FDA Why wouldn't we go on the offensive, right now?

[chopdoc]

I think, after listening to a couple insightful commentaries on the recent elections, what "we" get is what whoever puts the most campaign money behind this issue wants. How much do we, as a consolidated organization, put behind what "we" want? A nickel. How much does BP, BT or institutions that want their research and "non-profit" salaried positions to keep rolling along cough up to support candidates?. A hell of a lot more than we can or do. Until "we" get fed up with the best government money can buy and do something about this campaign donation insanity we don't have much say in this matter.

I dont buy that. It is well known the top 25 contributors are predominately Democrat. Unions and the Soros foundations like ActBlue pumped billions upon billions to the Democrats but still, the voice of the public spoke loudly this election and despite the Democrats overspending the Republicans by a large margin, the people voted against them.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

 

[pamdis]

I dont buy that. It is well known the top 25 contributors are predominately Democrat. Unions and the Soros foundations like ActBlue pumped billions upon billions to the Democrats but still, the voice of the public spoke loudly this election and despite the Democrats overspending the Republicans by a large margin, the people voted against them.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

This list is skewed and it even tells you that in the explanation for the page that it only includes "sums sent to candidates, parties and leadership PACs. Individuals and organizations have been able to make extremely large donations to outside spending groups in the last few years", which are not shown on the list.

"For example, this list does not include casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. He and his wife Miriam donated nearly $93 million in 2012 alone to conservative super PACs — enough to put him at No. 2 on this list."

"It's also important to note that we aren't including donations to politically active dark money groups, like Americans for Prosperity, a group linked to the Koch brothers, or the liberal group Patriot Majority — because these groups hide their donors"

Take a look at this overview page on the same website. Republicans outspent Democrats:

http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/

 

[chopdoc]

And we are getting off track. It is well known opensecrets is funded by Soros so of course its gonna be anti right. Each side has its skewered sites and is immaterial to this discussion.

So have you contacted your elected officials to try to help the vaping community?

 

[pamdis]

So have you contacted your elected officials to try to help the vaping community?

Yep.

(10 char)

 

[Jman8]

I seen this many times on ECF. People calling for action or laying out the battle plans but something that always seems to fail to get mentioned is how many of you actually took the time to sit down and email your elected offcials about this? How does anyone expect our elected officials to back us up or even remove vaping as being listed with tobacco if no one can take the five minutes to write there elected officials and attempt to educate them.

We all know smoking is a killer. Many of us have sucess stories from vaping. Why not share them with those who can change policies. Why not explain why vaping is far better for people over smoking and is proving to be better at smoking cessation that anything else out there. Or people can sit back and do nothing but complain. There is a bunch of newly elected officials now. Contact them, tell them your sucess stories. Tell them why you dont agree with vaping being catagorized with tobacco. Any anti vaping officials, contact them too. Let them know how vaping changed your life for the better. If you want something done then start with what you can do.

I see a campaign as necessary for what this thread is aiming for.

I have written to elected officials in the past and is part of reason why I am not in camp that thinks future of vaping looks awful. I know many others have written to elected officials and that we do have political momentum.

And I am suggesting we capitalize on recent shift in the national political momentum to do something grand in changing the politics around vaping and regulations (that are seemingly coming forth very soon).

 

[Nate760]

So have you contacted your elected officials to try to help the vaping community?

Like personally? It's not really possible to have personal interactions with elected federal officials unless you're a big-money campaign donor. When you call or email a congressional office, the people with whom you interact, and who answer your correspondence, are aides and (more often) interns. The actual member of Congress will never know or care that you exist.

 

[chopdoc]

I thought the same thing. Then one of our federal Senators had a town meeting and I spoke to him and brought up the issue I emailed him about previously. He actually remembered the email and a few of the points I was trying to make. So yes and no. I agree aides and interns do answer some of the vast amount of messages they receive but I also believe that the elected officials themselves are well aware of we the people and our thoughts on issues if we take the time to contact them.

With you having (franken)Feinstein and Boxer, I can understand your position.

 

[Nate760]

I thought the same thing. Then one of our federal Senators had a town meeting and I spoke to him and brought up the issue I emailed him about previously. He actually remembered the email and a few of the points I was trying to make. So yes and no. I agree aides and interns do answer some of the vast amount of messages they receive but I also believe that the elected officials themselves are well aware of we the people and our thoughts on issues if we take the time to contact them.

With you having (franken)Feinstein and Boxer, I can understand your position.

My position has nothing to do with the identity or party affiliation of my state's senators. Straw man fail.

I used to work in a congressional office. Part of my job was writing phone scripts and form letters designed to make the constituents think the congressman knew and cared about their concerns. I was 18 years old.

Another part of my job was, when the congressman came home to visit the district and had a town hall-type event scheduled (and wasn't too busy getting roaring drunk and sexually propositioning my female co-workers), to debrief him on the things we'd been receiving calls and letters about, and coach him on the answers he should give should those questions come up.

If you got the impression from your senator that he'd read your email, it's not because he read your email. It's because a sufficient number of people contacted his office about the same subject that his staff decided to include that topic in his debriefing materials. If he was able to convince you he'd personally read your particular email, then his aides are really good at their jobs.

 

[Racehorse]

I know many others have written to elected officials and that we do have political momentum.

Political momentum? Can you define that?

What % of the population of the US uses vape gear. Let's start there.

