Would you join an organized movement of vapers?

[Dougiestyle]

My regional vape group, Smoky Mountain Vapers (SMV), collected and submitted over $5K to CASAA this year. Only one occurrence of acknowledgement. Sad. I began the collections in the group, and I am a member of CASAA. I honestly only see advocacy coordination. Where is the lobby effort? I am sure there is a substantial contribution from the membership base, but have not seen much activity on the part of the board.

I am aware of AVA and Greg Conley's lobby efforts and promotion of the vaping community on a state by state level. If any future collections and raffles are performed by my group, the resources will most likely go to AVA. I see more concerted effort from Mr. Conley.

I will continue to participate in CASAA CTAs. I appreciate the effort to coordinate the strategies. I just wish there were a more proactive appearance of the administrators in the legislative arena.

On a state level, we in Tennessee, also have the TSFA- Tennessee Smoke-Free Association that does lobby on the state level for the benefit of our B&Ms. East Tennessee, alone, has around 30 B&Ms owned privately. Market saturation is the biggest obstacle for their success at this point IMO. well, that and proposed regulation.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

My regional vape group, Smoky Mountain Vapers (SMV), collected and submitted over $5K to CASAA this year. Only one occurrence of acknowledgement. Sad. I began the collections in the group, and I am a member of CASAA. I honestly only see advocacy coordination. Where is the lobby effort? I am sure there is a substantial contribution from the membership base, but have not seen much activity on the part of the board.

I am aware of AVA and Greg Conley's lobby efforts and promotion of the vaping community on a state by state level. If any future collections and raffles are performed by my group, the resources will most likely go to AVA. I see more concerted effort from Mr. Conley.

I will continue to participate in CASAA CTAs. I appreciate the effort to coordinate the strategies. I just wish there were a more proactive appearance of the administrators in the legislative arena.

That's pretty rude. If all you see is advocacy coordination, you should consider sending your money to other groups. Advocacy has limited effects, especially since this is a topic that's going to turn most people off. As I said earlier, their comments were lacking. I don't know if a lot of people are donating money like your group did, but I would question where that money is going. These comments were a major issue and they should have put some real work and research into it. Instead, all they did was throw out some rhetoric, statistics that they pulled from who knows where, and criticize the scientific methods of other research. A few college students with an internet connection could have put that together. At least they would have put some references in it. Just my opinion, but it seems like a sham.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

So this has turned into a CASAA bashing thread? I'm out. If you want to know where their money goes, read this post and contact the appropriate person instead of guessing. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...588-im-amazed-join-casaa-83.html#post14448467

 

[Plastic Shaman]

So this has turned into a CASAA bashing thread? I'm out. If you want to know where their money goes, read this post and contact the appropriate person instead of guessing. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...588-im-amazed-join-casaa-83.html#post14448467

Not trying to bash, but your point is taken. I just don't think their comments were very well done, especially considering the comments that I found out about from SFATA. I don't know how much money they make, but I have heard a lot more about CASAA so I assumed they had more resources. Reading that, I understand where their money goes. However, my position is that putting money into these activities isn't as effective as working in the political and legal areas.

Maybe I'm being totally unfair, but then again, what do I know? Not much probably. I guess I just expected more from a group that I see everyone plugging.

 

[CES]

OK, so I'm confused...the premise of this thread is whether vapers would join an organized consumer movement, yes? Which to me would be the likes of CASAA, maybe the vaping militia, or the I'm proof movement.

SFATA is a manufacturer's association- as individuals we can't join. We can decide whether or not to buy from members, but as consumers we have no voice.

From their mission statement AVA is also more about advocacy for the industry- though I think the lobbying efforts and media efforts are very important and i contribute.

I support all of these groups, but when we talk about joining, i think it's important to be clear. Vaper's can only "join" consumer associations.

 

[philoshop]

Advocacy, especially in an area such as this requires intense focus, and a clear target. The vaping community is currently working on the focus: availability of hardware and commodities required. An admirable focus.
The target is, however, somewhat unclear. Essentially the demons here in the US are the FDA and BT/BP. The FDA is part of the government, and BT/BP provide enormous sums of money to the government on a regular basis. They have both the target and the focus well in hand. And in a very real sense, have taken over an agency that is supposed to have our best interests at heart. They have the money and they're making the rules by which we live.
Targeting the government requires lots of time for the most part. It's a big machine and it will not turn easily when there's money at stake. Trying to match the advocacy power of BT/BP on a monetary level seems unrealistic at this point.

