FDA TVECA post table of contents for Deeming Final Rule

[Major Meatwad]

Did any of you catch this:

The implication is that TVECA, CASAA, and all the vapers who contact legislators and the executive branch to protest this regulatory over-reach are part of the "tobacco lobby".

Moreover, the ALA wants these regulations developed in secret, so that we can't protest them until after they go into effect.

Is it time yet?

A few others did too.
So anyone with pre-knowledge potentially has Big tobacco lobbyist ties.

This shows that CASAA support of Propping HR2058 seems like Big Tobacco lobbyist ties.
I know, an Inflammatory statement considering they are forefront leader in trying to protect the E-cig business.
Who's Ecig business? BT or the Independent Local community?

HR 2058 has gained mysterious momentum and Misunderstood 'Pro Rhetoric' to be the "grandfather clause" to save the vaping industry when in fact it only grandfathers pre-April 2011 products (only blu e-cig types) and specifically directly adds the "ecig /Vape store" section 905 and 910 regulations that do not exist yet.

Everyone is being Spun confusing HR 2058 Bill with being "Anti-Deeming e-cigs" and our savior when when in fact it is NOT! It only benefits Big Tobacco!
Lobbyists are experts in SPIN!

That being said there is other legislation in the works "Agriculture and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2016" which at this point per this statement " Therefore, newly deemed tobacco products, such as e-cigarettes, that were brought to market before the date on which the final rule is issued would not be required to submit a pre-market tobacco product application.[4] Instead, these products would be permitted to stay on the market so long as manufacturers comply with regulations such as health warning labels or minimum age of purchase restrictions."

Slightly more reasonable but who knows what it will say til we see its final version.

Anti deeming should be the 'Vapers' Focus.

Not some House or Senate Bill unless it specifically states that E-cig type products cannot be deemed tobacco products.

 

[nicnik]

A few others did too.
So anyone with pre-knowledge potentially has Big Tobacco lobbyist ties.

This shows that CASAA support of Propping HR2058 seems like Big Tobacco lobbyist ties.
I know, an Inflammatory statement considering they are forefront leader in trying to protect the E-cig business.
Who's Ecig business? BT or the Independent Local community?

HR 2058 has gained mysterious momentum and Misunderstood 'Pro Rhetoric' to be the "grandfather clause" to save the vaping industry when in fact it only grandfathers pre-April 2011 products (only blu e-cig types) and specifically directly adds the "ecig /Vape store" section 905 and 910 regulations that do not exist yet.

Everyone is being Spun confusing HR 2058 Bill with being "Anti-Deeming e-cigs" and our savior when when in fact it is NOT! It only benefits Big Tobacco!
Lobbyists are experts in SPIN!

That being said there is other legislation in the works "Agriculture and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2016" which at this point per this statement " Therefore, newly deemed tobacco products, such as e-cigarettes, that were brought to market before the date on which the final rule is issued would not be required to submit a pre-market tobacco product application.[4] Instead, these products would be permitted to stay on the market so long as manufacturers comply with regulations such as health warning labels or minimum age of purchase restrictions."

Slightly more reasonable but who knows what it will say til we see its final version.

Anti deeming should be the 'Vapers' Focus.

Not some House or Senate Bill unless it specifically states that E-cig type products cannot be deemed tobacco products.

Hoping to soon see someone with more knowledge about this than me, try to figure out if what Major Meatwad's been saying about HR 2058 is true...

 

[WhiteHighlights]

Sorry about the Malarky, I mean drivel, the man from Massachusetts spouts (and to make it worse, Warren signed on to urging the date be pushed back too). I am not, and haven't been, a fan of his for a long time. This is just one of many issues where he's off the wall.

 

[Robino1]

This shows that CASAA support of Propping HR2058 seems like Big Tobacco lobbyist ties.
I know, an Inflammatory statement considering they are forefront leader in trying to protect the E-cig business.
Who's Ecig business? BT or the Independent Local community?

CASAA was started in 2009 in response to the FDA's first strike out at vaping. They realized that the Consumer had no voice, no leadership. It was members of ECF that decided that they needed to step up to the plate and formed this organization. They are NOT in bed with Big Tobacco.
CASAA - The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association

http://casaa.org/

• 
  
  • CASAA is the Consumer Advocates for Smokefree Alternatives Association
  • CASAA formed in 2009 by members of an online forum as an advocacy group to raise awareness and protect our right to access reduced harm alternatives.
  • ,CASAA has over 40,000 registered members*
  • CASAA was created as an answer to the anti-Tobacco Harm Reduction groups' efforts to ban THR products and in the belief that there is strength in our numbers.
  • CASAA is not a trade organization.
  • The original CASAA 13-member board was elected by members of the electronic cigarette and smokeless tobacco community.
  • The current board of directors consists of board-appointed members, three of whom were originally elected in 2009.
  • CASAA board of director members are all volunteers and receive no financial compensation.
  • CASAA's bylaws strictly limit the number of retailers allowed to 1/3 or less to prevent industry interests having a majority vote.

