FDA Six US Senate Democrats urge FDA's Hamburg to impose false fear mongering warnings on e-cigs, while claiming to want accurate warnings

[hurricanegirl100]

Sherrod Brown is my Senator as well. Sent him a letter a few months back regarding his e-cig position. Got a form letter back. Then, last month, I posted on the Hill that for the first time in my life, I was seriously considering voting Republican because of Brown's position on electronic cigarettes.

I think his office monitors posts because the NEXT DAY, I got a long letter explaining Brown's position on e-cigs. The dumb ^%$# knows not the havoc his bill would wreak. I emailed him back a long letter explaining MY position on electronic cigarettes, but received no response. Hopefully, his office will listen.

Because if they don't, I wouldn't care if his opponent was freaking Donald Duck and a Libertarian lol, I'd vote for his damn opponent!

 

[skoony]

A very interesting article. However, I think the article left out a major point that I believe will ultimately motivate the government to move for tougher regulation on e-cigarettes. When the government went berserk of the big tobacco companies, they found a way to make a ton of money in doing so. To expound on that point, consider the fact that the government is raking in as much as $6.16 a pack in Chicago, Illinois (see http://tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0267.pdf.)

The state of Illinois raked in over $580m last year in tobacco taxes (see http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...ections-rise-board-president-toni-preckwinkle) and openly admits that they use the revenues for helping to balance their budgets, which one can reasonably assume is a common practice amongst most states. Interesting to note, the high taxes were originally imposed allegedly to help educate people on the health hazards of tobacco use, funding for helping people quit and to deter people from smoking, to name a few. (see http://www.who.int/tobacco/mpower/publications/en_tfi_mpower_brochure_r.pdf[/url])

There are numerous articles concerning the steady decline of federal and state tax proceeds from tobacco taxation (see http://tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0267.pdf.) Though I have not read any article attributing the reason why tax proceeds are steadily declining, one could reasonably assume that the high tax rates have caused many people to quit smoking and that the rising sale of e-cigarettes is likely taking a big bite out of said proceeds. Though that is just my opinion, according to Forbes Magazine, e-cigarettes sales top over $1b in sales (currently exempt from the tobacco use taxes) in the US in 2013 and are expect to nearly triple that this year. (see Welcome to Forbes)

Considering the aforementioned facts, it is reasonable to assume that Uncle Sam is going to find some way to raise their take on tobacco tax revenues by using the FDA and other government agencies to bash e-cigarettes under the guise of they are bad for your health as an excuse to tax the hades out of them. In my opinion, the above article and similar others are overlooking the real reason why the FDA is even considering the regulation of e-cigarettes, because we all know Uncle Sam could careless about our health. Whom, maybe I am just a pessimist.

in addition to the taxes imposed on cigarettes at the retail level 46 state attorney generals,and 3 separate attorney generals
have settlement agreements with big tobacco. the master tobacco settlement agreement covers 46 states. 3 states have their own
agreement. Florida is the only state with out one.
under this agreement the tobacco companies pay additional monies at a percentage of actual sales of cigarettes in the
particular state involved.as sales decline,so do the payments. at a certain point payments cease.
some state issued bonds covering 20 years of those payments.these are now at risk for default.
most states do not loose money when retail tax is raised as not enough people quit as a result.
most states see a net gain.
regards
mike