If vaping in the US succeeds and is allowed to grow to help millions more, and I dearly hope that it does, it will be the result of people speaking up for it's benefits in the face of the almighty dollar.

 

[wv2win]

.............. I don't shop at target or chik fil a or hobby lobby for political reasons..................................:

I understand, Chik-fil-a, the privately owned company that loses millions and gives it's employee's Sunday's off and liberally funds their employee's higher education. They are way too generous to be supported. (end of hijack)

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Actually, you can join SFATA. However, my initial point was that we could make vendors join.

Philoshop, I understand why you think advocacy is important. However, I'll ask you this. How will changing a few people's minds changes the actions of the FDA. Will those people's support somehow help win in federal court?

 

[DC2]

I really do hope the FDA takes this argument into consideration when they finalize the rules though.

For what it's worth the FSPTCA does require the FDA to take black market considerations into account.

 

[DC2]

If they have that much money, then there is no need for lobbying at this point. If I was a premium juice vendor with 5 or 6 flavors that people are buying like mad, the proposed rules would be in my favor. With that small of a line and enough capital, getting through the application process would be no problem. Also, it would put a lot of the smaller lines out of business. They can worry about the next set of proposals when the time comes.

It depends on what you believe the application process will entail, and how much it will cost.

Have you read the Economic Impact Analysis that the FDA wrote?
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/fda-regulations/557605-economic-impact-analysis.html

 

[zahzoo]

OK, so I'm confused...the premise of this thread is whether vapers would join an organized consumer movement, yes? Which to me would be the likes of CASAA, maybe the vaping militia, or the I'm proof movement.

SFATA is a manufacturer's association- as individuals we can't join. We can decide whether or not to buy from members, but as consumers we have no voice.

From their mission statement AVA is also more about advocacy for the industry- though I think the lobbying efforts and media efforts are very important and i contribute.

I support all of these groups, but when we talk about joining, i think it's important to be clear. Vaper's can only "join" consumer associations.

Thank you for pointing this out... there are quite differing agendas for Consumer (CASAA) and industry (SFATA) advocacy groups.

Then add to this the dynamics of the industry itself. Don't know the actual percentages but somewhere around 95% or higher in this market are just resellers. Majority of the manufacturing all comes from Chinese factories... most of those are not solely e-cigarette/vaping product manufacturers. Most are industrial fabrication and machine shops that make anything from auto parts to kitchen gadgets. There's hardly more than a dozen or so true established brand name manufacturers across the whole industry.

There is a small handful of chemical producers that make nicotine... then a group of resellers and thousands of "mixologists" selling e-juice.

When you get down to the business of organizing the industry... where do you form a base? Let's be frank... the Chinese manufacturers are NOT going to jump on-board. They'll just retool the line and switch to pumping out designer key-chains or whatever if the e-cig business collapses.

The original post seemed to suggest consumers hitch up to the industry wagon to drive advocacy... I just don't see that happening with this fragmented global industry.

 

[philoshop]

Actually, you can join SFATA. However, my initial point was that we could make vendors join.

Philoshop, I understand why you think advocacy is important. However, I'll ask you this. How will changing a few people's minds changes the actions of the FDA. Will those people's support somehow help win in federal court?

Changing the minds of the voters can help to change the minds of the lawmakers when the voices get loud enough. Those lawmakers are the ones who approve funding for federal agencies like the FDA, and also approve nominations of federal judges. Like I said, it takes time.
The vaping community and vaping industry simply don't have the financial resources to go toe-to-toe with BP/BT in court, but we do have a lot of voice with which to affect change in the government's position before it reaches the courts.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

It depends on what you believe the application process will entail, and how much it will cost.

Have you read the Economic Impact Analysis that the FDA wrote?
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/fda-regulations/557605-economic-impact-analysis.html

Honestly, I don't think that the application process is that bad, but I would have to look at it again. The issue, as I talked about in my other thread, is what they define as a tobacco product. If they are just looking at the nicotine, then I doubt that there is an issue as only the companies who are making the nicotine would be the ones who would have to apply as they would fall under the definition of tobacco manufactures, but juice producers would not. However, and I think this is more likely, if they are including liquid itself as a tobacco product, then it will become too cumbersome for most companies.

