FDA Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act (HR 367) would likely kill FDA's proposed deeming regulation, Republican Senate could pass it

[Bill Godshall]

Today's column by conservative George Will urges Congressional Republicans to do six things now that they control the US Senate, including enacting the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act (which was approved by the House in 2013, but was/is opposed by Senate Democrat leaders), which would either kill or severely weaken the FDA's proposed deeming regulation, and would also delay its approval (probably until after Obama leaves office).

George Will: The first steps Republicans should take
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...0c0fde-6529-11e4-bb14-4cfea1e742d5_story.html

HR 367: Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th...ons+from+the+Executive+in+Need+of+Scrutiny"]}

House Judiciary Committee report on HR 367
https://www.congress.gov/congressio...ons+from+the+Executive+in+Need+of+Scrutiny"]}

Vapers and vapor product manufacturers and suppliers would be wise to begin urging their US Senators to pass this legislation (Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act) when it is reintroduced next session, in addition to urging them to oppose the FDA's proposed deeming regulation (because it would protect cigarettes by banning >99% of vapor products, and by giving the e-cig industry to Big tobacco to only market inferior cigalike e-cigs).

 

[Nate760]

Even before Tuesday's election results, I saw very little likelihood that the deeming regs would be finalized and enacted before the end of the current presidential term. Now I'd say there's zero chance of it happening.

 

[DC2]

Subscribing....

 

[Bill Godshall]

Nate wrote:

Even before Tuesday's election results, I saw very little likelihood that the deeming regs would be finalized and enacted before the end of the current presidential term. Now I'd say there's zero chance of it happening.

I don't share Nate's optimism (or else I wouldn't be working to defeat the deeming regulation), although Tuesday's election clearly increased our chances of preventing the FDA from issuing a Final Rule for its proposed deeming regulation, and of weakening the Final Rule if it is issued.

But the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act almost certainly would prevent Obama's FDA from issuing a Final Rule on the deeming regulation. Although Obama would probably veto the bill (and it would be difficult to obtain enough Senate votes to override a veto), its passage by the Senate would further pressure the Obama administration to back off many of its proposed regulations (perhaps including the FDA deeming regulation).

Regardless, the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act is the best bill in US Congress to protect the future of the vapor products industry, and we should be urging US Senators to pass it ASAP next session.

 

[Nate760]

I don't share Nate's optimism (or else I wouldn't be working to defeat the deeming regulation), although Tuesday's election clearly increased our chances of preventing the FDA from issuing a Final Rule for its proposed deeming regulation, and of weakening the Final Rule if it is issued.

Let's bear in mind also that if a Final Rule is issued, in whatever form it happens to take, its implementation will almost certainly be halted by court injunction before it ever takes effect. There are so many legally dubious aspects of the deeming regs (all of which will be immediately challenged by the major players in the industry) that the judge's most difficult job might be deciding which one is the most unconstitutional.

 

[No ash More Cash]

The FDA are very powerful with a lot of strings they can pull and If they say they found cancer causing substances in half of the e-cigarettes tested Sad to say they will get there way...I could say a hell of a lot more about the FDA and I'm sure some of you have seen my Thread here... That alone shows you the ins and outs on how corrupt they are.. so that's all I'm saying here about the matter

 

[Nate760]

The FDA are very powerful with a lot of strings they can pull and If they say they found cancer causing substances in half of the e-cigarettes tested Sad to say they will get there way...

If the FDA could do anything it wanted and get away with it, there never would've been a Sottera case, all vapor products would be illegal, and there would be no need for deeming regulations.

 

[No ash More Cash]

If the FDA could do anything it wanted and get away with it, there never would've been a Sottera case, all vapor products would be illegal, and there would be no need for deeming regulations.

It's only a matter of time...Rulings get over turned all the time

 

[Nate760]

It's only a matter of time...Rulings get over turned all the time

The only way Sottera could be overturned is by the Supreme Court, and there's no reason to believe that has any chance of happening.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Nate wrote:

Let's bear in mind also that if a Final Rule is issued, in whatever form it happens to take, its implementation will almost certainly be halted by court injunction before it ever takes effect

Once again, I don't share Nate's optimism (even though my 110 pages of comments opposing FDA deeming regulation were actually intended for lawyers who will be representing vapor product manufacturers in suing the FDA after the agency sends them a cease and desist letter). Please note that Obama has recently packed the DC Circuit Court with liberal Democrat justices.

