Don't worry about it. It is very confusing.Well, I think after today I will turn in my Nancy Drew card.
I just feel sick about what I reported earlier. I guess I just keep expecting nothing but bad news with this, and what he said, and what I interpreted, were two very different things.
H.R.2058 - FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2015
- Thread starter Bronze
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Well, I think after today I will turn in my Nancy Drew card.
I just feel sick about what I reported earlier. I guess I just keep expecting nothing but bad news with this, and what he said, and what I interpreted, were two very different things.
Do not feel bad. This has us all on edge and jumpy.
I do believe, if we hear nothing on the Floor that is a good thing. Things cannot be added or removed without a Motion/Vote.
Quiet in the House/Senate is Good
Thanks.
Yeah, I admit, I am extremely edgy and jumpy. The last week and a half has been a blur, even though I knew the day was coming (deeming regs), eventually.Do not feel bad. This has us all on edge and jumpy.
I do believe, if we hear nothing on the Floor that is a good thing. Things cannot be added or removed without a Motion/Vote.
Quiet in the House/Senate is Good
And you know, I do know that, regarding adding or removing something.
No no no! You don't need to apologize at all! Thank you for going beyond the call and listening to all that drivel!
I SO wish I could find a hilarious English skit I saw that you could probably relate to right now. A documentary type interviewer goes off to talk to a woman who suffered narcolepsy and passes out on a regular basis. Next screen, he's interviewing her husband about what he does....He starts monotonously rambling about how he's an MP for Lincolnshire and is responsible for a bill currently before the Commons pertaining to weights and measures, its impact on the local farming community, and how it would be a good thing for fisheries, but not for cattle farmers...while slowly slowly the video camera starts lilting to the left and lilting to the left and lilting to the left, then Bmmph! At least they found the solution. lol! Let's hope the House does the same thing and flat out misses it!
Last edited:
Oh, thank you for that, but I do feel bad. I think tomorrow I'm going to try to take a long walk, and regroup...after work.
Thankfully, it was a short meeting, but the
kissing at the end made me want to VOMIT!Good night, and bless you all! Thanks for putting up with me.
As bad a shape as this country is in. With manufacturers offshoring every imaginable job overseas because it's cheaper. Profit is their only concern, To shut down an industry that is just beginning to start and help people here this way is in my view criminal. Vote. This is where you start having to pay attention not to your party but how a candidate votes. Do you really think this country can lose more small business job?
Hmmm... AEMSA just hired a consulting/lobbying firm to push for HR 2058
E-cigarette Group Gets Lobbying Help - Wed., May 18, 2016
E-cigarette Group Gets Lobbying Help - Wed., May 18, 2016
When backed in a corner like we are...working any possible angle can only be viewed as good. I've been pestering the fda Facebook page just for fun. Maybe enough gnats like me fly around in their face long enough that people start getting annoyed and angry just like me. Lol.
Better you live in their head than them live in your head.
CASAA has sent out an updated CTA.
CASAA: US - Take action to change to the predicate date for vapor products newly deemed as tobacco by the FDA
CASAA: US - Take action to change to the predicate date for vapor products newly deemed as tobacco by the FDA
Thank you Katya.CASAA has sent out an updated CTA.
CASAA: US - Take action to change to the predicate date for vapor products newly deemed as tobacco by the FDA
Tom Cole already changed the language in the amendment for a very good reason,
The only reason Sanford Bishop sponsored the bill was because of the change of language and the only reason it's now moving is because of the "bipartisan amendment"
Correct. They added age restrictions (among other things) to the amendment to make it harder for Democrats to say no to it. It took away some of their ammunition they used for trying to kill 2058. Still only getting nibbles from the left. This said, no reason to kill HR2058 at this point.
CASAA: US - Take action to change to the predicate date for vapor products newly deemed as tobacco by the FDA
"CASAA will be issuing a new, strategically-timed Call to Action to support the Cole-Bishop amendment before the appropriations bill comes to a vote in the House. At this time, we are urging our members to support both of these pieces of legislation. We have updated our message to lawmakers in this Call to Action to reflect this support."
CASAA: US - Take action to change to the predicate date for vapor products newly deemed as tobacco by the FDA
I truly wish they were working to keep an alread in place Amendment(Cole-Bishop) rather than wrapping up valuable time and money on a Proposal with a 4% chance of survival.
Tom Cole Agrees, the new Amendment is better - with Bipartisan Support.
We can lobby Representatives Free of Charge for either or Both as we see fit.
"CASAA will be issuing a new, strategically-timed Call to Action to support the Cole-Bishop amendment before the appropriations bill comes to a vote in the House. At this time, we are urging our members to support both of these pieces of legislation. We have updated our message to lawmakers in this Call to Action to reflect this support."
Thank you Katya!!
Actually, the Cole amendment has some favorable directives over 2058. Both would prevent enforcement of the 2007 date. While the Cole amendment does still require additional warnings and place new limits on advertising, it requires the FDA to clearly state the standards to be used in evaluating any future products. Right now, there really is no information on how an application will be reviewed and what is required for approval. Establishing those standards in advance (12 months) would provide industry a path to dispute those standards should they turn out to be utterly cumbersome to ever expect any product from gaining approval.
Rather than waiting for the two year period to expire and then sit through another year of awaiting an approval as the current Deeming regulation lay out (yeah, good luck they would ever approve a new tobacco product for sale unless the applicant has the kind of deep pockets BT has), the process would be far more transparent, and if the standards are truly onerous, serve as an excellent basis to establish challenges to overreaching regulation. Under 2058, we might get to keep whatever is currently on the market, but with the Cole amendment, and a opportunity to review and challenge the approval process before implementation, there could still be innovation and new products brought to us.
I'm all for supporting both, but regardless of which, if either, passes, I'd much rather force the FDA to publicly produce standards for the review process before enforcement. It's the best way to assure not only what we currently have will be grandfathered in, but new product approval might not be as daunting as they otherwise might be. I can live with that even if it means some labeling changes and enforcement of the underage restriction. As to advertising, well, personally outside of BT, there's not a lot of vaping ads out there in the media, and the net will be unaffected, which is where most of us get our info about this stuff anyway.
Rather than waiting for the two year period to expire and then sit through another year of awaiting an approval as the current Deeming regulation lay out (yeah, good luck they would ever approve a new tobacco product for sale unless the applicant has the kind of deep pockets BT has), the process would be far more transparent, and if the standards are truly onerous, serve as an excellent basis to establish challenges to overreaching regulation. Under 2058, we might get to keep whatever is currently on the market, but with the Cole amendment, and a opportunity to review and challenge the approval process before implementation, there could still be innovation and new products brought to us.
I'm all for supporting both, but regardless of which, if either, passes, I'd much rather force the FDA to publicly produce standards for the review process before enforcement. It's the best way to assure not only what we currently have will be grandfathered in, but new product approval might not be as daunting as they otherwise might be. I can live with that even if it means some labeling changes and enforcement of the underage restriction. As to advertising, well, personally outside of BT, there's not a lot of vaping ads out there in the media, and the net will be unaffected, which is where most of us get our info about this stuff anyway.
Nibbles from the left ? since it's bipartisan, it passed the house of appropriations 31/19
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
