Latest news on FDA tobacco legislative situation in the US Senate

[Bill Godshall]

Following is the latest news on the FDA tobacco legislative situation in the US Senate. Not sure if the full Senate will consider Waxman's bill or if the Senate will act on Kennedy's not-yet-introduced bill (which likely would have to go through the HELP Cmte before reaching the full Senate).

Although I gave Jim Carroll the heads up and urged him to write this article, he chose not to even mention our opposition to the Waxman/Kennedy legislation and our efforts to amend it in the Senate (with smokefree tobacco/nicotine product provisions).

- -

Senate set to speed up tobacco measure
Bill would allow federal regulation of all products

By James R. Carroll
jcarroll@courier-journal.com
Louisville Courier-Journal
April 26, 2009
Senate set to speed up tobacco measure | courier-journal.com | The Courier-Journal

WASHINGTON -- The Senate plans to expedite legislation that would give the federal government the power to regulate tobacco products.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has told supporters of the legislation, which passed the House on April 2 on a 298-112 vote, that the matter will be taken up before the end of May.

Bipartisan backing for the bill is strong in the Senate, so the measure is likely to pass and be signed into law by President Barack Obama, who also supports it.

The legislation would give the federal Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate the manufacturing, marketing and sales of tobacco products. Congressional deliberations are being closely watched in tobacco-growing states such as Kentucky, the second-leading producer of the leaf.

Reid met with representatives of the American Heart Association in his Capitol office last week.

"He was quite straightforward in saying that he knew, of course, the bill had passed the House and he hoped to do it in the next five weeks," said Derek Scholes, a lobbyist with the association.

Jim Manley, spokesman for Reid, confirmed that Senate action is slated for next month.

Bill ready for vote

The only question is whether the House-passed bill, sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., will be taken up by the Senate or whether a separate and basically identical Senate measure will be voted on instead.

Reid has invoked a Senate rule that allows the Waxman bill to be considered on the Senate floor without first being approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, whose chairman is Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

Kennedy spokeswoman Melissa Wagoner said last week that the senator still intends to introduce his own measure, as he did last year.

It was essentially the same as Waxman's plan.

While the House approved Waxman's bill last year, the Senate ran out of time and never took up Kennedy's bill.

Manley said no final decision has been made on the legislative procedures in the Senate for considering the tobacco bill.

Scholes said his association and Reid "didn't get too much into the weeds on that." But he added that "we're very excited we may finally see the bill go through this Senate."

Stepping up pressure

As a sign of intensifying lobbying for the measure, supporters have begun running ads in Washington-based publications to urge senators to act.

In one ad, a girl looks into the camera, standing next to these words: "You have the power to protect me from America's #1 cause of preventable death. Senators, it's time for FDA regulation of tobacco."

The ad is sponsored by the American Heart Association, American Lung Association, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, the Cancer Action Network of the American Cancer Society and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Another ad shows rows of schoolhouses and says: "7,000 kids have smoked their first cigarette since yesterday."

Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said that the bill has been debated in the Senate for years and that now is the time to act.

"Congress has a lot on its plate this year," Myers said. "The goal of our advertising campaign is to ensure that the tobacco bill gets the attention it deserves."

How it would work

If passed, the legislation would empower the FDA to restrict tobacco advertising and marketing -- particularly any that it determines to be targeting children.

The FDA also would have the authority to require larger and more graphic warnings on cigarette packs and demand disclosure of tobacco product ingredients.

The agency would not regulate tobacco farmers and would not be allowed to ban tobacco.

The cost of the regulation would be covered by fees imposed on the tobacco manufacturers and importers.

Reporter James R. Carroll can be reached at (202) 906-8141

 

[esmok-e]

They won't be able to ignore us or stifle us. With the gaining grass-roots support and easily obtainable facts regarding the product. This is a non-tobacco item - maybe it is a NRT device by FDA "definition" but strictly speaking so is a Tobacco cigarette when it comes to Nicotine. They are digging a black hole which any person with half a brain can light up with the tip of a single e-cig.

 

[Sar]

...
The agency would not regulate tobacco farmers and would not be allowed to ban tobacco.
...

So the agency could not ban tobacco outright. But would the agency be able to regulate tobacco, or tobacco product sales?

 

[jmoney]

just a thought wouldn't it take more tobacco to make the pure nicotine that we need for our e-juice? just thought maybe tobacco farmers would be completely behind us.

 

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

So the agency could not ban tobacco outright. But would the agency be able to regulate tobacco, or tobacco product sales?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but the provisions of the Waxman bill are:

The FDA cannot outright ban traditional tobacco cigarettes...but they can't say they approve them, either. Cigaratte manufacturers cannot state they are regulated or controled by the FDA (some think this would send the message to citizens that cigarettes are "approved" by the FDA) So, very hush, hush on this - the hill doesn't want the public to know this is going on.....

The FDA could do the following with tobacco:
1-control the amount/content of advertising for tobacco sales
2-control the amount of nicotine in a cigarette
3-control any alternate tobacco and/or nicotine products on the market since 2007.

