

I think it's a good name for encouraging smokers to try them, and that's what's most needed, even politically.

 

[buffaloguy]

I'm thinking of starting a poll...

What is the best way to utilize our resources?
--Lobbying
--Funding legal battles
--Public relations

The obvious answer is all three.
But if we have limited resources, how should they be allocated?

It must be nice to have unlimited funds, like our opponents.

There is actually a proven answer to this question. Most marketers and PR people only learn this tactic many years after they begin. In marketing realm I call it "the trifecta".

PR is always #1. Why? In our country we try ideas, things, and even people in the court of public opinion before we ever hear facts. We pick a side and right or wrong we zealously defend it. Whoever has more PR wins. It costs a lot of money to do this, but coupled with gorilla marketing tactics and social media, costs can come down some. Its all "opinion shaping". The message that gets repeated the most, and the loudest always wins.

How do marketers know this? People are sheep. The vast majority will blindly follow a shepherd off of a cliff without even asking "is that a good idea?" Marketers also know that those who resist message, right are wrong, will ALWAYS be considered the minority. Even if that group is correct.

Money and opinions are made when the vast majority follow.

Second is legal battles. Why? Because legal issues are easier to tackle when the PR machine has already had time to sway general opinion. Plus many times PR can help to fund legal.

Lastly is lobbying. With so many elected officials there is only so much lobbying money to go around. Lobbying without cash to give is futile. Payouts are expected and unless to can afford to buy alot of politicians (and pay more than the other guy) you can lobby till you turn ripe and decay. Wont change a damn thing.

Lobbying only works when you have massive amounts of money. The NRA, big tobacco, and big pharma are all examples of this. However when following PR and legal then lobbying becomes easier and less expensive because you have already influenced public opinions enough by then. Ideally.

Some politicians might care about vaping because they vape or people they know do. Those in favor because its "the right thing to do" are not powerful enough to get the rest of the legislature to fall in line.

PR and marketing ALWAYS trumps any other effort. Those who say otherwise simply dont know history, or sociology.

 

[wiredlove]

I definitely think we need to push our messages public, we have not done a good job with that. It's great that we make eachother feel better, but we need to make the rest of America care.

I think the legal front is on the vendors, though we can support them by supporting their businesses.

I don't know if we can win the lobbying game, they have more money and more experience.

PR is something that we, as consumers, can actually have an effect on.

Fade in to a funeral: scene of a distraught child - voiceover : this is bobby, bobby would have had a father if he hadn't gone back to smoking after he had successfully quit using our vapor product and then had it removed by your government. Think of the children who will be parentless due to government over-regulations. Stop over-zeller-ous regulations now. Think of bobby.

 

[GunMonkeyINTL]

Where did this thread go?
It used to be at the top of every sub forum, but I cont find it anywhere, now.

I only happened to have it opened in its own browser win do on my phone so I could try to keep up with reading it all. But, now, I don't think I could find it again.

 

[DC2]

Lobbying, and PR go hand. Without more widespread public support (More than just us vapers) any lobbying efforts are going exactly NOWHERE

I agree, and I've always agreed.
Public support is number one, and the supreme ruler of all that follows.

And we don't have it.
We should have gotten it but we didn't.

Big Media is the reason.
And money.

Lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of money.

It's not too late to get it though.
Not yet anyway.

 

[wiredlove]

From the main page(Forums)

ECF Competitions and Broadcasts

Then "deeming regs have been released"

 

[zoiDman]

Lobbying, and PR go hand. Without more widespread public support (More than just us vapers) any lobbying efforts are going exactly NOWHERE

This Isn't Exactly True.

Public Support is Needed when you are Lobbying from a Consumer Standpoint.

Money (the Ability to Garner Moneies via Profits, Campaign Contributions, Taxes, etc) is what is Important when Lobbying from a Producer/Retailers Standpoint.

 

[Lessifer]

Fade in to a funeral: scene of a distraught child - voiceover : this is bobby, bobby would have had a father if he hadn't gone back to smoking after he had successfully quit using our vapor product and then had it removed by your government. Think of the children who will be parentless due to government over-regulations. Stop over-zellar-ous regulations now. Think of bobby.

