Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[RobbyRocket]

All that being said, nobody should be surprised, I wasn't surprised. This was going to happen after Obama signed the Tobacco Legislation in 2009. It was just a matter of time and a question of when. Now it's happened. I live in Ky, the highest cigarette smoking rates in the nation. I'm still a smoker, and many here don't even know what vaping is, tons of people still smoke here. I can tell you that from what I've heard, the tobacco industry is absolutely thrilled because they know more people are going to start smoking cigarettes again and they are going to capitalize on this if the restrictions stand. I hope they won't though. People trying to educate others about vaping should break it down...vape is water vapor, NOT smoke. Point blank. No tar. Doctors in the UK have approved vaping as a method to stop cigarette smoking. I'm all for personal freedoms on most issues, and I'd be ok with even banning vaping equipment to those under 18. But requiring FDA approval on all juice? That's blatant right there, they're simply trying to homogenize. It's all about money and control. The two political parties are completely broken, the system is broken, people don't care anymore, and what you get as a result are bureaucrats and faceless lobbyists controlling everything.

And whether we get Clinton or Trump, it doesn't matter, because both are corporate sellout stooges. End rant.

 

[USMCotaku]

Rots-a-Ruck with that.

Spoiler: It's Every Man for Themselves

there will always be the musicians of that boat...even in the vape world

 

[Kent C]

I really Think at this Point of the Process, that SFATA or CASAA or Bill or someone should Step Forward and Outline EXACTLY what the remaining steps are.

There Should be Absolutely No Confusion as to what is Going to Happen Next. Because I could be Wrong in what I Think is the Next Step in this Process.

We Can Not Counter Punch at This Point.

First, how regulations are just part of a law:

. What is a regulation?

A. A regulation is a general statement issued by an agency, board, or commission that has the force and effect of law. Congress often grants agencies the authority to issue regulations. Sometimes Congress requires agencies to issue a regulation; sometimes Congress grants agencies the discretion to do so. Many laws passed by Congress give Federal agencies some flexibility in deciding how best to implement those laws. Federal regulations specify the details and requirements necessary to implement and to enforce legislation enacted by Congress.

Q. Does Congress have a role in rulemaking?

A. Yes. Congress enacts the legislation that mandates or authorizes agencies to issue regulations. Through the APA and other laws, Congress also establishes the procedures that govern agency rulemaking. Congress may use a variety of processes as part of its oversight of agency action, including holding hearings or informal meetings, issuing reports, or adopting legislation. In addition, Congress, through the Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. Chapter 8), may review and choose to reject new regulations issued by Federal agencies. The CRA requires Federal agencies to submit all new final rules to both the House and Senate. After submission, Congress may begin a process to reconsider and vote to overturn the rule.

Q. What are the different types of significant regulatory actions currently displayed on the dashboard that undergo OIRA review?

A. They are:

• Notice - These are documents that announce new programs (such as grant programs) or agency policies.
• Pre-rule (or advance notice of proposed rulemaking) - Agencies undertake this type of action to solicit public comment on whether or not, or how best, to initiate a rulemaking. Such actions occur prior to the proposed rule stage.
• Proposed rule - This is the rulemaking stage in which an agency proposes to add to or change its existing regulations and solicits public comment on this proposal.
• Final rule - This is the last step of the rulemaking process in which the agency responds to public comment on the proposed rule and makes appropriate revisions before publishing the final rule in the Federal Register to become effective.
• Interim Final Rule - These interim rules are typically issued in conformity with statutory provisions allowing agencies to publish a final rule that becomes effective soon after publication, without going through the proposed rule stage. The "good cause" exception in the Administrative Procedure Act allows agencies to bypass public notice and comment on a rule when it would be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. This process typically allows for public comment after the rule is published so that the agency still has an opportunity to consider public input and revise the rule accordingly.
• Direct Final Rule - These rules are similar to interim final rules, except that there is no comment period after publication, on the ground that they are uncontroversial. Such rules are categorized simply as "final rules" for display purposes on the dashboard.

FAQ

 

[Alexander Mundy]

Easier said than done.

Thank you for that post, but the part I quoted is the kicker. The mere mention usually brings out attack and as such I deleted a post of mine just earlier. Seems that most think that all L's are hardcore party line and that scares them because of the perceived resulting chaos. But in reality, just as with other parties the people themselves run the spectrum till the party lines are blurred. I vote my conscience and have never been a signed up member of any party. The candidate that for the most part reflects my viewpoints and also nothing else stands out to me as earth shattering in their beliefs is the one I support. Problem is that "most part reflects" and "earth shattering" ship has long sailed for a lot of the currently ruling parties candidates for any office.

