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

[DC2]

I have contacted both Federal and State lawmakers and always receive a reply including snail mail from them. Even the white house replied to my emails. I dont know how Canada is But I would expect a reply from any representative.

Every reply I've ever gotten has been canned spam.
But I sure have gotten a lot of them.

Be that as it may, I will always say that every vaper on earth should be sending their stories and thoughts to their representatives.
If they don't hear from us at all, they most certainly won't care about us at all.

 

[Kent C]

Every reply I've ever gotten has been canned spam.
But I sure have gotten a lot of them.

Be that as it may, I will always say that every vaper on earth should be sending their stories and thoughts to their representatives.
If they don't hear from us at all, they most certainly won't care about us at all.

Same here.... all but one looked canned. The one from Ted Cruz could have been also, (and different from one other person who mentioned the reply they got), but seemed less likely since he mentioned the information given. I sent him Burstyn's 'Peering through the mist' and a few other links.

If anything, they count the 'pros' and 'cons' and perhaps some staffer saves out links they think might prove helpful in a committee. I emphasized Burstyn, in that the study not only counters the anti-vaping studies and proposals but gives positive studies, etc. If I were a staffer reading through emails - it might be something I'd save out for future reference. They have to have some idea to compose a reply that is somewhat relevant - however, Sherrod Brown's form letter didn't even do that All anti..... likely from just the title.

 

[Nate760]

If anything, they count the 'pros' and 'cons' and perhaps some staffer saves out links they think might prove helpful in a committee.

Yup, this is exactly what happens. It doesn't rise to the level of "we need to tell the boss about this" unless 1) there's an overwhelming number of public inquiries, and 2) there's a clear majority on one or the other side of the issue. Congressmen hate it when their staffers trouble them with constituent mail unless it's absolutely necessary.

 

[Kent C]

Yup, this is exactly what happens. It doesn't rise to the level of "we need to tell the boss about this" unless 1) there's an overwhelming number of public inquiries, and 2) there's a clear majority on one or the other side of the issue. Congressmen hate it when their staffers trouble them with constituent mail unless it's absolutely necessary.

I got replies from all but one and I'm talking into the 40's - 50's + as far as what was sent out - some to the same people, of course on different issues. And their replies, except the one noted from Brown (who sent the same reply several times ) DID have some reference to the issue - and 'ecigs' isn't one in the dropdowns given, so someone had to look at the subject matter at least. How much further it goes from there is anyone's guess. Sheer volume would tend to indicate some shortcut And 'office held' is going to make some difference - city council being the most likely to read, then state reps, state senators, fed reps., fed senators, etc. although the one where I got no reply was my state rep. who I happen to know personally, and while I wouldn't call him a 'friend', we never had 'issues' when we hung around.

 

[DC2]

I got a reply from Barbara Boxer once.

Keep in mind that I already knew her stance based on her latest anti-vaping actions.
And keep in mind that I did not really "temper" my comments because of my knowledge of her stance.

I was not attempting to educate her, or sway her.
I just called her a liar and a murderer.

It took awhile, but I got a lovely canned response in reply.
After what I had to say, I will admit to being fairly surprised at even receiving one.

 

[Racehorse]

Yet how many actually bother to contact their elected officials.

The power that multi national Big Corporations have, against (most) "elected officials".. is not even comparable, IMHO. There will be court battles and judicial reviews but I just don't see many politicians getting seats at the "big table". Many politicians are just people with delusions of grandeur still working for a paycheck. They are BOUGHT and PAID FOR by the Big Corporations and Investment bankers I speak of.

Why wouldn't the politically aware vaper go on the offense right now and have Congress, in 2015, revisit TCA to exempt eCigs from that? Have Congress instruct the federal government to find another way to (reasonably) regulate eCigs and stop misusing TCA as the way to control the eCig issue?

And how do you propose to do that? Sounds worse than bringing a knife to a gunfight..... more like bringing a plastic picnic fork to a gunfight.


This stuff is ultimately decided in the courts when big companies launch legal challenges (like Totally Wicked did in EU). .deep pockets required. NJOY and such, they will do the heavy lifting.

The CEO of TW ......an astute businessman,multimillionare, and looks the part, suit-and-tie guy... with distribution centers in 4 countries, ex-commander in the Royal Navy and in charge of business development for Cobham Aviation, well educated from Kings College w/an MA in Military and Political Science. Knows how to get things done. Jason Malartsik their COO who wrote their Comments to FDA on Proposed Deeming Rule (very well written, by the way) is coming from a background in Financial Services, and graduated from Notre Dame.