Nice, but people prefer a positive message. When I hear Sarah McLaughlin come on tv, I change the channel.

We need a catchy positive message, something easy and short, old ladies, young parents, bearded men, soccer moms. Vapers are a diverse crowd, and everyone knows someone who has or could be helped by vaping.

 

[Katya]

Agree or not, like it or not, Rep. Cole is still working his bill (H.R. 2058), and that's a good thing (in my opinion).

Co-sponsor #53 just signed on.
FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2015 (H.R. 2058)

"Introduced:

Apr 28, 2015
Status:
Referred to Committee on Apr 28, 2015
This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on April 28, 2015, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole.
Sponsor:
Tom Cole
Representative for Oklahoma's 4th congressional district
Republican
...
Prognosis:
4% chance of being enacted (details)"

For the record, Rep. Cole himself also endorses the Cole/Bishop amendment.

Cole Responds to FDA Expanding Regulatory Authority on Tobacco Products

"I still believe that my bipartisan amendment, recently approved by the Appropriations Committee in the Agriculture Appropriations bill, provides the same framework for new tobacco products without needlessly subjecting small businesses to unnecessary regulations and without treating law abiding adults like naïve children.”

This amendment is bipartisan, has already been approved by the Committee (31-19 vote) and is less likely to be vetoed by the President--he would have to veto the entire bill, not just the rider.

So I suggest we support both bills--the HR2058 and the Cole-Bishop amendment. There's absolutely NO downside to supporting both.

 

[nicnik]

There is actually a proven answer to this question. Most marketers and PR people only learn this tactic many years after they begin. In marketing realm I call it "the trifecta".

PR is always #1. Why? In our country we try ideas, things, and even people in the court of public opinion before we ever hear facts. We pick a side and right or wrong we zealously defend it. Whoever has more PR wins. It costs a lot of money to do this, but coupled with gurilla marketing tactics and social media, costs can come down some. Its all "opinion shaping". The message that gets repeated the most, and the loudest always wins.

How do marketers know this? People are sheep. The vast majority will blindly follow a shepherd off of a cliff without even asking "is that a good idea". Marketers also know that those who resist message, right are wrong, will ALWAYS be considered the minority. Even of that group is correct.

Money is made when the vast majority follow, not lead.

Second is legal battles. Why? Because legal issues are easier to tackle when the PR machine has already had time to sway general opinion. Plus many time PR can help to fund legal.

Lastly is lobbying. With so many elected officials there is only so much lobbying money to go around. Lobbying without cash to give is futile. Payouts are expected and unless to can afford to buy alot of politicians (and pay more than the other guy) you can lobby till you turn ripe and decay. Wont change a damn thing.

Lobbying only works when you have massive amounts of money. The NRA, big tobacco, and big pharma are all examples of this. However when following PR and legal then lobbying becomes easier and less expensive because you have already influenced public opinions enough by then. Ideally.

Some politicians might care about vaping because they vape or people they know do. Those in favor because its "the right thing to do" are not powerful enough to get the rest of the legislature to fall in line.

PR and marketing ALWAYS trumps any other effort. Those who say otherwise simply dont know history, or sociology.

I like your post, but I'm hesistant to call many people sheep. People are busy, and their minds are cluttered with all sorts of both facts and crap fed to them, among all the necessay attention to needs, both long and short term. People have to have priorities, and thankfully, with the right knowledge, are wanting to do the right thing when aware of others in crisis. And most people HATE corruption.

 

[Lessifer]

Where did this thread go?
It used to be at the top of every sub forum, but I cont find it anywhere, now.

I only happened to have it opened in its own browser win do on my phone so I could try to keep up with reading it all. But, now, I don't think I could find it again.

From the main page(Forums)

ECF Competitions and Broadcasts

Then "deeming regs have been released"

Wired FTW

It lost its broadcast status when additional information came out, apparently only one global sticky at a time.

 

[wiredlove]

Nice, but people prefer a positive message. When I hear Sarah McLaughlin come on tv, I change the channel.

We need a catchy positive message, something easy and short, old ladies, young parents, bearded men, soccer moms. Vapers are a diverse crowd, and everyone knows someone who has or could be helped by vaping.

Do you remember the Native American crying over littering?