Now just imagine if we could somehow get every vaper to understand all of this...
FDA may soon propose regulation that could ban many/most e-cigarette products, eliminate many/most companies
- Thread starter Bill Godshall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- innokin nicquid revolution revolver
- Status
Murray Kessler of Lorillard says he isn't much concerned about the FDA, but is concerned about local groups banning ecigs without knowing anything about them.
I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't concerned about the FDA, as it is quite likely the FDA regulations will be in line with their business model.
Unfortunately, it is quite likely that many of those regulations won't necessarily be what's best for us.
Since we are being discriminated against, couldn't we get some help from the ACLU??
That seems to be the prevailing belief on ECF. But, let's face it, the totally unregulated sale of nicotine eliquid will be coming to an end. No amount of posts on ECF will change that.
You're correct.
No amount of "begging your masters for lighter whippings" ever works. They only respect the pitchfork.
Of course the regulations will benefit BT. Regulations always benefit the Big Guys--the very ones who the "help me gubmint" whiners SAY are the problem. Of course the regulators will be set to work (by the Big Guys who actually write the regs) killing the small businesses that politicians all swoon over.
As long as the "Most Dangerous Superstition" (the belief that what is amoral in the private sphere--the initiation of force-- becomes moral when it is done in the fictitious public sphere) holds sway, we are doomed to be controlled---for our own good, or for the children, or to stop the terrorists or the illegals, or fillintheblank scare tactic of the week. All while THEY sell the unborn into debt slavery.
Just sayin'....
Today's News September 6, 2012
OFFICIAL WEBSITE State of Connecticut electronic cigarette ban - ecigs ecigarette
I have got to stock up on nic and buy as many rebuild-able atty's as possible on a starving artist budget, I'll dip into my spiritual account, the universe or (power on high) will help! We all are hoping at the very least our forums and events won't be censored out of existance, this scary idea needs taming. Be strong, confident and courageous, this is a new angle on an old societal behavior. REVOLUTION!
OFFICIAL WEBSITE State of Connecticut electronic cigarette ban - ecigs ecigarette
I have got to stock up on nic and buy as many rebuild-able atty's as possible on a starving artist budget, I'll dip into my spiritual account, the universe or (power on high) will help! We all are hoping at the very least our forums and events won't be censored out of existance, this scary idea needs taming. Be strong, confident and courageous, this is a new angle on an old societal behavior. REVOLUTION!
The link showed a page for Connecticut, which doesn't show any issues pending or passed. The recent news page had stuff from 2011. I think this site is woefully outdated (IMO). CASAA's site is constantly updated - get the news there (and join, for those who haven't).
Glad to come to the next CASAA meeting and also, I was confused, but also gladdened that others are watching the states, as CASAA does, there is a need for organized and not dis-organized organizations. Chaos is not going to help. 
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
It continues to become less likely that any state or local legislators will try to ban the sale of e-cigarettes to adults.
After ten bills were introduced in seven state legislatures from 2009-2011 to ban e-cigarette sales (and after all were defeated), only one bill was introduced in 2012 to do so, which was the whacky short lived bill by NY Sen Kemp Hannon that was introduced the same week the NY Senate was considering the legislation that now bans e-cig sales to minors (that Gov. Cuomo signed this week).
By far the biggest threat facing the future of the e-cigarette industry is the FDA proposing/approving the "deeming" regulation to apply Chapter IX of the FSPTCA to e-cigarettes and other unregulated tobacco products.
I'm not aware that Lorillard CEO Murray Kessler ever said (as claimed by TTK above) he wasn't concerned about the FDA, as he wasn't even aware of the ramifications of the "deeming" regulation on e-cigarettes when I spoke to him in May just after Lorillard bought blu cigs (because I was explaining to Murray and two of his execs about the dozens of different threats to the e-cigarette industry posed by the deeming regulation).
I urged Murray to have his lawyers read every sentence of Chapter IX very carefully (as it would apply to e-cigs) so he would truly understand how Chapter IX would decimate the e-cigarette industry.
My concern at that time, and still, is that Lorillard may endorse a watered down version of the "deeming" regulation if that's what the FDA proposes (which I suspect is likely to occur if Obama wins a second term).
