wv2win wrote:
When you look at the history of political positions "for and against" the use of personal vaporizers, Republicans primarily support vaping and believe people should be left alone to make up their own minds on what helps them be more healthly and Democrats primarily are against the use of personal vaporizers and believe vaping should be banned. I've never been one (and I'm still not) to advocate voting by party line vs voting for the individual but when it comes to vaping, the more Democrats that are in power, the more likely are right to vape will be taken away.
During the 25 years I've been campaigning for various types of legislation (that reduces cigarette smoking), tobacco harm reduction is the first tobacco policy issue that is clearly a partisan issue, (with left/liberal Democrats who are tobacco prohibitonists staunchly opposing tobacco harm reduction products and policies, while many Republicans have supported harm reduction products and policies).
Although not all Democrats oppose tobacco harm reduction, very few Democrats have publicly endorsed tobacco harm reduction products or policies for fear of upsetting their left/liberal Democrat colleagues who have proposed banning e-cigarettes, dissolvables, flavorings, etc.
csnoski wrote:
OK Bill,
I hate to sound dense here, but do I need to write to my esteemed senators Coats and Lugar re:flavored cigars? I mean, what can/should we do?
Letters/calls should be sent/made to members of Congress (both Senators and Representatives) urging them to
"Oppose the FDA's attempt to ban e-cigarettes"
Letters/calls should explain that after the federal courts stopped Obama appointed FDA officials from trying to ban the sale of e-cigarettes (by claiming they were unregulated drug devices), that the FDA has subsequently stated its intent to propose a "deeming" regulation that would apply Chapter IX of the Tobacco Control Act to e-cigarettes (and other currently unregulated tobacco products including cigars), which would ban virtually all or all e-cigarette products since Section 910 bans all products not on the market before Feb 15, 2007.
The second paragraph of letters (or second part of calls) to Congress members should briefly (in several sentences) explain your personal experience with e-cigarettes (especially if they helped you quit smoking or sharply reduce your cigarette consumption).
The rest of the letters/calls should cite some of the false and misleading claims made by FDA about e-cigarettes in 2009 and 2010 (when the agency was trying to scare federal judges and the public to believe that e-cigarettes contained toxic poison and caused cancer, and to believe that all e-cig companies target marketed to children and were making unproven therapeutic claims.
Also point out that since April 25 when the FDA stated it would comply with Judge Leon's ruling, the agency has continued to post on its website the same false and misleading claims about e-cigarettes and e-cigarette companies, and that just last week the FDA's Lawrence Deyton made more false and misleading claims about e-cigarettes (in response to the petition to the White House), and once again claimed the agency planned to regulate (er ban) the products.
It would be helpful (especially in letters/calls to Republicans) to point out that Sen. Lautenberg had previously urged the FDA to ban e-cigarettes (in 2009), and that Lautenberg and other Democrat Senators have sent multiple letters to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg urging her to propose a "deeming" regulation for currently unregulated tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, cigars and dissolvable tobacco products.
And the last sentence of the letter (please keep letters to one page) should once again urging your member of Congress to "please oppose the FDA's attempt to ban e-cigarettes."
