Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

ShariR

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 13, 2013
8,375
33,469
Nashville, TN
Excellent point Mike. And with your extensive mod Building experience, you would know better than most. At the risk of repeating here is the timeline.

- The clock starts ticking the day the Final Rule is published in the Federal Register which has not yet occurred but per the FDA will occur on 5/10/16. Nothing will change from the document we are reading today.

- Vendors/Manufact etc have 90 days from the Publication date of 5/10/16 for introduction of new products which is the issue you raised along with others.

- The clock starts clicking on the Congressional Review Act and Congress has 60 days from the Publication date to reject/modify the Final Rule. NO extensions. IMHO, doubtful they will accomplish anything but I could be wrong. If they do nothing or wonder around in the bushes and can't accomplish anything then the Final Rule becomes the law of the land 90 days from the Publication Date in the Federal Register.

Edit for senior moment

When does Congress go for summer break? Memorial Day? July 4th? I have a feeling that Congress will do nothing before the election. Sigh...... Great timing for Obama and the FDA.
 

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,928
Wisconsin
I don't know about the rest of the folks here, but for the last 3 days I've been swinging wildly between abject despair and irrational optimism over this stuff. Maybe I should turn off the computer and take a break.

I feel that for sure. But also have found this issue follows me away from the computer, even if I don't bring it up. And have found that venting with fellow vapers is best because I don't have to speak in a debating type of manner about ideas that apparently are not understood in scientific way from non-vapers and anti-vapers.

The forum allows me to coalesce my thoughts, get updated information from other pertinent perspectives and express what negative thoughts I have in a more calm, sometimes humorous manner. My fuse for the non-vaper is longer than the anti-vaper, but not by much, especially if the non-vaper is short on scientific understanding and lacking ability to think things through.

Including vapers, the whole underground market aspect is a bit of an unknown, but vapers are at least tuned into the idea. And I currently believe it will be huge and it will have a lot to do with how zealous the FDA chose to be. I guess the alternative is to pretend it won't exist because all product will be eliminated, but too many factors suggest otherwise for me to go in that direction. Plus, I really do think it is where the consumer fits in the fight. We've already done the contact politicians thing and I know we will continue that, but FDA has essentially made it so hard to overcome politically, that it would take a presidential candidate, a unified congress or emergence of an actual world leader to change this in a way that truly upholds the pro-vaping position. Underground market, by its very existence, will be supporting pro-vaping position and essentially undoing anything anti-vapers were going for. They thought it was wild west before? Ha, that's just getting started. And to get rid of the new wild west would take a humbled anti-vaping leader (i.e. Zeller) to say the regulatory framework does need to be reconsidered, due to how much they underestimated the illicit market.
 

Jazzman

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 24, 2013
947
2,115
High Desert, CA
It very well could be that your Local Vape Shop has already done the work to fulfill all the Requirements to sell "Tobacco Products" on the State/County/State/Federal level. Many Shops who have followed all this Have in the hopes that when the FDA released it's Final Rule set, that they could continue to Operate for some length of time.

But just Carding people for 18+ Isn't Enough.

In California, carding people for 21+ :-x
 

Smocian257

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 3, 2014
164
43
Green Valley, Arizona
There is the fact that a good bit of this is against constitutional rights to name just one legal aspect of a court case.

Hardly, I mean its a good talking point to rile up libertarians maybe but the boat sailed on that nearly a hundred years ago - the supreme court has made it abundantly clear that the commerce clause allows taxation / legislation willy nilly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacTechVpr

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,619
1
84,743
So-Cal
This brings to mind I think of what would be a sensible regulation.
Do not use bottles that could leach or pass through things that could
contaminate the juice. Glass bottles would meet this requirement with out
undue burden . some plastics should.
regards
Mike

There are Regulations in Place for Gum, Candy, and Foods with regards to things like "1st Use" and when Recycled "Plastics" can be used and Exactly what type of Recycled "Plastics" (and at what Percentage) are Allowed.

