obamacare and vaping?

[Mohamed]

Well, that's 217 previous posts and I still don't know how the heck to answer the question. I say it's NO for Smoking, but for "tobacco product" I'm unclear if the S.C. ruling was just to the limit of the FDA's authority, or it actually made them a "tobacco product" and if so what happens with the FDA approved (for long term use even) NRT's? The NRT's have the same or similar trace stuff in them.

I'm kind of with you on this...only been here a couple of months...but from what I gathered the FDA court ruling said that the ecig could not be regulated as a medical device and if they wanted to regulate it; it would have to as a tobacco product.

What's unclear is does the FDA now deem this a tobacco product? Has the FDA Officially declared this a tobacco product or are they just going under the assumption that they have the right to regulate as a tobacco product?

I'd be curious if another court case could be put in place to decide if it is a tobacco product...or has that ship sailed and it IS ALREADY a tobacco product?

 

[DC2]

I'm kind of with you on this...only been here a couple of months...but from what I gathered the FDA court ruling said that the ecig could not be regulated as a medical device and if they wanted to regulate it; it would have to as a tobacco product.

What's unclear is does the FDA now deem this a tobacco product? Has the FDA Officially declared this a tobacco product or are they just going under the assumption that they have the right to regulate as a tobacco product?

I'd be curious if another court case could be put in place to decide if it is a tobacco product...or has that ship sailed and it IS ALREADY a tobacco product?

I'm 90% certain that for Federal purposes electronic cigarettes are not officially tobacco products.
At least not until the upcoming "deeming regulations" say they are, and those regulations are officially put into final form and approved.

Until then, they are not "tobacco products" at the Federal level.
But that doesn't seem to keep states and such from redefining them if they so choose.

I do hope someone will correct me if I'm wrong...
But I'll only believe a CASAA board member or Bill Godshall regarding any corrections...

 

[ElectricalSocket]

Exposed! Obamacare Money trail and corruption

So shocked [/sarcasm]

We all know this is all about money. ACA, Deeming regulations, etc. It's all about THEM making $$$ and not to save YOU money. No one at the top cares about you, get real. Obamadoesn'tcare act. (just a little FYI for anyone still stuck in a delusional stockholm syndrome mentality)

 

[p51mustang23]

People really don't understand how inefficient both government and insurance companies are. Nor do they understand how efficient charities are.

Also, isn't it curious that Obamacare is paid for, almost in whole, by the middle class? Isn't it a bit odd that at $22,000 a year I am eligible for ZERO subsidies?

Through Obamacare the government will have untold access to our information. We are only just starting to realize how bad it is.

The people who qualify for subsidies can't pay the deductible. The people just above the cut-off for a subsidy can't afford the monthly rate OR the deductible. The people doing a bit better than that are having massive increases in prices, as are healthy people.

The insurance companies will be able to loot us, so they support it. The super elite who pull the strings want the middle class smothered, so they like it. The dems and RINO republicans are bought and paid for.

We are accelerating towards a revolution in this country. Let's hope its a peaceful one.

 

[rothenbj]

I think they wanted the system reformed and fixed...not TRANSFORMED

I wonder what a poll would look like if they asked, do you want healthcare - probably 100% or close to it, next question: "do you want the federal government to have the power and control to tell you you MUST buy insurance and charge a fine if you don't" somehow I don't think that one would be such a high number

This law so reminds me of other laws that require compliance. Let's take mandatory auto insurance. Laws are past mandating coverage yet, depending on State, 4.5-28% remain uninsured. No problem, they charge those that are insured an additional premium to protect them against those that are breaking the law. In the case of PA, the courts have even ruled that the uninsured driver can sue for economic and sometime non-economic damages.

Mandated insurance, fine collected by the government and the rest of us pick up the tab for those that use the system.

 

[Mohamed]

Just heard that the budget for the website was approx 100 million dollars but it actually costs approx 700 million dollars. I'm a computer programmer...I don't know about you but if I'm 2x over budget I'm getting my ... royally chewed and drilled with questions as to why. If I was 3x over budget I'd be canned. The contracted company is 7x over budget and the website isn't even fully functional. I wonder when a company contracts with the government does it just keep going or does someone have to continue to approve these over budget expenses. Sorry off topic again but had to give a little rant from what I heard on radio on car ride home.

 

[AttyPops]

Really? An I.T. project, with continually changing specs, that probably went out for initial bid (lowest bidder), and was done by contractors with contracts that get overtime for non-salaried workers, went over budget?