Regarding timing, it is unlikely that the FDA will propose the "deeming" regulation before the November election.
If Obama wins, the FDA is likely to propose the "deeming" regulation next year, which will set off a major battle with the FDA over e-cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, dissolvables, hookah/shisha and other unregulated tobacco products. If FDA doesn't relent, I anticipate several lawsuits will be filed against
the agency.
If Romney wins the election, most of Obama appointees will be gone (including those at DHHS, FDA, CDC) and it is far less likely that Romney would allow his new DHHS Secretary to propose any unwarranted regulation. But even if Romney caves in and allows the FDA to propose a deeming regulation, his adminstration would be far more receptive (than Obama's has been or will be) to amending or killing their proposed regulation after its dozens of counterproductive clauses are exposed and opposed.
After ten bills were introduced in seven state legislatures from 2009-2011 to ban e-cigarette sales (and after all were defeated), only one bill was introduced in 2012 to do so, which was the whacky short lived bill by NY Sen Kemp Hannon that was introduced the same week the NY Senate was considering the legislation that now bans e-cig sales to minors (that Gov. Cuomo signed this week).
By far the biggest threat facing the future of the e-cigarette industry is the FDA proposing/approving the "deeming" regulation to apply Chapter IX of the FSPTCA to e-cigarettes and other unregulated tobacco products.
I'm not aware that Lorillard CEO Murray Kessler ever said (as claimed by TTK above) he wasn't concerned about the FDA, as he wasn't even aware of the ramifications of the "deeming" regulation on e-cigarettes when I spoke to him in May just after Lorillard bought blu cigs (because I was explaining to Murray and two of his execs about the dozens of different threats to the e-cigarette industry posed by the deeming regulation).
I urged Murray to have his lawyers read every sentence of Chapter IX very carefully (as it would apply to e-cigs) so he would truly understand how Chapter IX would decimate the e-cigarette industry.
My concern at that time, and still, is that Lorillard may endorse a watered down version of the "deeming" regulation if that's what the FDA proposes (which I suspect is likely to occur if Obama wins a second term).
Regarding timing, it is unlikely that the FDA will propose the "deeming" regulation before the November election.
If Obama wins, the FDA is likely to propose the "deeming" regulation next year, which will set off a major battle with the FDA over e-cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, dissolvables, hookah/shisha and other unregulated tobacco products. If FDA doesn't relent, I anticipate several lawsuits will be filed against
the agency.
If Romney wins the election, most of Obama appointees will be gone (including those at DHHS, FDA, CDC) and it is far less likely that Romney would allow his new DHHS Secretary to propose any unwarranted regulation. But even if Romney caves in and allows the FDA to propose a deeming regulation, his adminstration would be far more receptive (than Obama's has been or will be) to amending or killing their proposed regulation after its dozens of counterproductive clauses are exposed and opposed.
Last edited:
Thank you Bill Godshall, for the facts it still remains to be seen, as you have pointed out. To wait and see is probably the safest stand. I know who I won't vote for. It seems a given that the current admin is more than closed minded and really closely linked to the FDA. 
Thank you Bill Godshall, for the facts it still remains to be seen, as you have pointed out. To wait and see is probably the safest stand. I know who I won't vote for. It seems a given that the current admin is more than closed minded and really closely linked to the FDA.
I won't speak about political parties since I think it should be avoided here unless it has a specific relationship rather than an implication that anything is bound to be better than what we have now. I will speak about politicians in general. I have never heard of a change in Government resulting in a 180 degree change in policy for the FDA.
I will add that now is the time to hit your local politicians with direct questions about their stance on e-cigarettes, maybe even to educate them if necessary (probably Lol). Then hold them to any positive position they may make. I am not naive enough to think they will actually stick to their position or actually deliver anything that they promised, but you have the chance to make your voices heard at a time when they at least have to listen to you.
I hope everyone makes the most of this situation for the next 2 months.
Amen Brother. You never heard about it because it never happened. And it ain't gonna start next year. I distinctly remember hearing a lot of noise in 2010 about how if only John Boehner and the TP candidates won control of Congress, they'd be the white knights of vaping and all our fears would be over. How's that going?
