Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[DC2]

The White House threw us a bone that is meaningless in the long run. The strategy: load the initial regs with a few selected throwaways. But leave in place the important stuff that kills the open system vape industry...

I'm a little bit behind, but I wanted to throw this out there...

I am thinking that a flavor ban was removed so as to keep vapers sleeping.

Once flavors were removed all vapers in the country would know vaping was threatened.
Heck, they MIGHT even start getting involved and doing something.

Yeah, I really am starting to become a conspiracy whack job.

 

[crxess]

That they wanted regulation of ecigarettes with the deeming, is unquestioned. Except now they support Cole/Bishop..... That Altria's participation/contribution/input into 2009 FSPTCA was my point - something that others had rejected out of hand.

A point we will continue to Agree on. Big Tobacco saw Regulation as a Protection to their business practices, shielding them from continued individual Suites as well as Blocking any Future competition from outside Tobacco interest. It also Guaranteed Government would not attempt outright Ban of the product.

Big Tobacco is skilled at an international level and swift to fight to minimize Government interference in Business as usual.

*Governments - Oh look, we are going to pit Nasty Pictures on Cigarette Packs.
Big Tobacco - Yea, and there will still be 20 Marlboro's inside that pack.

Personally, I think this tactic was more to embarrass Smokers even more....Oh Gross, look at that pack...............and you still smoke


I get the point Governments - Let me Vape in peace!

Yes, I am anti-conformist
I Believe in individuality

 

[Lessifer]

Not just my opinion - see the Dimitris video where he states just that and the Siegel video me and others have posted in this thread - likely where Dimitris got his data.

I'm thinking that was supposed to be:
In your Opinion, Does BT support of the Ag Amendment or HR2058 (or any Positive e-Cigarette Legislation) help or hurt the Passage of these Bills?

But I wouldn't want to put words in zoid's mouth. If that's what he was asking, I'm not sure, possibly both. It sets the Dems against it, but lobbying money can help, and it seems like Dem support may not be all that necessary.

 

[crxess]

I'm a little bit behind, but I wanted to throw this out there...

I am thinking that a flavor ban was removed so as to keep vapers sleeping.

Once flavors were removed all vapers in the country would know vaping was threatened.
Heck, they MIGHT even start getting involved and doing something.

Yeah, I really am starting to become a conspiracy whack job.

What Purpose is served in Removing a Splinter from a foot before Removing the Leg at the Hip?

 

[Kent C]

I'm thinking that was supposed to be:
In your Opinion, Does BT support of the Ag Amendment or HR2058 (or any Positive e-Cigarette Legislation) help or hurt the Passage of these Bills?

With zoidman it's always hard to tell. :- ) But I edited to address that - you may have missed it.

 

[zoiDman]

Not just my opinion - see the Dimitris video where he states just that and the Siegel video me and others have posted in this thread - likely where Dimitris got his data. As far as help or hurt, depends on where their contributions may go now. Some Dems may have second thoughts.

I was More Curious as to Your Thoughts.

And if more House/Senate Members are Opposed to a BT "Sponsored" Bill than those who Like the idea of a BT "Sponsored" Bill, sounds like it could/would hurt the chances of Passage.

In one Hand Bread, the Other a Stone?

 

[Kent C]

A point we will continue to Agree on. Big Tobacco saw Regulation as a Protection to their business practices, shielding them from continued individual Suites as well as Blocking any Future competition from outside Tobacco interest. It also Guaranteed Government would not attempt outright Ban of the product.

Well the original point was about 'regulation' (deeming) and the Tobacco Act of 2009. BT as a whole wasn't part of the FSPTCA - although Altria was. BT as a whole was 'for' the deeming, except now, support Cole/Bishop according to Siegel for the purposes he stated in the video - basically that they'd rather be a smaller part in a huge ($40 Billion) market (with Cole/Bishop) rather than a big part in a small ($1 billion) market (keeping the grandfather date at 2007).

 

[crxess]

I'm thinking that was supposed to be:
In your Opinion, Does BT support of the Ag Amendment or HR2058 (or any Positive e-Cigarette Legislation) help or hurt the Passage of these Bills?

But I wouldn't want to put words in zoid's mouth. If that's what he was asking, I'm not sure, possibly both. It sets the Dems against it, but lobbying money can help, and it seems like Dem support may not be all that necessary.