Maybe they should have used the military contracting model..........

 

[Mohamed]

Really? An I.T. project, with continually changing specs, that probably went out for initial bid (lowest bidder), and was done by contractors with contracts that get overtime for non-salaried workers, went over budget?

Maybe they should have used the military contracting model..........

Yeah I understand the forever changing spec syndrome...don't get me wrong on that That usually requires a change order and someone has to approve the changes and approve the additional spending...at least where I work. If it's beyond the scope of what was originally requested that is an automatic. Otherwise you get stuck developing something forever for the original bid. My point is someone had to keep approving these change order requests and additional spending. At 3x or 4x originally budget there would be some very drastic slashing of heads or talks of starting over. 2-3x is highest I've seen. And at 3x there better have been some pretty significant change orders to justify the 3x over budget or literally I would be canned at that point.

I've gone 2x over budget before and they are not happy. Usually what happens is you finish the original scope of the project and then they submit bids for new change requests. 95% of the time the originally contractor gets the job as they know the ins and outs of the project already.

 

[Mohamed]

I guess I'd like to know who was responsible in the government for budgeting this project. Some names would be good to know so we can point some fingers.

Not familiar with the military contracting model...you can pm me if you like as this is off topic Is that where you bid and even if takes you 7x the budget you only get paid for the original bid? The X amount not to exceed Y amount model?

 

[djezewski]

This law so reminds me of other laws that require compliance. Let's take mandatory auto insurance. Laws are past mandating coverage yet, depending on State, 4.5-28% remain uninsured. No problem, they charge those that are insured an additional premium to protect them against those that are breaking the law. In the case of PA, the courts have even ruled that the uninsured driver can sue for economic and sometime non-economic damages.

Mandated insurance, fine collected by the government and the rest of us pick up the tab for those that use the system.

Yes, and the illegals will still be going to the emergency room with no insurance, a street person isn't going to have Obamacare, etc, etc.. so all that crap about healthcare for everyone with the program..it is an impossibility! ..and it sure isn't free healthcare....

 

[AttyPops]

I guess I'd like to know who was responsible in the government for budgeting this project. Some names would be good to know so we can point some fingers.

Not familiar with the military contracting model...you can pm me if you like as this is off topic Is that where you bid and even if takes you 7x the budget you only get paid for the original bid? The X amount not to exceed Y amount model?

Military projects are just famous for going over budget. For much of the same reasons, particularly for new-inventions. You know how it is. Engineering something from nothing is a lot harder than bidding a new road or something. You have to invent stuff as you go. Not to say the techniques aren't "standard" in most cases.

I think they did some stuff OK. For example they used a large CDN. What they didn't do was a gradual roll out (like Press 1st, curiosity day 1, etc. then by time zone or something). Would have eased the load.

Looks to me like they needed a lot of beta testing yet and revisions. Probably ran into a schedule wall. THAT is nothing new either.

The funny thing is that the site is fairly nice looking. And the information is not badly presented. There's just...questions...people have and some if it may be due to state-specific sites too. The whole "state's rights" thing looks like it messed the project up. If they had just said "Do it this way" and everyone was the same they would have been efficient. No. They have 3 different models (at least) and the state chooses. So for some states you just get kicked to the state site, I think. For some, it's a standard site (maybe still state specific, IDK). For others, it's the Fed site. So that's 3 different ways to implement...State-run, State-uses-fed model, Fed-run.

As I understand the articles. Don't really know any of the specifics so I probably shouldn't say much.

It's the 50 fiefdoms thing. Totally doesn't work for any economics of scale. "A kingdom divided cannot stand". Grrrrrr. Jefferson would be happy. Total chaos, but each state got it's way. The anti-fed people just make things 50 times harder than they have to be (or more than 50 due to territories).

 

[AttyPops]

Yes, and the illegals will still be going to the emergency room with no insurance, a street person isn't going to have Obamacare, etc, etc.. so all that crap about healthcare for everyone with the program..it is an impossibility! ..and it sure isn't free healthcare....

I have relatives in Texas. They insist that the illegals coming here to have their babies and then moving back to Mexico is crazy and we need to stop it. Thing is, it would take a Constitutional Amendment to change it. The fence thing doesn't work...particularly if they are "just visiting relatives for a few days". And that's just the births issue.

As to the poor...there's a gap. The whole thing could have been a different model, but he couldn't sell it through congress. THAT is the problem. Sabotage.