Please visit the website to get more information.

*it actually has grown to 100,000 members

 

[englishmick]

There was another piece of legislation mentioned on ECF a few weeks ago. I forget the details but I think it was a clause in part of the budget that forbade the FDA from spending money on assessing compliance of ecig products, or maybe it was enforcing against non-compliance. Anyone remember that, or know what happened to it?

 

[justagurlinseattle]

I haven't watched yet, but here you go.

he is an IDIOT!!! I'm not shocked... he is a democrat after all...

Before anybody jumps my booty... I'm a liberal... BUt, I am getting sick and tired
of the Left Wing wanting to go after e-cigs and even smoking...
E-cisg made me feel like I could possibly be part of the community again,
after being banished for being a smoker.

I'm sorry, But, I am sick and tired of the ..."Ohh what about the children??"

I'm a parent... and I am the person who should be worried about MY OWN child..
Not supporting arbitrary laws.. because OTHER people can't be bothered to parent
their children.

the IRONY is... they don't DARE go after Cherry and Chocolate Flavored PIPE Tobacco...
Nope.. because then... they would have an actual FIGHT..

UUUggghhh, these idiots make my blood boil.

 

[Joules_Verne]

Straight from the horses mouth, literally.

kkay59, I think you got the wrong end of the horse.

 

[squee]

HR 2058 has gained mysterious momentum and Misunderstood 'Pro Rhetoric' to be the "grandfather clause" to save the vaping industry when in fact it only grandfathers pre-April 2011 products (only blu e-cig types) and specifically directly adds the "ecig /Vape store" section 905 and 910 regulations that do not exist yet.

No, it doesn't. It says, in part:

“(A) to ‘February 15, 2007’, shall be considered to be a reference to ‘the effective date of the regulation under which a tobacco product is deemed subject to the requirements of this Act pursuant to section 901(b)(1)’; and

Which means that any *newly* deemed product will have an effective date after *it's* 'deeming'. i.e. if the final rule goes into effect in January of 2016, then products marketed up to Jan 2016 are grandfathered in.

 

[Stubby]

A few others did too.
So anyone with pre-knowledge potentially has Big Tobacco lobbyist ties.

This shows that CASAA support of Propping HR2058 seems like Big Tobacco lobbyist ties.
I know, an Inflammatory statement considering they are forefront leader in trying to protect the E-cig business.
Who's Ecig business? BT or the Independent Local community?

HR 2058 has gained mysterious momentum and Misunderstood 'Pro Rhetoric' to be the "grandfather clause" to save the vaping industry when in fact it only grandfathers pre-April 2011 products (only blu e-cig types) and specifically directly adds the "ecig /Vape store" section 905 and 910 regulations that do not exist yet.

Everyone is being Spun confusing HR 2058 Bill with being "Anti-Deeming e-cigs" and our savior when when in fact it is NOT! It only benefits Big Tobacco!
Lobbyists are experts in SPIN!

That being said there is other legislation in the works "Agriculture and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2016" which at this point per this statement " Therefore, newly deemed tobacco products, such as e-cigarettes, that were brought to market before the date on which the final rule is issued would not be required to submit a pre-market tobacco product application.[4] Instead, these products would be permitted to stay on the market so long as manufacturers comply with regulations such as health warning labels or minimum age of purchase restrictions."

Slightly more reasonable but who knows what it will say til we see its final version.

Anti deeming should be the 'Vapers' Focus.

Not some House or Senate Bill unless it specifically states that E-cig type products cannot be deemed tobacco products.

You are wrong on most of what you are saying. To get a better handle of HR 2058 read this thread

https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/f...007-to-2015-for-newly-deemed-products.670731/

HR 2058 changes the effective date of the deeming to the date the deeming is issued. This means that all products on the market before the deeming date are grandfathered.

 

[Katya]

Well, did my part and wrote both Indiana and White House emails...and I got back what seems to be very canned replies. Why are we not flooding the FDA with calls and emails too? I realize they are a bunch of idiot puppets but so is our Government.

And I really hope our ecig vendors are stepping up and shouting out as well.

It's my understanding that CASAA will issue another CTA--Julie mentioned that. I guess they are still working on it. But it wouldn't hurt to start posting in CASAA subforum, methinks; their forum has been too quiet lately. Just to remind them that we are ready to take action. We should be sending emails and letters and possibly make phone calls to the FDA, to OIRA, and to our representatives.

 

[Katya]

I haven't watched yet, but here you go.

Put out of business?

Oh, shut up....

 

[Katya]

@pennysmalls It really is crazy, right? But I do understand why it's happened. Put simply, our side of the industry is invisible - the only tracked data on sales comes, via Nielsen, from the C-Store sector which is dominated by the tobacco industry.

That's why I started Vape Manifest project with SFATA/ECigintelligence/Roebling, and we now have data from a properly representative sample of B&Ms which we will be submitting to OIRA once it's been fully analysed. This is big news - we're putting the vape sector on the map, finally.