 

[nicnik]

Makes sense because republicans want less government regulation, while democrats want more big government.

But then Republicans are always fighting Democrats' efforts for Harm Reduction programs, so in that sense, some Democrats would be easier to convince.

 

[Rt1Rebel]

Greg Gutfeld is about to go ballistic on The Five, Fox News... Tune in now if you can!

 

[USMCotaku]

I always like the "well, we don't have any long term information to know how it will affect us".
Um, yes, we do.
Movie industry/Theatre: been using various mixes of PG/VG solutions in fog machines for many generations.
Medical industry: Pg is a MAIN ingredient of asthma inhalers, also piped into ventilation at medical facilities to keep germ spread down.
Cooking: How many chefs/candy makers have you heard of devoloping issues from inhaling steaming concoctions of the flavorings....the same basic flavorings we are using?

Looks like plenty of long term data exists to me.

Oh, and on the "popcorn lung" thing....something I am soooo tired of hearing about.....the chemical "POSSIBLY linked" to development of popcorn lung...all because of those workers who developed it, that SAME chemical is present in CIGARETTES. Smokers have been consuming far higher doses of that chemical, for FAR longer then those workers did...and when is the last time you heard of any link to popcorn lung with cigarettes? The fact is, they had NO idea what caused the issue in those factory workers, and made an assumption...one we can now see today was a wrong assumption, but since it supports their push on regulations, they have ZERO compunction about using false info to further their goals.

 

[Sir Kadly]

But, but... The FDA can't make any laws. Only Congress. Am I wrong? And this administration is on its way out, anyway.

They aren't making a law, they are passing regulations, which they have been given the authority to do. It may be questionable if they have the authority to decide that vaping products are in fact tobacco products, but that would be up to a judge to decide. Until that time, yes this is fully under their power and control because, as I said, they aren't technically making any laws.

 

[DC2]

Final rule - This is the last step of the rulemaking process in which the agency responds to public comment on the proposed rule and makes appropriate revisions before publishing the final rule in the Federal Register to become effective.

Yeah, they responded to the comments all right.
By taking what we said and using it to screw us even harder.

 

[ReacT]

Nobody can stop making juice at home as long as they dont ban 'pure nicotine' as this is the only thing needs to be diluted in pg or vg. So I recommend everyone learn how to make juice at home, since I live in a country where ecig is forbidden from the beginning. But pure nic is always accessible as it has to be somehow, so all you need is food flavors which cannot be regulated or banned, and a chemist or lab to mix pure pg with pure nic easily for you. Any chemist can mix nic and pg for you in 5 minutes 5L 100mg that you can use it for 2-3 years.

 

[USMCotaku]

Greg Gutfeld is about to go ballistic on The Five, Fox News... Tune in now if you can!

dang, I don't have Dish network anymore
Kinda hard to keep satellite without a job

 

[USMCotaku]

Greg Gutfeld is about to go ballistic on The Five, Fox News... Tune in now if you can!

hope someone posts it on youtube

 

[7sixtwo]

But then Republicans are always fighting Democrats' efforts for Harm Reduction programs, so in that sense, some Democrats would be easier to convince.

O rly?

Citation needed.

 

[Katya]

U.S. doctors are so mean. I think I like UK doctors, better. But worse than being mean, I disapprove of their anti-science stance.

In all fairness, it's not the doctors, it's the bureaucrats from the 3-letter agencies. They don't really represent American physicians, unfortunately... They just follow orders from the mother ship--HHS, CDC etc., who, in turn, take their orders from the Administration that appointed them. It's a shame. People like Sylvia Burwell, Tom Frieden, Margaret Hamburg (and now Califf) are nothing but apparatchiks with no imagination and no courage.

 

[7sixtwo]

Yeah, they responded to the comments all right.
By taking what we said and using it to screw us even harder.

Exactly. It's as I posted yesterday; they welcomed comments and all the related info they could possibly get.. to make sure that this tyranny was as comprehensive as possible. They didn't want to leave any "loop holes" where personal liberty could leak through. They intended from the start to destroy the industry, regardless of what any of us "little people" had to say. That should be obvious to all, at this point.

 

[zoiDman]

First, how regulations are just part of a law:

. What is a regulation?

A. A regulation is a general statement issued by an agency, board, or commission that has the force and effect of law. Congress often grants agencies the authority to issue regulations. Sometimes Congress requires agencies to issue a regulation; sometimes Congress grants agencies the discretion to do so. Many laws passed by Congress give Federal agencies some flexibility in deciding how best to implement those laws. Federal regulations specify the details and requirements necessary to implement and to enforce legislation enacted by Congress.