Politicians the world over, do the bidding of the banking/investment sector and the multinational corporations.

When Blu, NJOY, et. al are done the opposition will look like squashed bugs on the yellow line. big $$ can do those things.


I'm really not seeing the kind of clout that the OP suggests about "going on the offensive". If you are serious then you better be ready to engage and unleash a large team of lawyers, and lots of $$, and be ready with grounds, complaints, and other legal documents to sue those who have made the laws.


Until then, just keep getting the word out that ecigs are good. That is, IMHO, the value of the emails. We are educating. By sharing our stories we are witnesses to the success of ecigarettes as harm reduction method. We are providing the "information" that the big boys will use to win court cases and legal battles.

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.

Okay, so give us your action plan.

If you think there is political momentum, then there is no time to waste. if you think now is the "time".......

Explain *exactly* what you mean by "us going on the offensive due to recent shift in national politics". I have no idea what that would consist of?

IMHO, anybody making this into a purely partisan issue is really going to be disappointed. Esp. if you think that sending $$ to any political party is going to "win" anything for vapers.

 

[DC2]

Until then, just keep getting the word out that ecigs are good. That is, IMHO, the value of the emails. We are educating. By sharing our stories we are witnesses to the success of ecigarettes as harm reduction method. We are providing the "information" that the big boys will use to win court cases and legal battles.

...................

 

[chopdoc]

Im a huge advocate for general aviation and contacted my elected officials on a few occasions about it. Some of the replies I received could be considered as spam replies and some of them couldn't be anything but a real reply for the information exchange took thought on their part and I dont think an aide would have the authority to make that kind of reply. The reply I received from the white house I dont think they even bothered to read anymore than the email heading yet that is more than I expected from Obama. The I spoke with Sen David Vitter at a town hall meeting and things he mentioned led me to believe he actually did read my email and was sympathetic to what I and others wanted for general aviation.
many elected officials was just given their walking papers because they voted party lines and not what the people want and those who was elected in their place need to be informed before they too become as bad as their predecessors. Now is the time to make the plight of the vaping community known. Or at least that is what my is.

 

[Kent C]

I think that we could be more 'offensive' (btw - that never meant 'offending someone' ) through studies, showing positive effects, not negative ones that have been floated recently. A study of ecf members who mostly have quit smoking or greatly reduced would show a greater percentage of cessation than any 1 or 2 month study that were done on smokers where they are merely 'introduced' to ecigs in the study, with a 1 or 2 month followup. One on more veterans past the cigalike stage (like at least 2-3 months of vaping even if dual use is involved) would be an 'offensive' study vs. merely reacting to ANTZ studies with opposite studies and conclusions (which still should be done though).

 

[Katya]

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.

Either that, or we need more Jewish and gay vapers.

 

[Nate760]

Some of the replies I received could be considered as spam replies and some of them couldn't be anything but a real reply for the information exchange took thought on their part and I dont think an aide would have the authority to make that kind of reply.

Well, you're wrong in that assessment. The overwhelming majority of written communications between congressional offices and constituents are authored and disseminated by staff members. For that matter, the overwhelming majority of a congressman's public statements are formulated by staff members. I don't wish to overplay the "it used to be my job" card, but....it used to be my job.

Thinking independently, reading comprehensively, and speaking extemporaneously are not really strong suits for most of these people. Their job is to smile, kiss babies, look pretty on camera, and recite the lines on the note cards they hopefully succeeded in memorizing during the limo ride.

 

[Racehorse]

I think that we could be more 'offensive' (btw - that never meant 'offending someone' ) through studies, showing positive effects, not negative ones that have been floated recently. A study of ecf members who mostly have quit smoking or greatly reduced would show a greater percentage of cessation than any 1 or 2 month study that were done on smokers where they are merely 'introduced' to ecigs in the study, with a 1 or 2 month followup. One on more veterans past the cigalike stage (like at least 2-3 months of vaping even if dual use is involved) would be an 'offensive' study vs. merely reacting to ANTZ studies with opposite studies and conclusions (which still should be done though).

I agree. This all serves as "testimony" and it will come in handy.....at the most opportune time.


I guess I'm old and patient, but I truly believe all this will sort itself out in our favor and the reason is 2-fold:
1) ecig is a truly transformative innovative emerging technology / tool that really has and will, change lives
2) there is a tremendous amount of investment, production and $$, so much so that there is probably no going back. To do so would put a very large sector of the world out of business. This isn't going to happen IMHO

And there are other business overlaps, like micro chip and cirucuit board manufactuers and developers, who are also contributing to ecig technology. Flavoring companies. etc.