I did look at the economic analysis and I think it is looking at it as liquid as being a tobacco product. It sounds dire, but they also seem to need a lot more info. However, I still don't see it as an issue for the bigger companies with small lines as they wont have nearly as much to report and will have more resources to go through the process.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

Honestly, I don't think that the application process is that bad, but I would have to look at it again. The issue, as I talked about in my other thread, is what they define as a tobacco product. If they are just looking at the nicotine, then I doubt that there is an issue as only the companies who are making the nicotine would be the ones who would have to apply as they would fall under the definition of tobacco manufactures, but juice producers would not. However, and I think this is more likely, if they are including liquid itself as a tobacco product, then it will become too cumbersome for most companies.

I did look at the economic analysis and I think it is looking at it as liquid as being a tobacco product. It sounds dire, but they also seem to need a lot more info. However, I still don't see it as an issue for the bigger companies with small lines as they wont have nearly as much to report and will have more resources to go through the process.

Eeeek! You just stepped in it. Ejuice is considered a tobacco product. It's dumb, but it is. Insurance companies also consider vaping to essentially be smoking and charge accordingly.

 

[DC2]

Honestly, I don't think that the application process is that bad, but I would have to look at it again.

As the thread I linked shows, the FDA itself thinks the application process will be that bad.

Here is another link you might want to take a look at if you haven't already...
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ing-why-deeming-reg-would-ban-all-e-cigs.html

I know electronic cigarettes are not going to be able to use the "substantial equivalence" route...
But the process to apply for Premarket Review of New Tobacco Products is said by many to be even worse.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

Shaman, don't get me wrong, I think your heart is in the right place.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Changing the minds of the voters can help to change the minds of the lawmakers when the voices get loud enough. Those lawmakers are the ones who approve funding for federal agencies like the FDA, and also approve nominations of federal judges. Like I said, it takes time.
The vaping community and vaping industry simply don't have the financial resources to go toe-to-toe with BP/BT in court, but we do have a lot of voice with which to affect change in the government's position before it reaches the courts.

This is where are views are divergent. First, I don't really see this as something you can easily change people's minds about. This isn't about helping starving children or puppies. It's about our use of a product that people already have a negative view about. There are also a number of major issues with e-cigs, like their long term effects and the use by minors. While I don't know anything about the science behind the long term effects, I do know that there are children using these and that will put a large part of the population. We aren't going to get people to flood their congressmen and women with letters about this. Similarly, I don't think that FDA funding and judicial appointments will change just based off this issue and public opinion. There are bigger concerns and the FDA isn't getting defunded any time soon.

Even if I was wrong, it wouldn't solve a thing if we are just looking at the current proposed rules. Congress has given the FDA the ability to regulate this product by statute. The only solution at this point would be Congress amending the legislation. As I mentioned earlier, the Tobacco Control Act was passed with 2/3 of the House and 79 votes in the Senate. What I'm saying is that this is not a controversial bill and it will be really hard to get Congress to change its mind unless they have a real chance to lose their seat. As I've said, I think that the idea of Congress changing it's mind based on voter demand is pretty far fetched.

On the other hand, lobbying dollars can fight these issues in court. Although it would take a lot of money, lobbying can also change the law with campaign contributions. I don't think that it's up for discussion at this point, money is the most effective way to change the law.

 

[DC2]

First, I don't really see this as something you can easily change people's minds about. This isn't about helping starving children or puppies. It's about our use of a product that people already have a negative view about.

It's not just vapers, but all of the people who know a smoker and care deeply that they quit smoking.
That's a lot of people, if we can reach them somehow.

The only solution at this point would be Congress amending the legislation. As I mentioned earlier, the Tobacco Control Act was passed with 2/3 of the House and 79 votes in the Senate.

But it was written long before anyone knew about electronic cigarettes.
Things have changed since then.

And the FSPTCA should be changed accordingly.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Eeeek! You just stepped in it. Ejuice is considered a tobacco product. It's dumb, but it is. Insurance companies also consider vaping to essentially be smoking and charge accordingly.

I totally agree, but I still think that there might be some legal arguments about statutory interpretations. My arguments may not be the best, but I still would make them!

Also, insurance companies do all sorts of risk analysis. A lot of them are silly, but don't necessarily mean anything outside of risk analysis.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

Agreed, first we have to see what the FDA will decide to do, then what the courts decide. What happens in the middle could be a disaster, especially for those unprepared or just starting out.

Take a look at this form. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...scussion/620718-am-i-smoker.html#post14524971 You don't get charged for being overweight or jaywalking.