Q. Does Congress have a role in rulemaking?

A. Yes. Congress enacts the legislation that mandates or authorizes agencies to issue regulations. Through the APA and other laws, Congress also establishes the procedures that govern agency rulemaking. Congress may use a variety of processes as part of its oversight of agency action, including holding hearings or informal meetings, issuing reports, or adopting legislation. In addition, Congress, through the Congressional Review Act (CRA) (5 U.S.C. Chapter 8), may review and choose to reject new regulations issued by Federal agencies. The CRA requires Federal agencies to submit all new final rules to both the House and Senate. After submission, Congress may begin a process to reconsider and vote to overturn the rule.

Q. What are the different types of significant regulatory actions currently displayed on the dashboard that undergo OIRA review?

A. They are:

• Notice - These are documents that announce new programs (such as grant programs) or agency policies.
• Pre-rule (or advance notice of proposed rulemaking) - Agencies undertake this type of action to solicit public comment on whether or not, or how best, to initiate a rulemaking. Such actions occur prior to the proposed rule stage.
• Proposed rule - This is the rulemaking stage in which an agency proposes to add to or change its existing regulations and solicits public comment on this proposal.
• Final rule - This is the last step of the rulemaking process in which the agency responds to public comment on the proposed rule and makes appropriate revisions before publishing the final rule in the Federal Register to become effective.
• Interim Final Rule - These interim rules are typically issued in conformity with statutory provisions allowing agencies to publish a final rule that becomes effective soon after publication, without going through the proposed rule stage. The "good cause" exception in the Administrative Procedure Act allows agencies to bypass public notice and comment on a rule when it would be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. This process typically allows for public comment after the rule is published so that the agency still has an opportunity to consider public input and revise the rule accordingly.
• Direct Final Rule - These rules are similar to interim final rules, except that there is no comment period after publication, on the ground that they are uncontroversial. Such rules are categorized simply as "final rules" for display purposes on the dashboard.

FAQ

So the Question Still Remains. Where does "Deeming" go Next?

 

[Rt1Rebel]

hope someone posts it on youtube

Not yet, but I did find this:



Gutfeld has quite a library of pro-vape rants on YouTube.

I have much admiration for Gutfeld, partly because he is an outspoken advocate of vaping, but mostly because he gets paid big $ to look at and talk to Kimberly Guilfoyle for an hour every day.

 

[ENAUD]

I don't think they can regulate what you already own only what can be sold but heck I could be wrong.

Let's hope you are right sir!

 

[RobbyRocket]

Let's be clear. For a long time, the Democrats and the Republicans have been essentially the same. Yea, in some ways different sure, and I'd sure as hell prefer a Democrat than someone thumping a bible telling me I'm going to hell for loving who I choose, but that being said, when it comes to the broader personal freedom issues, they're the same. Conservative lunatics are against smoking and vaping because they feel it's "immoral", and the corporate democrats are against smoking and vaping because their whitecoat friends in the corporate global healthcare lobby tell them vaping is smoking so they equate the two and go along with it. No rational sane person would compare ejuice to tobacco. That's psychotic. But these people are told these things by their lobbyists and special interests, and they just go along with it. And it fits their narrative for control. All this started with passing NAFTA in the 90s, and slowly subverting national sovereignty in favor of global corporate control. The same thing is happening on multiple fronts the healthcare industry is out of control, run by nazis. Supported by the big government stooges in both parties. You can thank the Congress of 2009 and Obama for signing the legislation which paved the way for the FDA's action.

 

[Kent C]

Yeah, they responded to the comments all right.
By taking what we said and using it to screw us even harder.

That is one thing that was the most disconcerting about the new doc. Cavalierly, rejecting some rather rational and science-backed comments. It shows the 'tone' they are in. No 'compromise' whatsoever. Full throttle.

I know some have said that it was 'handling all the comments' is why it took so long. I'll stick with what I said before and that should be obvious to anyone who has followed along here - that they financed studies over the last year and a half to come up with the most negative spin they could with ecigs and the media complied with them (with the noted exceptions).

It was the heaviest negative propaganda that we got almost daily with the poison, formaldehyde, popcorn lung, etc. etc. and the main objective, imo - to make ecigs Worse than cigarettes. Only then could they come out with the 'final rule' after they've demonized ecigs to the rest of the (non-vaping) population to where the main response would be "that makes sense" to those who have no clue.