It's really pretty far-reaching when you think about it!

It's like a train going very fast, that was designed at first w/out a braking system. Some people want to simply place a braking system into the train, some don't want any braking system at all; others want to pull the brakes hard causing a major jolt, and yet others want to derail the actual train itself.

I think the former will happen, because it's *reasonable*, all trains do need a braking system. that is logical engineering, safe engineering, and good planning. (The latter 3, won't get their way) Either because it is not reasonable, or because the train is already on the tracks and there are a LOT of cars attached. )



Ecigs is just another technology that will change people's lives. Technology has become perhaps the greatest agent of change in the modern world.

At least, that is the way I see it, so I guess I don't "take it personally" as some people do. It's no different than drugs that will eventually regulate people's genes.....and yet, there will be plenty of outcry about those things, too. Just like there is about human embryonic stem cell research.

It doesnt seem all that long ago (it REALLY DOESN'T!) that I was working in IT in one of the largest financial services company in the world, and "client/server" solutions for banking didn't really exist, except in the form of me and another guy crawling along the floor lifting up panels to fix cabling to mainframe computers, ATM cards were considered hot technology. I actually had to step around the back of banks of routers and move plugs around to route Now its on Forbes as one of the most cutting edge companies


Being patient doesn't mean you're not doing anything. You keep up your testimony, you keep asking, you keep shaking trees. And you keep the light alive....speak your truth out there, whenever you can.

But there is often nothing you can "do" to make things go.........faster. Things will take their course. You CAN, however, do whatever you can to help ensure a POSITIVE OUTCOME when the dust settles.

 

[Kent C]

I agree. This all serves as "testimony" and it will come in handy.....at the most opportune time.

I'll accept the 'I agree' on what I said. The rest seems not to be directed at me, since the train analogy doesn't fit what I said exactly. Jman was asserting that we should take the offensive and I only offered up one way that could help accomplish that end. There are others of course. We do seem to be 'reacting' (on defensive) and that can be good in certain situations but there seems to be a time when offense is the better strategy and with the change in parties in the Senate, I think jman thought that time is now. I happen to agree. As does Bill G. apparently, and others I suspect.

Perhaps some more emails should go out to Sen. Alexander who is likely to take over the HELP chair, and others on that committee. I may send a few off tomorrow

I also think that IF the deeming continues to final rule, that the courts is where we need to focus - with money and or support of any kind, but if there's any way to derail final rule, we should put our focus there for now and that is more immediate than 'being patient'. I think the 'goal' for final rule is May 2015. If we could stop that, then we'd be way ahead for the rest to 'come together' in the way you imagine.

 

[Racehorse]

The rest seems not to be directed at me

It wasn't.

I understand where you and jman are coming from.

It is always good to attack things from as many different angles as are available.

I just put a lot more faith in movers and shakers in business, just because I see the power they have, and the alacrity at which they get things done, compared to politicians and politics. I believe if the world was left up to politicians, we'd still be trying to invent fire.

 

[Kent C]

It wasn't.

I understand where you and jman are coming from.

It is always good to attack things from as many different angles as are available.

I just put a lot more faith in movers and shakers in business, just because I see the power they have, and the alacrity at which they get things done, compared to politicians and politics. I believe if the world was left up to politicians, we'd still be trying to invent fire.

I agree, esp. with that last of course, but I think we (and the ecig business and the tobacco companies if they were willing) do have a chance to derail the final rule at this point - well... January... and it's worth a shot and would hope CASAA is on that track as well.

 

[AndriaD]

I agree. This all serves as "testimony" and it will come in handy.....at the most opportune time.


I guess I'm old and patient, but I truly believe all this will sort itself out in our favor and the reason is 2-fold:
1) ecig is a truly transformative innovative emerging technology / tool that really has and will, change lives
2) there is a tremendous amount of investment, production and $$, so much so that there is probably no going back. To do so would put a very large sector of the world out of business. This isn't going to happen IMHO

And there are other business overlaps, like micro chip and cirucuit board manufactuers and developers, who are also contributing to ecig technology. Flavoring companies. etc.

It's really pretty far-reaching when you think about it!

It's like a train going very fast, that was designed at first w/out a braking system. Some people want to simply place a braking system into the train, some don't want any braking system at all; others want to pull the brakes hard causing a major jolt, and yet others want to derail the actual train itself.

