Obama signed the Pact Act today...
- Thread starter eplanet
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Eplanet, thanks for the information, we need someone to explain the legalese in the bill. I did get the lies, they have been getting people to quit and will get more to quit with this bill. The problem is the quit smoking rates is stagnated. They are losing ground to the smoker. All the while losing those tax dollars.
I don't understand how something that contains no tobacco can be subject to a tobacco tax. Is it just me or is that about as low down as they can go. They even go on to state that tobacco has killed 400 thousand people and cost all this money and there idea is to punish the suppliers who are helping people kick that habit. all the politics and ignorance that surrounds these issues are so infuriating!
Okay, I'm confused. Most of what I can find about the PACT Act on the forums is in the alternative methods area. Since the FDA is calling e-cigs a tobacco product in their lawsuit, doesn't that mean that we can't ship e-liquid, filled carts and kits via USPS anymore?
Actually, the FDA isn't suing. It is being sued by Smoking Everywhere and Sottera (NJOY) because the FDA claims that e-cigarettes are a drug-delivery device, aimed at smoking cessation. The plaintiffs (that's SE & NJOY) claim that their product is an alternative way to smoke. Judge Leon has ruled that FDA can't regulate them as drugs and that they should be treated as tobacco products.
Regarding the PACT act, I'm not seeing that Obama signed it. Here is what I found:
The bill may now proceed to a conference committee of senators and representatives to work out differences in the versions of the bill each chamber approved. The bill then goes to the President before becoming law. [Last Updated: Mar 18, 2010 12:32PM]
So according to this site, it isn't law yet. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to get quashed. S. 1147: PACT Act (GovTrack.us)
This is the full text of the bill as approved by the Senate:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-1147t
From what I can see, it covers traditional tobacco cigarettes (but not cigars) and smokeless tobacco, defined as "finely cut, ground, powdered, or leaf tobacco, or other product containing tobacco, that is intended to be placed in the oral or nasal cavity, or otherwise consumed without being combusted."
It's not been signed yet, but I'm sure it will be very soon. The only real opposition I can see is from the Native American Nations. They're ask that an exemption be added for them.
My question is, if SE/NJoy win the lawsuit and e-cigs are considered a tobacco product, does the PACT Act mean game over for us?
Also, what the heck are snus users suppose to do? Can you buy the good stuff here at local tobacco shops?
My question is, if SE/NJoy win the lawsuit and e-cigs are considered a tobacco product, does the PACT Act mean game over for us?
Also, what the heck are snus users suppose to do? Can you buy the good stuff here at local tobacco shops?
Taking that just one step further, it does not cover ecig products.
As a note...the seneca tribe did loby against it...as a result almost all the enforcement parts were taken out...the PACT act has for all intensive purposes been defanged to get it approved by the senate and sereral of the snus suppliers are laughing about it..
see here: Snuffhouse.org - Parsing the Senate PACT revision
see here: Snuffhouse.org - Parsing the Senate PACT revision
No you cant buy the good stuff at tob shops all they have is a lousy prod with low nic and a terrible sweet taste and what we are doing is ordering as much as we can afford. Some are getting tob seeds and planting their own and going to make their snus. The Presajoke and his pos cronies make me sooo mad but yes Pact will affect ecigs users as well.
Not yet it doesnt but if the court rules they are a tob product it will.
I'm guessing that 'the pact' wouldn't have influence or jurisdiction over non-tobacco products such as nicotine juice.
People are just made that we found a way around their antismoking im right your wrong liberalism. bs..... The whole point for the truth program was to steer kids away from smoking and to show what smoking really does. But ecigs are not real cigaretts. They can not be classified as such either. it is not constitutional for them to outlaw or limit it at all. but then again. It is not constitutional for them to take my right to free speech and my right to bare arms. but they are sure trying to do that as well. commys
No.
The PACT Act, as Vocalek already posted, specifically defines the products it applies to. It applies only to cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products, each of which is further specifically defined in the law. It does not apply to cigars, and it would not apply to ecig products - even if categorized as "tobacco products".