Representative support should still be EXPECTED.
These Damn Party Lines are ANNUALLY making this country worse and worse. Government is getting Fatter and Fatter, Bloated on Garbage Politics at the expense and Suffering of All Americans.

Think about this. Once the poor have nothing left, the rich cannot get Richer.......they eventually fall to poverty levels by a system of their own creation.

 

[zoiDman]

I'm thinking that was supposed to be:
In your Opinion, Does BT support of the Ag Amendment or HR2058 (or any Positive e-Cigarette Legislation) help or hurt the Passage of these Bills?

But I wouldn't want to put words in zoid's mouth. If that's what he was asking, I'm not sure, possibly both. It sets the Dems against it, but lobbying money can help, and it seems like Dem support may not be all that necessary.

I'm going to Forum Posting Excuse #17 (Cat walking on Keyboard while Typing) for any Misunderstanding of my Post.

 

[Lessifer]

I was More Curious as to Your Thoughts.

And if more House/Senate Members are Opposed to a BT "Sponsored" Bill than those who Like the idea of a BT "Sponsored" Bill, sounds like it could/would hurt the chances of Passage.

In one Hand Bread, the Other a Stone?

All the more reason to get the message out that WE support the bill, and that WE are NOT Big Tobacco.

 

[Kent C]

I was More Curious as to Your Thoughts.

And if more House/Senate Members are Opposed to a BT "Sponsored" Bill than those who Like the idea of a BT "Sponsored" Bill, sounds like it could/would hurt the chances of Passage.

In one Hand Bread, the Other a Stone?

Those who think in BT terms - mainly Dems - will still not vote for Cole/Bishop but they may point out that BT is 'onboard', but it won't change those who now support it for other reasons - mainly the insanity of the deeming and how it affects true public health - it decreases it, and the effect it has for companies and jobs in their districts and states. As well as the income taxes it brings :- )

 

[zoiDman]

I'm thinking that was supposed to be:
In your Opinion, Does BT support of the Ag Amendment or HR2058 (or any Positive e-Cigarette Legislation) help or hurt the Passage of these Bills?

But I wouldn't want to put words in zoid's mouth. If that's what he was asking, I'm not sure, possibly both. It sets the Dems against it, but lobbying money can help, and it seems like Dem support may not be all that necessary.

I think Anything that BT puts its name on is going to Raise Opposition from a Large Percentage of House and Senate Members.

And sometimes that can be Used in your Favor if you Don't want something to Pass.

 

[crxess]

I'm going to Forum Posting Excuse #17 (Cat walking on Keyboard while Typing) for any Misunderstanding of my Post.

Completely reasonable assumption for any error in translation

 

[Kent C]

I'm going to Forum Posting Excuse #17 (Cat walking on Keyboard while Typing) for any Misunderstanding of my Post.

Does the cat like the cap lock key especially? :- )

 

[Lessifer]

I'm going to Forum Posting Excuse #17 (Cat walking on Keyboard while Typing) for any Misunderstanding of my Post.

You and I have been around the block a few times together, I'm almost fluent in zoidspeak

 

[zoiDman]

All the more reason to get the message out that WE support the bill, and that WE are NOT Big Tobacco.

I Couldn't Agree with That More!

 

[zoiDman]

Does the cat like the cap lock key especially? :- )

All the Time.

 

[crxess]

I think Anything that BT puts its name on is going to Raise Opposition from a Large Percentage of House and Senate Members.

THIS!!!

I have been in opposition of BT involvement in the e-cigarette industry from the moment they made first venture announcements.

A Guaranteed Bullet wound to our Industry

 

[VNeil]

I'm a little bit behind, but I wanted to throw this out there...

I am thinking that a flavor ban was removed so as to keep vapers sleeping.

Once flavors were removed all vapers in the country would know vaping was threatened.
Heck, they MIGHT even start getting involved and doing something.

Yeah, I really am starting to become a conspiracy whack job.

If you're a whack job I'm a total whack job.

 

[Kent C]

All the more reason to get the message out that WE support the bill, and that WE are NOT Big Tobacco.

I think BT support will help the bill. As I said, those who don't like BT aren't supporting it anyway. And others who might get contributions from BT may help support - some Dems there as well, but not the 'usual suspects' of course.