 

[AttyPops]

Further evidence of crazy:

Conservatives get early look at potential '16 field

The GOP is having a summit for '16. They won't put Chris Christy on the speaker list...he's not radical enough.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, another possible Republican presidential contender, is not on the schedule of speakers. Perkins told The Hill that Christie, who has been stressing his work with Democrats as he runs for a second term in New Jersey, would have a difficult time courting social conservatives.

How are we supposed to get anything accomplished in this country with parties like that?

 

[WarHawk-AVG]

I have relatives in Texas. They insist that the illegals coming here to have their babies and then moving back to Mexico is crazy and we need to stop it. Thing is, it would take a Constitutional Amendment to change it. The fence thing doesn't work...particularly if they are "just visiting relatives for a few days". And that's just the births issue.

As to the poor...there's a gap. The whole thing could have been a different model, but he couldn't sell it through congress. THAT is the problem. Sabotage.

cute...you have any idea what they refer to a baby as once its born on American soil? Please be honest

Nice coy attempt sir...

 

[DaveP]

I'm betting that most insurance will not require a cotinine test to enter the group for a policy, but might just do that when you are admitted to a hospital for a procedure. I wouldn't be surprised if cotinine wasn't eventually phased into the blood chemistry panel that doctors do on a regular basis.

I agree that checking the no tobacco box might be a problem down the line if you test positive for nic. My company policy has historically presented a Tobacco User/Non Tobacco User selection. If you enter their tobacco cessation program and succeed, you get the non tobacco label. That program allows the use of nicotine gum and inhalers to taper off. Would I be covered during the time I'm using those?

They also define non tobacco user as someone who hasn't used tobacco in the last 12 months. I qualify in that respect, since I smoked my last cig a year and six months ago and haven't touched one since. I haven't even wanted one, but legally I'm a smoker since I use a nicotine product. I'm working my way down the ladder and I'm starting to buy 12 mg nic after tapering from 24mg to 16mg. I plan to work my way down to 6mg and lower.

I just wonder how much nic I can vape and still be below the cotinine test level and pass as a non smoker. Someone posted that they were at 1/4mg and failed. Maybe that was a mistype and they meant to say 14mg.

 

[AttyPops]

cute...you have any idea what they refer to a baby as once its born on American soil? Please be honest

Nice coy attempt sir...

They was nothing "coy" about it. So quit projecting.

And no, I don't live there nor know what the slang is. And frankly, I'm just responding to the other poster; djezewski's comment.

 

[rothenbj]

............
They also define non tobacco user as someone who hasn't used tobacco in the last 12 months. I qualify in that respect, since I smoked my last cig a year and six months ago and haven't touched one since. I haven't even wanted one, but legally I'm a smoker since I use a nicotine product. I'm working my way down the ladder and I'm starting to buy 12 mg nic after tapering from 24mg to 16mg. I plan to work my way down to 6mg and lower.

I just wonder how much nic I can vape and still be below the cotinine test level and pass as a non smoker. Someone posted that they were at 1/4mg and failed. Maybe that was a mistype and they meant to say 14mg.

There is no such thing as a smoker anymore as they have replaced the term or use it as a synonym for tobacco user. All part of that slippery slope that gets slipperier every year. As long as they use cotinine as their standard and you are vaping a level that meets user status, you are a tobacco user in their eyes.

 

[AttyPops]

I'm starting a rumor.

50% of the "psycho mass shootings/bombings/attacks" are from people that had to quit nicotine due to insurance costs and were subject to cotinine tests......

Who's with me?

(OK, bad joke. But it was just a joke, so grow some thicker skin.)

Seriously though, IDK how the government (or insurance) could be against a chemical that calms people down and makes them think more clearly with few side effects.

 

[wv2win]

I have relatives in Texas. They insist that the illegals coming here to have their babies and then moving back to Mexico is crazy and we need to stop it. Thing is, it would take a Constitutional Amendment to change it. The fence thing doesn't work...particularly if they are "just visiting relatives for a few days". And that's just the births issue.

As to the poor...there's a gap. The whole thing could have been a different model, but he couldn't sell it through congress. THAT is the problem. Sabotage.

The "fence thing" does work where there is a fence, for the majority of illegal crossings. The problem is, only a fraction of the border has a fence.

 

[Mohamed]

The "fence thing" does work where there is a fence, for the majority of illegal crossings. The problem is, only a fraction of the border has a fence.

I don't know all the ins and outs of that law but it's similar to the Obama Care law now and what the republicans are trying to do. The fenced border is still a law on the books they just quit funding it. So very similar to what is going on now...just a different law.