Once we've got this in from of a few people (financial analysts in particular), it will no longer be possible to claim Big Tobacco ownership of the sector, and it will no longer be possible to ignore the size of the independent industry.

Big Vapor? 'Bout time!

 

[Katya]

Excuse my ignorance, but why is that we are not able to see the proposal that OIRA is reviewing?

Why the redacted, second-hand documents? I thought this whole OIRA review process was supposed to be about "open government"?

Again, I'm not an expert in these matters, so I'm wide open to enlightenment....

 

[StormFinch]

You are wrong on most of what you are saying. To get a better handle of HR 2058 read this thread

https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/f...007-to-2015-for-newly-deemed-products.670731/

HR 2058 changes the effective date of the deeming to the date the deeming is issued. This means that all products on the market before the deeming date are grandfathered.

Oh, he'd posted this before and I just thought someone had already covered it so everyone was leaving it alone.

Besides, by 2011 we already had e-Gos, mechanicals, box mods, even variable voltage devices and tanks. It's the pre-2007 deeming that would throw us back into the cigalike dark ages of vaping

 

[nicnik]

What about the vape store stuff in 905 and 910 that Major Meatwad says would go into effect along with HR2058?

 

[nicnik]

Besides, by 2011 we already had e-Gos, mechanicals, box mods, even variable voltage devices and tanks. It's the pre-2007 deeming that would throw us back into the ciglike dark ages of vaping

Were pyrex tanks on the market, yet?

 

[StormFinch]

Were pyrex tanks on the market, yet?

I'm not sure about pyrex but I'll see what I can find, or one of the other vets may know.

Edited to add; Yep, pyrex was being marketed at the end of 2011 for Phiniac tanks. https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/f...ks-from-phiniac-com-are-now-available.243435/

And here was some of the stuff available by the end of 2010, I believe there's one metal tank shown. https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/f...ul-world-of-mods-an-illustrated-guide.129125/ This was the beginning of the mod era; a lot of these were made from whatever was available, and sometimes kind of rough, but they worked (or at least most of them did; Vapezilla for all you vets? lol) better than a 510 battery.

 

[navigator2011]

he is an IDIOT!!! I'm not shocked... he is a democrat after all...

Before anybody jumps my booty... I'm a liberal... BUt, I am getting sick and tired
of the Left Wing wanting to go after e-cigs and even smoking...
E-cisg made me feel like I could possibly be part of the community again,
after being banished for being a smoker.

I'm sorry, But, I am sick and tired of the ..."Ohh what about the children??"

I'm a parent... and I am the person who should be worried about MY OWN child..
Not supporting arbitrary laws.. because OTHER people can't be bothered to parent
their children.

the IRONY is... they don't DARE go after Cherry and Chocolate Flavored PIPE Tobacco...
Nope.. because then... they would have an actual FIGHT..

UUUggghhh, these idiots make my blood boil.

When you say that you are a liberal, what does that mean now days? It seems to me that the party that has been traditionally associated with being liberal is no longer very liberal. Perhaps I am being naïve, but I presume being a liberal is not the same as being a leftist. Is it true?

 

[nicnik]

Excuse my ignorance, but why is that we are not able to see the proposal that OIRA is reviewing?

Why the redacted, second-hand documents? I thought this whole OIRA review process was supposed to be about "open government"?

Again, I'm not an expert in these matters, so I'm wide open to enlightenment....

I might have even less expertise than you, but reading this, I have no expectations of transparency, although it shows that the ball is clearly in the President's court:

http://www.propublica.org/article/l...ernment-regs-sights-set-secretive-white-house

In an influential 2001 Harvard Law Review article, Elena Kagan, now a Supreme Court Justice, argued OIRA provides a crucial check on the actions of government bureaucrats. "From the beginning of the twentieth century onward," she wrote, "many statutes authorizing agency action included open-ended grants of power, leaving to the relevant agency's discretion major questions of public policy." Since agency heads are appointed, this could lead to administrative inefficiencies and, potentially, abuses of power. OIRA's review requires agencies to answer to the president — an elected official who, unlike agency administrators, is accountable to the people.

But in practice, OIRA operates largely in secret, exempt from most requests under the Freedom of Information Act. It routinely declines to release the changes it has proposed, the evidence it has relied upon to make them, or the identities and affiliations of White House advisers and other agencies' staff it has consulted. OIRA doesn't even disclose the names and credentials of its employees other than its two most senior officials. (Repeated requests to the office for the backgrounds of its employees drew no response.

and

OIRA gets three passes at each rule it audits. First is the informal review, which takes place before a proposed rule is officially submitted. Informal review could include memos, phone calls, in-person conversations and the swapping of early drafts. This process unfolds in secret. Documents generated as part of the executive branch's policy deliberations are exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

 

[Katya]

Were pyrex tanks on the market, yet?

I don't think so. IIRC, the first stock pyrex tanks (Kanger PT1) were first introduced in 2012/2013. IBTanked started making glass tubes for cartotanks also about that time...2012, perhaps. In 2011 we were still using cartos (metal) and polycarbonate. Not sure when Phiniac started making glass tanks...

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.