 

[Jman8]

Political momentum? Can you define that?

What % of the population of the US uses vape gear. Let's start there.

I would estimate around 1 to 2% and growing. I would think number that don't vape but are vaper-friendly added to the number that do vape is somewhere between 5 to 10% and growing.

I actually think these numbers are low, but let's start here.

 

[Nate760]

I would estimate around 1 to 2% and growing. I would think number that don't vape but are vaper-friendly added to the number that do vape is somewhere between 5 to 10% and growing.

I actually think these numbers are low, but let's start here.

For purposes of perspective, assuming the 2% figure is accurate, that means there are roughly as many vapor product users in the US as there are gay men and Jews. Both of those groups wield a fairly significant level of political influence. So there's no particular reason, in terms of sheer numbers, why we shouldn't as well.

 

[AndriaD]

For purposes of perspective, assuming the 2% figure is accurate, that means there are roughly as many vapor product users in the US as there are gay men and Jews. Both of those groups wield a fairly significant level of political influence. So there's no particular reason, in terms of sheer numbers, why we shouldn't as well.

That seems a bit low, for Jews. Do you mean just religious Jews, or those of Jewish descent?

Andria

 

[Racehorse]

I would estimate around 1 to 2% and growing.

That sounds about right.

 

[Nate760]

That seems a bit low, for Jews. Do you mean just religious Jews, or those of Jewish descent?

According to the Jewish Virtual Library, the low estimate for observant Jews is 5.4 million and the high estimate is 6.8 million. The "enlarged" population (meaning everyone who qualifies as ethnically Jewish according to their parentage) is 8.3 million. So, as a share of national population, it's somewhere between 2.1% and 2.6%.

 

[AndriaD]

According to the Jewish Virtual Library, the low estimate for observant Jews is 5.4 million and the high estimate is 6.8 million. The "enlarged" population (meaning everyone who qualifies as ethnically Jewish according to their parentage) is 8.3 million. So, as a share of national population, it's somewhere between 2.1% and 2.6%.

Ok. It really does seem like it should be more, but maybe I'm just more aware of Jews because I used to be married to one. According to him and his family, one would think they're at least 25% of the population.

It may also be a quirk of how Jews perceive ethnic Judaism; one of my great-grandmothers was Jewish, and thus her daughter, and her daughter's son could be identified as ethnically Jewish, but it's on my father's side, so I don't qualify.

Andria

 

[Nate760]

Ok. It really does seem like it should be more, but maybe I'm just more aware of Jews because I used to be married to one. According to him and his family, one would think they're at least 25% of the population.

I married a Mormon girl and have countless hundreds of Mormon in-laws, so I know exactly what you mean. They're only 2% of the national population themselves, but it's easy to assume otherwise when they constitute the majority of people you know and interact with.

 

[chopdoc]

I would estimate around 1 to 2% and growing. I would think number that don't vape but are vaper-friendly added to the number that do vape is somewhere between 5 to 10% and growing.

I actually think these numbers are low, but let's start here.

Yet how many actually bother to contact their elected officials. Very few would be my estimate. Now if they started getting a lot of correspondence about vaping dont you think they might sit up and take notice regardless what naysayers believe?

 

[Nate760]

Yet how many actually bother to contact their elected officials. Very few would be my estimate. Now if they started getting a lot of correspondence about vaping dont you think they might sit up and take notice regardless what naysayers believe?

Your idealism is commendable, but you seem to be operating under the mistaken impression that elected officials cast their votes according to the opinions of their constituents. They do not. Legislators cast their votes based on 1) what their party leadership tells them to do; 2) what maximizes their chances of reelection; and 3) what keeps the most money flowing into their campaign coffers.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Your idealism is commendable, but you seem to be operating under the mistaken impression that elected officials cast their votes according to the opinions of their constituents. They do not. Legislators cast their votes based on 1) what their party leadership tells them to do; 2) what maximizes their chances of reelection; and 3) what keeps the most money flowing into their campaign coffers.

Three extremely good reasons for term limits.

 

[Jman8]

Let's say the number is 1% of US population are vapers. That doesn't mean that 99% are against us. And so, by political momentum, I meant that there are more people now for vaping than against it. Yet, I would say the majority are ignorant of what vaping is or don't care about how it goes. I would for sure assert that most people don't know the issue at the level of a politically aware vaper, or essentially those of us who have studied the ANTZ playbook. As smokers, many of us didn't know that playbook existed or even that ANTZ existed as viable political agent within American politics, even while their handiwork was very visible to us (the smoker).

Yet, a lot of us now know. I reckon that number of us who know ANTZ and who are 'woken up' to their agenda is around .25%. But that number is growing and if it were to ever reach 3%, it would likely be game over for ANTZ, as ANTZ position is based mostly on leadership by deception and emotional hype. Okay, maybe not 'game over,' but it would be like any political movement (ever) in the US where there was a very small minority (less than 1%) that understood history and intricacies of what they were up against, kept hammering away on facts and accurate information and then changed how society viewed that topic.

Had smokers had the internet and awareness of ANTZ game plan back in 1970's, I reckon we'd live in a far different world than we do know. But it is what it is, and what it is is our side is gaining political momentum.

In some ways, banning eCigs would be the worst move ANTZ could make right now.

And in many ways, us going on the offensive due to recent shift in national politics would be the best move we could make perhaps in the entire history of vaping.