I think the former will happen, because it's *reasonable*, all trains do need a braking system. that is logical engineering, safe engineering, and good planning. (The latter 3, won't get their way) Either because it is not reasonable, or because the train is already on the tracks and there are a LOT of cars attached. )



Ecigs is just another technology that will change people's lives. Technology has become perhaps the greatest agent of change in the modern world.

At least, that is the way I see it, so I guess I don't "take it personally" as some people do. It's no different than drugs that will eventually regulate people's genes.....and yet, there will be plenty of outcry about those things, too. Just like there is about human embryonic stem cell research.

It doesnt seem all that long ago (it REALLY DOESN'T!) that I was working in IT in one of the largest financial services company in the world, and "client/server" solutions for banking didn't really exist, except in the form of me and another guy crawling along the floor lifting up panels to fix cabling to mainframe computers, ATM cards were considered hot technology. I actually had to step around the back of banks of routers and move plugs around to route Now its on Forbes as one of the most cutting edge companies


Being patient doesn't mean you're not doing anything. You keep up your testimony, you keep asking, you keep shaking trees. And you keep the light alive....speak your truth out there, whenever you can.

But there is often nothing you can "do" to make things go.........faster. Things will take their course. You CAN, however, do whatever you can to help ensure a POSITIVE OUTCOME when the dust settles.

I agree with this very much; it was much the same back in the early years of the previous decade, when there was all this hooraw about how Congress was going to "regulate the internet" or "kill the internet" -- then, apparently Congress came to the shocking realization that THEY DON'T OWN the internet, it belongs to the whole world and there's very little they can do about the content of it -- heck, law enforcement can barely stay abreast of it enough to prosecute those using it in an illegal manner, so I dunno how they ever thought they could kill or regulate it. Once the genie is out of the bottle... it ain't going back in. Until something else comes along to take its place! Yeah, they could make things more difficult for us, which is why we need to keep hammering the nail, and maybe the FDA will be more reasonable than we currently fear it will be -- but if we DON'T keep hammering the nail, they won't have a clue that there are a lot of Americans out here that will NOT be pleased with draconian measures, and WILL have recourse to that ol black market, and that would make the FDA *responsible* for creating a whole new type of crime. I don't think a black market is our BEST option, not by a long shot, but if it becomes the ONLY option, then I will support it; it also makes a nice threatening club to bludgeon the FDA with.

Andria

 

[Jman8]

Okay, so give us your action plan.

If you think there is political momentum, then there is no time to waste. if you think now is the "time".......

Explain *exactly* what you mean by "us going on the offensive due to recent shift in national politics". I have no idea what that would consist of?

IMHO, anybody making this into a purely partisan issue is really going to be disappointed. Esp. if you think that sending $$ to any political party is going to "win" anything for vapers.

I've already stated in this thread that whatever I mean by going on the offensive could probably be criticized. I would count on that. I might even agree with criticisms of a game plan. So, I ask allowance to speak in generalities and for certain actions to be a given even if, in reality, they'd be a lot of work outside any individual reading this thread.

As noted before, a campaign has to occur. I would call it round 2 of what we all did during FDA comments, but this one is targeting Congress (Pubs specifically) and the focus is exemption of eCigs from FDA regulations per their 2014 proposal to align eCigs with TCA. I feel many reading this thread are learned enough with what both TCA and FDA proposals are saying to actually educate a few congress people about what exactly needs to be said. I feel here on ECF we discussed how ridiculous it is to apply TCA to eCigs, especially given the 2007 date when in 2009, most everyone in Congress (and in the US) never even knew eCigs existed.

I see us writing letters to Congress that touch on a number of points or are focussed on one point of emphasis (exemption). That us, to me, has to be way more than 100 of us and I think 10,000 is realistic. I think it would be doable if it means eCig politics could change dramatically and if we capitalize on momentum from what we just experienced with FDA, as this represents a 'get out of jail free' card. And we are writing to an audience that I like to think is very receptive to big government trying to enforce undue regulations on the little guy and small business. We let them know that SBA was brought up in our recent fight, and that we are seeking reasonable regulations that continue innovation and promote free market principles. And even while I couldn't personally put this into words, 'we' let them know that no sales to minors is something 'we' support and that we believe another faction of federal government can come up with effective regulations that aren't so influenced by ANTZ rhetoric (perhaps stated another way) and who isn't scorned by lost court battle from just a few years ago.