Regulations are Not Always the Oppressive, Market Crushing, Sudo-Ban like what we see here with the FDA's PMTA for ENDS.
 

Alexander Mundy

Ribbon Twister
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 1, 2013
4,408
26,100
Springfield, MO
Agree about the timing, and it would have been nice if this project started a year or so earlier. However, considering when the project was announce, they were able to gather the film content and finish post-production on a very short schedule compared to many projects of this nature. We can all sit around and complain about what should've happened, but that's not going to help our current situation. While this film might not change our immediate circumstances, it does shed light on the cause, and it might help curb some of the more harsh regulations as they're being considered for implementation.

Worst case scenario is that it will open a few eyes and a few minds to this and similar corruption in our current government.

Can't hurt. My eyes were opened to fracking by a documentary, however most of the general public would rather knaw off an arm than watch a documentary. Perhaps vital snippits in advertising slots, but most have that FF button on the DVR. Not knocking the film or effort, I applaud both.
 

sparkky1

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jul 8, 2014
3,429
2,686
Nashville
I feel that for sure. But also have found this issue follows me away from the computer, even if I don't bring it up. And have found that venting with fellow vapers is best because I don't have to speak in a debating type of manner about ideas that apparently are not understood in scientific way from non-vapers and anti-vapers.

The forum allows me to coalesce my thoughts, get updated information from other pertinent perspectives and express what negative thoughts I have in a more calm, sometimes humorous manner. My fuse for the non-vaper is longer than the anti-vaper, but not by much, especially if the non-vaper is short on scientific understanding and lacking ability to think things through.

Including vapers, the whole underground market aspect is a bit of an unknown, but vapers are at least tuned into the idea. And I currently believe it will be huge and it will have a lot to do with how zealous the FDA chose to be. I guess the alternative is to pretend it won't exist because all product will be eliminated, but too many factors suggest otherwise for me to go in that direction. Plus, I really do think it is where the consumer fits in the fight. We've already done the contact politicians thing and I know we will continue that, but FDA has essentially made it so hard to overcome politically, that it would take a presidential candidate, a unified congress or emergence of an actual world leader to change this in a way that truly upholds the pro-vaping position. Underground market, by its very existence, will be supporting pro-vaping position and essentially undoing anything anti-vapers were going for. They thought it was wild west before? Ha, that's just getting started. And to get rid of the new wild west would take a humbled anti-vaping leader (i.e. Zeller) to say the regulatory framework does need to be reconsidered, due to how much they underestimated the illicit market.

Corey Lewandowski (@CLewandowski_) | Twitter
Have you asked his stance with the new regs ?
 

Robino1

Resting in Peace
ECF Veteran
Sep 7, 2012
27,447
110,404
Treasure Coast, Florida
like what we see here with the FDA's PMTA for ENDS.
Please let's not continue with their derogatory name for Ecigs ;)
UGH I hate that name 'ends'.

Kinda serious, kinda inserting sarcasm .... It just hit me weird.
 

Alexander Mundy

Ribbon Twister
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 1, 2013
4,408
26,100
Springfield, MO
Already did that with ESRB that closed down all the arcades in the late 80s and early 90s
I was in the industry back then and it was the home video games that decimated it long before the ESRB was created in 94.
 

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,928
Wisconsin
Sorry, Kristin Noll-Marsh whoever you are... I am not going to stand by idly while my PERSONAL LIBERTIES are actively being trampled upon. DON'T TREAD ON ME!

I'm thinking others have already responded to this post, but perhaps not stated what I am.