This means SNUS, chew, dip, snuff, our E-Cigs, and I'm not sure what else would be firmly under the thumb of the FDA. Bottom line is that with FDA regulation you can kiss any new products bye-bye (unless marketed as an NRT, limited use product) and they will suck all the life out of the recreational nicotine industry. (how dare we have fun with a drug!!!!)

Here's the real scary part: The FDA, if given control of nicotine, will direct the tobacco companies to reduce the amt of nicotine in their cigarettes, in an attempt to make cigarettes less and less addictive. Clear thinkers can see that if you put less of the addictive substance in a cigarette, yon smokers are going to smoke MORE cigarettes to get their fix....So this bill will make tobacco sales SPIKE (and tax $$ increase, too).

There's your bottom line, people. This is why PM is sponsoring this bill, and why we've got to FIGHT it!

 

[TropicalBob]

You are correct, Vicks, in all your assumptions. E-cigs are relegated to history once the FDA can make demands of tobacco/nicotine alternative products.

All indications are that this will pass the Senate by a large margin of votes. It already has House approval. No question the President will sign it, since he sponsored it before running for President.

Oh ... and where are the pro e-smoking ads on television? A few on this forum wondered how our tiny David of an enthusiast base could hope to compete with the giant Goliath health organizations amassed against us. We have the answer: We can't.

We need a commercial with a little girl turning to the camera and saying, "My mommy smokes and is coughing so bad now that I'm really scared. Why would you deny her safer choices and condemn her to a smoker's death?"

 

[ISAWHIM]

It won't be long before we all start growing our own tobacco.

For the statement above, about needing more tobacco for e-cigs...

It is the reverse. A cigarette has 20mg of nicotine, only 2mg is consumed when smoked. So... two cigs will make one 40mg/ml bottle. 20 cigs will make a 10ml bottle of 40mg/ml. One carton will make 100ml of 40mg/ml bottle.

A 100ml bottle of juice would last 10x longer than a carton. (If diluted to 20mg/ml, as most would do, it would last for 20x longer than a carton.)

In short... it is a better investment, because after you extract the nicotine, you can sell the byproduct waste. The water you extract can be reused for the next batch, and the physical waste sludge that remains is already half decomposed and ready for mixing into top-soils. I am sure that tobacco is like marijuana, and the remaining 2000+ chemicals in the plant might have a more specific use that is beneficial, rather than harmful.

It is the FDA's fault that only nicotine is labeled as the "Addictive element", yet actual testing and real-world data suggests that nicotine is NOT the addictive element. (Otherwise we would all be happy with the gum and patches. There would not be such a high failure rate.)

Like when the FDA say THC is the addictive and "High", chemical in marijuana... but the facts indicate that the THC does not produce the high, and is not addictive. (There are several cannaboids and non-cannaboids that function as a whole, to produce the "high". There is no addictive chemicals in marijuana, as all the testing has indicated. Addiction is purely psychological desire for the normalcy and calming effects that are pleasurable, and non-harmful. Indicated by the years of successful use with vaporizers, and years of failure with government-patented THC.) If they knew what they were actually talking about, the world would be fixed by now. $85,000,000,000.00 later, and all we have are more taxes, and higher use of everything they attempt to save us from.

 

[ISAWHIM]

How about we all write the FDA, Obama, and this control-freak Harry Reid... and tell them how it helped us, how we are willing to participate as a "test statistic", since we already use these devices. How we believe, as users who see first-hand, that they are doing the world an injustice by acting in such an epidemic manor. How we perceive their abuse of power as a direct threat to our potential right to life.

I don't mind saying that it is my living right to have this choice. That it is my living right to remove people who take unnecessary actions like this from my payroll. That I find it insulting how these laws/bills are allowed to be funded by large corporations who are not willing to pay for the testing they demand of others. How I find it insulting that my tax dollars are being blindly consumed by tobacco, are not being used to repay me back for the potential losses I have accrued. That I am insulted by the removal of the only device which finally offered me a chance to regain my life, and my money, has been pulled out of reach, in favor of the "Known" harmful substitutes, and in favor of the expensive devices which have high failure rates for quitting.

 

[jcoppers]

Frankly, because the government does not give a rats ... about our health. Harry Reid, the FDA and every other worthless piece of crap in the government cares about one thing and one thing only. Money, how much can I get in the time I am here. The worst part is that even though everyone knows this, the same .......s are continuously re-elected to office. Sorry for the rant, but it really pisses me off.

 

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

Greed needs to be a 4 letter word......nowadays, it's a status symbol.

 

[Sar]

Aren't indian reservations exempt from tobacco control and regulation? Would that also apply to e-cigs sold on indian reservations?

 

[esmok-e]

 

[Jim Davis]

Aren't indian reservations exempt from tobacco control and regulation? Would that also apply to e-cigs sold on indian reservations?

Some time ago, the gov't was fighting to pass a law that you had to be at least part Indian to purchase on the reservations. Because I'm part Indian, I never followed it because I wasn't worried about it at the time. I don't know what ever happened to it.

