National Call to Action! Stop the FDA from banning nearly ALL vapor products from the market!

[JustJulie]

A provision (Sec. 747) in this year’s budget bill could save the U.S. vapor industry from being destroyed by the overbearing and burdensome FDA premarket application process.

CASAA is asking members to voice support for a provision in this year’s budget bill that would change the grandfather date for products that are about to be subject to the FDA’s tobacco regulations. This provision would essentially include the Cole bill language -- HR 2058 -- and require the FDA to move the grandfather date to the effective date of the final regulation.

Without a change in the February 2007 grandfather date, more than 99% of vapor products currently on the market will be gone within two years. This is not hyperbole. The cost of obtaining premarket approvals with the FDA’s Center for tobacco Products is intentionally prohibitive, and all indications are that there will be no significant exemptions made for vapor products.

If Congress does not act to change the grandfather date established by the tobacco Control Act, the wide variety of vapor products that adult smokers have come to rely on to live smoke-free will be swept off the market.

Even if you’ve taken action before, your voice is needed now.

Please take action NOW by contacting your Representative and Senators!

Direct link to email campaign: National Call to Action! Stop the FDA from banning nearly ALL vapor products from the market!
Direct link to phone campaign: National Call to Action! Make a Call to stop the FDA from banning nearly ALL vapor products from the market!

See details in the full Call to Action:
CASAA: National Call to Action! Stop the FDA from banning nearly ALL vapor products from the market!

 

[zoiDman]

Now would be a Good Time for people to Do Something.

 

[Katya]

Done!

 

[bigbob2322]

DONE.

 

[tyleris12]

Done!

 

[puffon]

Done!
So many times they don't send back any canned response any more.

 

[TheMike21]

We really need to get vape companies to do something as well, if they want to stay in business they need to invest in lobbyists and advocacy.

I spoke with my local legislator in person the other day but this won't count for this particular cause (I live in Mexico) Sorry.

 

[Katya]

Just received a response from my representative (R-CA).

Dear Ms. xxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me with your support for the FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2015 (H.R. 2058). Hearing from my constituents is important to me and I appreciate the time you took to share your views.

The Tobacco Control Act of 2009 authorizes the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate tobacco products and products with nicotine derived from tobacco. Under this law, the FDA was given immediate regulatory authority over cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco. The law also allows the FDA the ability to regulate other tobacco products. Specifically, the law states that any cigarette, smokeless tobacco, or roll-your-own tobacco that was already in the marketplace before February 15, 2007 is grandfathered and can remain on the market without manufacturers submitting applications for FDA approval. Manufacturers making changes to grandfathered tobacco products or introducing new tobacco products after this date are required to file an application with the FDA.

On April 25, 2014, the FDA released its proposed deeming regulation, which would grant authority for the agency to regulate cigars, vapor products, and other tobacco-derived nicotine products. The proposed rule states that it would maintain the February 15, 2007 grandfather date for new products, which could create barriers for new products entering the marketplace.

As you know, H.R. 2058 would make the grandfather date for newly deemed tobacco products the effective date of the final rule. Further, it would provide for a 21-month transition period, like that given to cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco products. This legislation is currently awaiting consideration by the House Energy and Commerce Committee; however, there is some discussion that similar language will be included in the Fiscal Year 2016 omnibus appropriations bill. Should H.R. 2058 or similar language come before the full House for a vote, please be assured I will keep your thoughts in mind.

(snip)

 

[puffon]

Just received a response from my representative (R-CA).

Dear Ms. xxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me with your support for the FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2015 (H.R. 2058). Hearing from my constituents is important to me and I appreciate the time you took to share your views.

The Tobacco Control Act of 2009 authorizes the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate tobacco products and products with nicotine derived from tobacco. Under this law, the FDA was given immediate regulatory authority over cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco. The law also allows the FDA the ability to regulate other tobacco products. Specifically, the law states that any cigarette, smokeless tobacco, or roll-your-own tobacco that was already in the marketplace before February 15, 2007 is grandfathered and can remain on the market without manufacturers submitting applications for FDA approval. Manufacturers making changes to grandfathered tobacco products or introducing new tobacco products after this date are required to file an application with the FDA.

On April 25, 2014, the FDA released its proposed deeming regulation, which would grant authority for the agency to regulate cigars, vapor products, and other tobacco-derived nicotine products. The proposed rule states that it would maintain the February 15, 2007 grandfather date for new products, which could create barriers for new products entering the marketplace.

As you know, H.R. 2058 would make the grandfather date for newly deemed tobacco products the effective date of the final rule. Further, it would provide for a 21-month transition period, like that given to cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco products. This legislation is currently awaiting consideration by the House Energy and Commerce Committee; however, there is some discussion that similar language will be included in the Fiscal Year 2016 omnibus appropriations bill. Should H.R. 2058 or similar language come before the full House for a vote, please be assured I will keep your thoughts in mind.