Nate wrote:

If the FDA could do anything it wanted and get away with it, there never would've been a Sottera case, all vapor products would be illegal, and there would be no need for deeming regulations.

The reasons FDA's 2009 ban was struck down were because:
- SE filed the claim against FDA arguing that e-cigs fit the definition of tobacco product in the FSPTCA,
- NJOY continued its lawsuit against FDA to oppose FDA's appeals after SE dropped out of the case,
- A group of public health advocates (led by me) submitted an amicus brief with the DC Court of Appeals in support of SE's and NJOY's lawsuits.

Had any of those actions not occurred (except perhaps the last one), FDA's ban on e-cigs would not have been struck down.

Nate wrote:

The only way Sottera could be overturned is by the Supreme Court, and there's no reason to believe that has any chance of happening.

The case ended on April 25, 2011 when FDA chose not to appeal the case to the US Supreme Court (which is called a writ of certeori) because we had enough votes on the Supreme Court to uphold Judge Leon's ruling.

 

[No ash More Cash]

The only way Sottera could be overturned is by the Supreme Court, and there's no reason to believe that has any chance of happening.

I really don't want to get into it here as I have already been accused of being a "Fear Munger" but with no proof of me being that ... I only go on Facts...The Supreme Court have overturned many a ruling or made rulings that have been quite shocking but if you dig down you'll find the real reasons why they did what they did but as the saying goes..."It's not what you know it's who you know" and that's even more so In Washington

 

[Kent C]

I really don't want to get into it here as I have already been called a "Fear Munger" But I only go on Facts...The Supreme Court have overturned many a ruling or made rulings that have been quite shocking but if you dig down you'll find the reasons why they did what they did but as the saying goes..."It's not what you know it's who you know" and that's even more so In Washington

Actually the 'who you know' isn't as big a factor for judges (appointed ones) AFTER they're appointed (before, yes) ...because most are in for life and have to really do something terrible to be impeached. Supremes are more influenced by what they know or who taught them what they know.

 

[sonicdsl]

Not to mention, Sottero was finished in 2010 with the FDA conceding.

 

[Kent C]

See a pattern here?

Oh, I see a pattern alright .... from your very first post here.

 

[No ash More Cash]

I really hope this will be the end of it and that they leave us all alone...I didn't want to be a downer but I don't trust them one bit

 

[No ash More Cash]

Oh, I see a pattern alright .... from your very first post here.

What has rakuten have to do with anything? http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/new-members-forum/616875-rakuten.html#post14435628

 

[Kent C]

"here"=Electronic Cigarette News and Campaigning

 

[nomore stinkies]

I can't quite figure out how HR367 affects the FDA and the deeming tobacco regulations. One of the economy robbing bills waiting to be passed? The amount of money as in job loss? It is a million dollar industry and it would be only "stupid" people that would push for it's demise (FDA regulations). HHMMM Where did I hear that word? Oh yeah that economist......and his BOSS. I will send a note to my senator. The one on the Right side. Keep us posted.

 

[Kent C]

I can't quite figure out how HR367 affects the FDA and the deeming tobacco regulations. One of the economy robbing bills waiting to be passed? The amount of money as in job loss? It is a million dollar industry and it would be only "stupid" people that would push for it's demise (FDA regulations). HHMMM Where did I hear that word? Oh yeah that economist......and his BOSS. I will send a note to my senator. The one on the Right side. Keep us posted.

There's a lot of similarities....

Jonathan Gruber(Obamacare architect):

"Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, (laughs), but basically that was really, really critical to get the thing to pass. Look, I wish ... we could make it all transparent, but I'd rather have this law than not."

That last line - as in the deeming - the end justifies the means. Basically 'we'll lie, cover up, cook the studies, skew the science and rely on the stupidity of the American people to buy into what we and our lapdog media say about it. And demonize personally anyone who disagrees or criticizes, as uncaring, selfish and in the pocket of some 'moneyed interest'.'

 

[Nate760]

That last line - as in the deeming - the end justifies the means. Basically 'we'll lie, cover up, cook the studies, skew the science and rely on the stupidity of the American people to buy into what we and our lapdog media say about it. And demonize personally anyone who disagrees or criticizes, as uncaring, selfish and in the pocket of some 'moneyed interest'.'

The "public health" fanatics have made it abundantly clear that to them, the truth is more of an inconvenience than it is something to be valued and upheld. They've convinced themselves that their goal of living in a tobacco-free, nicotine-free utopia is of such paramount importance that pathological lying is a perfectly acceptable tool for making it happen.