The reservations could possibly be exempt, but they would most likely be affected by receiving supplies like everyone else.

 

[esmok-e]

Aren't indian reservations exempt from tobacco control and regulation? Would that also apply to e-cigs sold on indian reservations?

You would have to be an electronic Indian.... (probably made by Sony or Honda)

 

[LaceyUnderall]

How about we all write the FDA, Obama, and this control-freak Harry Reid... and tell them how it helped us, how we are willing to participate as a "test statistic", since we already use these devices. How we believe, as users who see first-hand, that they are doing the world an injustice by acting in such an epidemic manor. How we perceive their abuse of power as a direct threat to our potential right to life.

I don't mind saying that it is my living right to have this choice. That it is my living right to remove people who take unnecessary actions like this from my payroll. That I find it insulting how these laws/bills are allowed to be funded by large corporations who are not willing to pay for the testing they demand of others. How I find it insulting that my tax dollars are being blindly consumed by tobacco, are not being used to repay me back for the potential losses I have accrued. That I am insulted by the removal of the only device which finally offered me a chance to regain my life, and my money, has been pulled out of reach, in favor of the "Known" harmful substitutes, and in favor of the expensive devices which have high failure rates for quitting.

It's a great idea. You should do it. Don't hold back! Let them know how YOU feel.

 

[LuckyCharm]

I've been trying to keep up with this issue... I understand the bill is now before the Senate for a vote. Does anybody know when that will take place? I've been meaning to fax my senators for several days now, but haven't gotten around to it. But I'll make it my priority this evening, if it's not too late already.

~~Cheryl

 

[LaceyUnderall]

It is my understanding they hope to move on this by the end of May.

It is also my understanding that there is some chattering going on on the Hill and the ecig is being mentioned in conversations. This is good!

so... the more we can do the better. our little voices may just be heard!

 

[LuckyCharm]

Here is what I'm faxing to my senators. If I can't get my fax to go through, I will deliver a paper copy to their office tomorrow.

Senators Murray and Cantwell
United States Senate

Dear Senators:

Senators Murray and Cantwell, as a loyal constituent and proud liberal, I was deeply shocked that our Representative Norm Dicks would cosponsor the “Waxman Tobacco Bill,” which is supported by Phillip Morris and opposed by the FDA! An April 16th article on TheHill.com by Jeff Stier, associate director, American Council on Science and Health, titled "Waxman’s anti-smoking bill may do more harm than good," points out that this bill could effectively kill proven safer smoking alternatives, and by regulating nicotine content, could actually lead to MORE smoking of tobacco products (cut the nicotine in cigarettes = more cigarettes smoked)! In other words, it is set to backfire big-time, if the intent is to improve public health.

I, Mesdames, am a case study in the effectiveness of the new so-called e-cigarettes, an electronic vapor-delivery system that may or may not contain nicotine. And I am one of the many "accidental quitters" who happened upon this safer alternative and abruptly quit smoking after a 30+-year, pack-a-day habit. I used to shush doctors when they'd start to talk to me about quitting. "I don't even want to hear it, you're wasting your breath and my time." I had NO intention of quitting smoking last month -- until I received my first e-cig. Since then, it's been nothing but positive. No more losing sleep from lying awake at night hacking. No more waking in the middle of the night and going on the porch for a smoke. No more fire hazard from lighters. No more ashes, burn holes, smelly butts to discard. And just think of the savings to the VA, of which I am a client. Decreased risk of lung cancer, emphysema, etc. Easier dental cleanings.

My friends and family are so thrilled that I’ve finally quit smoking. They had long since given up on me. The patch or the gum would never have worked for me, because part of the feeling I crave is the “throat hit,” as we call it – the sensation produced when smoke or vapor is inhaled. This product provides that sensation without all the carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, arsenic, and hundreds of other chemicals present in tobacco.

My dear Senators, my story is typical of thousands of others. Finally a way to give up all those toxic chemicals and quit polluting the atmosphere, and still satisfy a craving we're going to yield to one way or the other. Scores of doctors and scientists have come out in support of e-cigs. The only thing their prohibition would do is to keep lining Big Tobacco's pockets. Now that the bill has passed the House, we currently hope and pray it doesn’t pass in the Senate. Please, oppose this bill, and allow us to keep our e-cigarettes!

Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,

~~Cheryl

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Cheryl - I love the "accidental quitter" part. So true!

One note: FDA does not oppose this bill (my understanding). They have been looking forward to this since at least 94!

Some groups who do: Association of Public Health Physicians, some units of tobaccofree.org, Michael Siegel of TobaccoAnalysis

wonderful though. If you head to the hill... stop into the Capital Grille and have a stoley doley for me. Just one though... and make sure you eat so you aren't off of your rocker! mmmmm.... stoley doley (insert homer smilie here)

 

[TropicalBob]

It is a FORMER head of the FDA who opposes the bill, not the FDA per se. Good letter otherwise.