(snip)

That is almost word for word what my FL rep sent me.
They never tell you their thoughts and how they will vote on it, just they "will keep your thoughts in mind"
Typical politicians.....

 

[zoiDman]

That is almost word for word what my FL rep sent me.
They never tell you their thoughts and how they will vote on it, just they "will keep your thoughts in mind"
Typical politicians.....

I usually include in my Closing Statement when I contact an elected official Something to this effect.

"... Thank you for your in-depth consideration is this matter. And I will keep your thoughts in My mind when I make my next campaign contribution. And of course, when I have the opportunity to vote."

 

[Marina2]

This legislation is currently awaiting consideration by the House Energy and Commerce Committee; however, there is some discussion that similar language will be included in the Fiscal Year 2016 omnibus appropriations bill.

According to news just released by The American Vaping Association that "similar language" will not be included in the Fiscal Year 2016 omnibus appropriations bill.

Omnibus Bill Will Protect Cigarette Markets & Harm Public Health
Congress squanders the opportunity to save tens of thousands of American jobs

News - The American Vaping Association

 

[Katya]

Terrible news.

 

[MarkCM]

That is almost word for word what my FL rep sent me.
They never tell you their thoughts and how they will vote on it, just they "will keep your thoughts in mind"
Typical politicians.....

I have worked (well was an intern) in a legislative office here in Ohio and I can tell you that they use scripted letters. Every person that contacted your representative about said bill, got that same exact message that you got back. And it's almost the same for every other congressional rep or Senators office. Very rarely do they ever personally address the person who sent them the info or anything. They draft an outline of talking points for a specific topic/issue, and that's the same one everyone gets concerning that topic. Trust me, I wrote a few of them myself. Rarely, and I mean rarely (although possible, because I have had it happen), they will personally address your concerns and directly comment and go off the "cuff" with their response. But that's rare. More than likely, the person responding to you is an intern or low level staffer. Unless you flood their office with phone calls or emails concerning the same topic/issue(to the point where it's annoying the staffers and they have to discuss it with the Rep or Senator), the legislator may never even know how many of his/her constituents feel. BUT, if you had a truckload of campaign contributions, or a powerful lobbyist group in your corner, you bet they'll listen. (The vaping industry needs money and more lobbyists or we're going to be SOL soon).

 

[inspects]

DIY time shortly, probably after the lawsuits end.

 

[Jman8]

In the latest CASAA CTA (that came out yesterday), I used pretty much the same wording as given, but inserted (in all caps) the following:

NOT PASSING THIS BILL WILL UNDOUBTEDLY CREATE A BLACK/UNDERGROUND MARKET.

Just wanted to make sure they were aware of that.

 

[Roiikka-Ta]

And what is the ultimatum here with this/these bill(s) etc. etc. ?
Everyone go back to cigarettes and tobacco huh .. .. ..
You'd think the point of life was to progress, not digress .. not go BACK, but to move FORWARDS ..
Talk about a stunted mindset .. wow ..

 

[MyMagicMist]

... BUT, if you had a truckload of campaign contributions, or a powerful lobbyist group in your corner, you bet they'll listen. (The vaping industry needs money and more lobbyists or we're going to be SOL soon).

My apologies for being direct, maybe even crude. From what I'm comprehending of things is the lobbyist akin to a bag person, i.e. they carry the contribution to the politician for considerations on the issue/s? Do they need any special educational requirements beyond familiarity of the issue? Can they be a volunteer?

As I said my apologies. I am not one too keen upon politics. Not a diplomat either.

 

[MarkCM]

My apologies for being direct, maybe even crude. From what I'm comprehending of things is the lobbyist akin to a bag person, i.e. they carry the contribution to the politician for considerations on the issue/s? Do they need any special educational requirements beyond familiarity of the issue? Can they be a volunteer?

As I said my apologies. I am not one too keen upon politics. Not a diplomat either.

Top notch education is not necessary, but it can be helpful. The most useful lobbyists are the ones that can A). Have extensive knowledge of the topic or issue at hand and B.) Perhaps, most importantly, they are very persuasive. Lobbyists flip solid "Yea's" and "Nay's" when it comes to bills in Congress (at the state level as well, although varies depending on where you live), all the time. So when there's a surprise and bill goes down or a bill passes surprisingly, you can bet that a lobbyist got to one of those Congressman or Congresswoman (or Senator). And if they are put in front of someone on the fence? There's an even better chance they can flip them.

Basically, we need more lobbyists in the E-Cig industry. If they have the traits as I mentioned above, it bodes will for us and getting vape friendly legislation passed or anti-vape legislation denied. We just don't have enough right now, although CASAA continues to put up one heck of a battle with not nearly as many resources as other similar organizations have at their arsenal.