Absolutely. On the Federal level, each of us has two Senators and one Representative. Odds are good that at least one of those folks are running for re-election this year, which means that they probably have at least one opponent challenging them for their seat. Cover all those bases! And yes, it is fine to contact the Presidential campaign offices of both (or all) parties.
Contact each of these folks to tell them your personal story and to ask if they will help you to keep smoke-free alternatives such as e-cigarettes, snus, and dissolvables available for sale to and use by adults so that smokers can use them to replace some or all of their smoked cigarettes, and that former smokers who, like you, have already escaped from smoking can continue to remain smoke-free.
Replacing smoked cigarettes with a smoke-free alternative source of nicotine is called Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR). See these sites for more information:
Tobaccoharmreduction.org
CASAA - The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association
For Smokers Only
When you have contacted all of your federal office-holders and their opponents (if any), move on to your state level legislators and the governor.
And then, repeat the same with your local elected officials.
Or if it is more comfortable for you, do this in reverse, beginning with your City Mayor, Council Member (or County Commissioner or whatever title is held by your local law makers), and then move on to the State level and finally the Federal level.
Use whatever mode of communication is most comfortable for you. If you're a good talker, ask for an appointment to talk with them in person. Most are happy (especially during an election year) to meet with their constituents and help them solve problems. If you're more comfortable writing, write a good letter and then snail mail or fax it to your legislator's office. The same letter can be used for all, just changing the name and address.
Don't know who these people are? The internet makes it easy to look up this information.
Find your U.S. Senators: U.S. Senate: Senators Home
Find your U.S. Representative: Find Your Representative · House.gov
Find State Senators & House Members: Congress.org – Get informed, get involved
To find the web site for your local (city/county/township) government, do a Google search. A little detective work will help you track down the name and contact information for these officials.
Well, the Dems have sponsored bills that would have destroyed the e-cig industry, and the Reps have
not brought them to the floor for a vote. They've just let them languish in committee. And every day
that the Reps continue to do this is another liberating day for us to be able to enjoy the way things are.
Would things have been worse had the Dems retained control of the House? I don't pretend to know.
What I do know is that I am super mighty fine with the extension of the status quo the Reps have
been enabling (even though I know that it is only at the temporary behest of big tobacco). The free-
wheeling days of vaping will surely come to an end no matter who we put in office - but there is no
need for us to risk rushing it along. Each extra day we have to prepare for the inevitable is a good day.
They don't have a chance because you (ok, WE) refuse to vote your (our) conscious. As a former LP candidate, activist, and state party official (I'm still on the State Committee), nothing is more aggravating than hearing the same thing every two years--"I agree with Libertarians, but we can't let "X" win; THIS election is too important."
As if the RATE at which we're being morally raped and plundered is the thing, rather than standing up and saying "STOP the Rape and Plunder!" I can say that any and every LP candidate would give almost the same answer to regulation/taxation of your personal vices--that they are YOURS to exercise, AND take responsibility for.
Amens.
I seriously doubt that any of the local politicians will have an answer but I totally agree with you X P3. After the latest study findings coming from the EU and the University of Athens in Greece, I am very fearful that if we do not as a community become more organized and form our own Political Action Committee (PAC) we might wake up one day and find ourselves deprived of this truly great technology. If you know of any PACs please let me know...
Cheers,
B123
Cheers,
B123
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
X P3 wrote
Except that Bush's appointed FDA commissioner Andrew Von Eschenbach vehemently opposed the FSPTCA (and Von Eschenbach's testimony to Congress cited tobacco harm reduction as a reason for opposing the legislation).
But once Obama was elected, his appointees at DHHS aggressively campaigned for Congress to enact the FSPTCA.
That's a 180 degree change.
Except that Bush's appointed FDA commissioner Andrew Von Eschenbach vehemently opposed the FSPTCA (and Von Eschenbach's testimony to Congress cited tobacco harm reduction as a reason for opposing the legislation).
But once Obama was elected, his appointees at DHHS aggressively campaigned for Congress to enact the FSPTCA.
That's a 180 degree change.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