The term "tobacco products" is a very broad label - applying for purposes of federal law to anything containing tobacco or derived from tobacco (that last part is what makes ecigs eligible to be considered a "tobacco product").
But, any legislation about "tobacco products" invariably specifically defines WHICH particular tobacco products are being targeted by specific provisions, whether it be taxing statutes, the Food and Drug act provisions (for example, the new ban on flavors is specific to traditional combustible cigarettes too), and now the PACT Act.
Being a "tobacco product" in and of itself is meaningless in this context. A particular "tobacco product" is ONLY affected by any given law when specifically listed as a target of that law.
Last edited:
Very little is really known the real effect this will have or if a play on words will save the ecig but I wouldnt bet on it. PACT stands for Prevent all Cigarett Trafficing however all smokless tob is included and the ecig which is in court right now will either be classified as a medical device or a tob product, either way it looks like they got us comming and going.
To Answer your question the bill is heading to resolution committee for the house and Senate to resolve any differences they have in the bill then its sent to the Pres to be signed, after that 60-90 days and it is law.
I do not expect for resolution to take long it was approved by the Senate 2 days after the house approved it, hopefully Odonkey will be to busy with the health reform to sign it but I would bet on that either, this bill is now being ram rodded thought the process extremly fast.
Last edited:
Well, I'm not buying it yvilla. If e-cigs are decided to be a tobacco product then I think the Pact Act might be an issue even if it doesn't specifically specify it. I know it's sucking trouble through a long straw, but I do think we should be prepared for it as a possible problem in the future.
As for snus, it just plain wrong. We really need to get harm reduction strategies out there in the public to gain more acceptance. I'm not sure what to DO. But I know I want to DO something.
As for snus, it just plain wrong. We really need to get harm reduction strategies out there in the public to gain more acceptance. I'm not sure what to DO. But I know I want to DO something.
Well I PMed an attourney friend who lets just say is very knowledgable about the whole ecig thing and he pretty much thinks PACT will shut down all internet ordering and may cause problems with transporting tob proucts across state lines. Ill just say I think my friend knows what he is talking about but I hope hes wrong.
Last edited:
Well, I'm not buying it yvilla. If e-cigs are decided to be a tobacco product then I think the Pact Act might be an issue even if it doesn't specifically specify it. I know it's sucking trouble through a long straw, but I do think we should be prepared for it as a possible problem in the future.
As for snus, it just plain wrong. We really need to get harm reduction strategies out there in the public to gain more acceptance. I'm not sure what to DO. But I know I want to DO something.
Janetda, I'm NOT saying they could not or would not possibly amend the PACT Act at some point in time in the future. If they want to target ecigs and write them into an amended PACT Act (after ecigs win "tobacco product" classification, if they do), then of course they can!
What I am trying to do is stem the tide of misunderstanding as to the PACT Act as presently written - it simply would not apply to ecigs no matter their classification.
It seems to be a very common misapprehension - the absolutely false notion that "tobacco product" classification would automagically make ecigs subject to all sorts of laws and regulations (such as presently enacted taxation, presently written smoking bans, etc) that do apply to various specifically defined tobacco products. That is simply not correct.
If and when ecigs win "tobacco product" classification, then any legislative body wanting to make our lives even more miserable would have to in fact first enact (or amend) laws to specifically target them - to impose taxes on them, to ban use in public places, or to impose anything else their devious and mean minds can come up with.
Last edited:
seriously though, I KNOW I'm really going to sound naive but as long as they aren't totally banned then I'm willing to pay the tax on them. It sucks to pay a "sin tax" on something that's not any more harmful than coffee or soda pop, but I've been paying it for years without more than a grumble. Maybe its not fair but it's better than cold turkey.
OHH didnt you know they want to help obiese kids so they want to tax soda as well, cuz you know they want to help the kids drink less soda...yeah right!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