For this to really get some legs, I see vendors / manufacturers needing to hit things home with possible meetings with congress people besides our thousands of connections with low level staffers. If industry doesn't see this as golden opportunity for them to capitalize on the political momentum, then really, I don't know what a group of even 100,000 consumers could do. So, perhaps we go a educating to vendors who may not realize what has just been served up to them on a silver platter. But, I truly do believe that some manufacturers, especially of the BT and BV variety are already on this path, and already meeting with the members of 2015 Congress to help shape things going forward. I dunno this, but it would surprise me if I'm the only person on the planet thinking in this direction.

Us going on the offensive means we (vapers, vendors and manufacturers) try to change the FDA game plan to exempt eCigs from TCA before FDA is able to establish a final rule that deems eCigs, and all vaping products, a tobacco product.

 

[Jman8]

2 other things that I think ought to happen, and one of them I think is most viable of the 3 options.

I would love to see 2015 congress do another 'hearing on eCigs' that is grandstanding and is antithesis of what was done in 2014 hearing that allowed ANTZ a megaphone on eCigs. I recall Pub senator (sorry I forgot the name) being only voice of reason in the room, while Dem senator (intentionally forgot his name) prattled on about how no adult anywhere could like these sweet flavors. So, another hearing with Pubs sitting in the head chair and various people (manufacturers, health experts, perhaps a few vapers) who make it clear that children are not being sold these items from legitimate sources, that adults very much do like these type of flavors and that adults who were heavy smokers are no longer smoking or have greatly reduced because of what vaping has done in just 5 years on this planet. Plus noting that now is the time to bring standards and reasonable regulations to the industry and how heavy regulations would be exactly the wrong thing to do.

I don't know if that sort of hearing would occur, but I'd love to see it anyway.

Of the three things I'm suggesting, the last one I consider most viable. First one is exemption, second one is congressional hearing on eCigs chaired by Pub leader, and third one is that Congress amends the FDA proposal to establish a grandfather for eCigs to be time that the final rule comes out. So, bye bye 2007 date. You were unrealistic and are no longer needed as a consideration for when substantial equivalency ought to be established. Instead, the reasonable people are going with whatever date FDA does establish final rule for their proposals and all vaping products prior to that date do not need to apply for legal distribution/marketing with the FDA as they have been grandfathered in.

The third one means the exemption item is off the table, but also means we would have gained a rather significant victory while also allowing FDA to be that which controls regulations of vaping stuff going forward. I see this as most viable because it answers a question from the exemption path of who will be in charge of regulating eCigs going forward and kinda sorta makes the work for what Congress needs to do, to help us, much easier.

Either way, I'd still love to see that hearing I wrote about occur.

 

[Nate760]

Good points being made all around. I would add one thing:

Much like the "e-cigarette" label itself, the grass-roots nature of our movement is both a blessing and a curse, in that it simultaneously augments and diminishes our credibility. Ordinary citizens who have the truth on their side will always enjoy the moral/ethical high ground, but when they are up against a fabulously well-financed and well-organized opposition, with decades of experience at systematically manipulating public opinion and government policy, they will most always lose, irrespective of which side is telling the truth and which side is lying.

So on the one hand, we have little hope of prevailing unless we establish a formal organizational hierarchy and a coherent, unified rhetorical strategy. We need to have public spokespeople who are sharply dressed, well-spoken, well-qualified to argue the relevant issues, and have extensive prior experience dealing with the media. However, once we take that step, we will necessarily open ourselves up to allegations of astroturfing. It's an exceedingly fine line that must be walked.

 

[Racehorse]

I think 10,000 is realistic.

I do not think that number is at all realistic at this time. Let me give an example of why I think that.

I was looking into the Conrad James campaign in NM and it appears that he received $125,000 in campaign contributions.

$650 appeared to come from vapers. (according to the Albuquerque Journal) 0.005%

(and that was after Greg Conley did an all-out push to get votes and raise dollars 2 weeks all across the United States before the election).

That just doesn't spell political momentum to me.

So, perhaps we go a educating to vendors who may not realize what has just been served up to them on a silver platter.

^^^
Any reasonably astute business person would be aware of this. (Wouldn't they? )

I see vendors / manufacturers needing to hit things home with possible meetings with congress people besides our thousands of connections with low level staffers.

So you think vendors and manufacturers (many of whom you suggest might need to be clued in about a silver platter opportunity being presented to them) are going to get a seat at the table with someone other than ineffectual low level staffers?

Because if your prior description of them reflects any truth, then they aren't qualified to sit at the table with the Big Boys.

They should be sent to the children's table with some Play Doh.