I'm curious what any vaper thinks a petition would do right now? You are saying a petition to the current WH will have you actively involved in a counter fight to the Final Rule. Please inform me/us on how that works. I'm interested in the reasoning here.
 

jjk1

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 6, 2014
144
166
Maine, USA
this is what’s going to happen. Best case scenario.
The amendment to change the deeming date that is in the 2017 agriculture appropriations bill will pass.
The FDA will begin to regulate everything but the equivalence date change will enable the industry to survive to be a cash cow. They will tax the crap out of everything and vaping will become much more expensive. Vapors will not go back to smoking in mass and the giant black market that 2007 equivalence creates serves no one except BT. Making vaping hardware and liquid illegal would only increase its popularity among the youth and the loss of tax revenue and potential tax revenue would be too much.
If they change the date via a spending bill amendment all the politicians win.
The republicans get to save an industry and the dems get to demonize an industry that actually continues to exist for the purpose of taxation and demonization. Even the FDA wins – what’s the fun in regulating an industry that doesn’t exist?
Our saviors in government can really only win in the long run if they have an industry to regulate.
I’m not going to panic until the Cole amendment is stripped from the Agriculture Funding Bill.
 

crxess

Grumpy Ole Man
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 20, 2012
24,438
46,126
71
Williamsport Md
I understand that part my wondering is....so, who is overseeing/monitoring thousands of retail vape shops after the 90 day period and over the next 2 years to make sure no new products are entering the market from overseas or that they are not making new eliquid flavors? How is that being implemented?

See Oliver's Comment on Impossible to Control.

Initial implementation will likely come in the form of Over worked, under trained Customs Agents with no clue what is what. Lots of slow downs on Verification and transport flow. Excessive Port research and tons of Mistakes or plain Frustration rejections.
On the What is What end - Grants to Private companies to Monitor introduction of non current products internationally to tag as in Violation of FDA Approval.(More Wasted Money)

*Note - The Proposed FDA Budget RELY'S on DEEMING E-cigarettes and Includes Expansion of Property and Employees<<<<<<<<<<<<< sounds like business growth.


This Country Cannot be fixed or even continue to endlessly operate on Monopolization and Ever Increasing Non-Productive Government Expense.
Our Governing Body does nothing more than create Paperwork and increased Debt at an ever growing cost to the People.:cool:
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,619
1
84,743
So-Cal
Please let's not continue with their derogatory name for Ecigs ;)
UGH I hate that name 'ends'.

Kinda serious, kinda inserting sarcasm .... It just hit me weird.

Just wanted to be Clear. But if you like, I won't use ENDS anymore.

:)
 

crxess

Grumpy Ole Man
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 20, 2012
24,438
46,126
71
Williamsport Md
(Screwtape didn't have the post count to link a url. I fixed it.)

"Screwtape, post: 17702341, member: 225031"]Here's something relevant from the SSRN:

January 1, 2015

Case Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015-3

Abstract:
Electronic cigarettes pose competitive threats to the makers of traditional cigarettes and nicotine replacement therapies such as nicotine gum and patches. It is no surprise that these producers, and the governments that earn revenue from tobacco taxes, respond by seeking controls on the competition. Similarly, despite evidence that e-cigarettes may be beneficial in helping tobacco smokers quit, assorted public health researchers and groups have attacked e-cigarettes as a health danger. This episode allows application of the Bootlegger and Baptist theory of regulation. Diverse groups, not necessarily working together, and with different motives, share in a goal of limiting how e-cigarettes enter the market. Those who profit from the current tobacco market structure and some health advocates plead for politicians and regulators to restrict the new product.


Bootleggers, Baptists, and E-Cigarettes by Bruce Yandle, Roger E. Meiners, Jonathan H. Adler, Andrew P. Morriss :: SSRN

Thank you Ocelot,

I wanted this in my Folders before some Bureaucrat finds a way to Bury it.:grr:
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,619
1
84,743
So-Cal
I know. I probably should have hit cancel instead of post reply.
This is just so maddening, sad, frustrating, troubling.

Hey No Problem Robino. I think All of this has everyone On Edge. And Isn't where we want to be After 5 Years of waiting.

I feel Complete Disgusted and Betrayed by the FDA's actions. Not for myself. None of this will Effect me much. But for the Hundred of Thousand of current Smokers who will Never be given the opportunity that I had to Get Off Cigarettes.

I think Congress should draft Legislation to Replace the words "Public Heath" from All FDA Signs and Printed Material and in their place, insert various Corporate Logos of BT and BP.
 

Users who are viewing this thread