FDA Godshall meets with White House OMB/OIRA again urging rejection of FDA deeming ban on vapor products

[navigator2011]

I would like to think the White House is carefully weighing all sides to this issue. While there may be a huge pile of money involved with BT/BP/BB, there is also "optics" to consider. At the end of the day, it won't look good for the Democrats to be seen hurting the economy, destroying small businesses across the nation, causing an increase in unemployment, bolstering big tobacco, and driving millions of Americans right back to smoking tobacco. Kicking the can down the road may be the President's "cleanest" option.

 

[TheMike21]

Thank you Bill for all of your hard work.
This is a fight that just won't end I think but what's important is not to give up and keep on fighting

 

[Kent C]

At the end of the day, it won't look good for the Democrats to be seen hurting the economy, destroying small businesses across the nation, causing an increase in unemployment,

Hasn't hurt them so far.....

 

[Katya]

I would like to think the White House is carefully weighing all sides to this issue. While there may be a huge pile of money involved with BT/BP/BB, there is also "optics" to consider. At the end of the day, it won't look good for the Democrats to be seen hurting the economy, destroying small businesses across the nation, causing an increase in unemployment, bolstering big tobacco, and driving millions of Americans right back to smoking tobacco. Kicking the can down the road may be the President's "cleanest" option.

Let's hope and pray...

Maybe the OMB/OIRA will show some courage.

 

[AndriaD]

Many of the anti-ecig crowd in government are influential Democrats. Obama is a Democrat in an election year. If he were to make the call, my fear would be that he'd follow the party line.... and that's probably not good for us.

I didn't look at every single calendar entry, but from what I did check out on the OIRA calendar, it appears that a lot more pro-ecig groups (like Bill and CAASA) met with OIRA than anti-ecig groups (at least the more recent ones).

Maybe some ANTZ groups are starting to worry?

He has zero reason to toe the party line, since he won't be up for election himself. What are they gonna do to him, kick him out? I doubt it, even if they could -- but they can't.

He's a lame duck at this point, and can do or say pretty much anything he likes.

Andria

 

[roxynoodle]

He has zero reason to toe the party line, since he won't be up for election himself. What are they gonna do to him, kick him out? I doubt it, even if they could -- but they can't.

He's a lame duck at this point, and can do or say pretty much anything he likes.

Andria

I had that thought also, but I also don't think he will want to hurt his party. I'm sure he would like to see another Dem in the White House after him, and try to regain control of Congress.

So I suppose it could come down to whether he wants to do the right thing more. I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy though. Wasn't one of the first things that happened under his administration the $1.01 federal tax on a pack of smokes?

 

[Endor]

He has zero reason to toe the party line, since he won't be up for election himself. What are they gonna do to him, kick him out? I doubt it, even if they could -- but they can't.

He's a lame duck at this point, and can do or say pretty much anything he likes.

To a point, you are right, but it was pretty clear in last night's speech that he cares very deeply for his legacy and setting up the continuation of his agenda through the next presidency.

Party line politics are still very much at play, even with a lame duck President, at a minimum to prevent a drastic shift in agenda for the next Democrat (he hopes) and not alienate the party just before an election.

 

[roxynoodle]

Yes, on Feb 4, 2009 he raised it from $0.39/pk to $1.01 according to Wiki. Not the greatest source, but that sounds right to me.

 

[OldBatty]

Yes, on Feb 4, 2009 he raised it from $0.39/pk to $1.01 according to Wiki. Not the greatest source, but that sounds right to me.

Pretty sure it did not take effect until around the first of April 2009. Wife and I quit two weeks later on the more symbolic April 15th.

 

[navigator2011]

I had that thought also, but I also don't think he will want to hurt his party. I'm sure he would like to see another Dem in the White House after him, and try to regain control of Congress.

So I suppose it could come down to whether he wants to do the right thing more. I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy though. Wasn't one of the first things that happened under his administration the $1.01 federal tax on a pack of smokes?

I think that federal tax has at least something to do with the institutions that are advising the President. All of the alphabet institutions repeatedly claim that raising the tax on smokes causes a certain percentage of smokers to quit. They claim to be improving the health of the nation by raising the price of tobacco. If this is the only advice reaching the President, then it is no wonder to me why he raised the tax.

To a point, you are right, but it was pretty clear in last night's speech that he cares very deeply for his legacy and setting up the continuation of his agenda through the next presidency.

Party line politics are still very much at play, even with a lame duck President, at a minimum to prevent a drastic shift in agenda for the next Democrat (he hopes) and not alienate the party just before an election.

I do get the feeling that he ponders very deeply before making any decision (at least, that's the sense that I get). I do think that he cares not just about his legacy, but also about doing what he thinks is simply "the right thing to do." I may not agree with his decisions, but I do think his decisions are well thought out. If I am correct, then it bodes well for us that positive information about vaping has been reaching the White House as of late.

 

[roxynoodle]

Pretty sure it did not take effect until around the first of April 2009. Wife and I quit two weeks later on the more symbolic April 15th.

My life was a total mess right around then so you may be right. I was granted disability the last week of March and given 1 week's notice for leaving my job. I retired April 1. So things were pretty frantic with my preparing my students and the teacher taking over. And my first day of retirement I sunk into the worst case of depression I've ever gone through. Shortly after, my fiance ran off with another woman.

 

[AndriaD]

My life was a total mess right around then so you may be right. I was granted disability the last week of March and given 1 week's notice for leaving my job. I retired April 1. So things were pretty frantic with my preparing my students and the teacher taking over. And my first day of retirement I sunk into the worst case of depression I've ever gone through. Shortly after, my fiance ran off with another woman.

Sounds like 2009 was a pretty sucky year for pretty much everyone! My husband went on short-hours that year, which was better than being laid off, but still very hard -- he had to sell every one of his "star notes" (he's a coin/currency collector, and had a full collection of star notes in every denomination) just to pay the dang electric bill! Still hasn't managed to rebuild that collection, though he was able to go back to his collecting hobby when I stopped buying cigarettes.

Andria

 

[Kent C]

I think that federal tax has at least something to do with the institutions that are advising the President. All of the alphabet institutions repeatedly claim that raising the tax on smokes causes a certain percentage of smokers to quit.

More taxes sometimes have opposite consequences. The luxury yacht tax lost revenues after no one bought new yachts. The main bite in the adult smokers rate (from 30-40% down to 25%) took place after the Clinton cigarette tax in the 90's. Subsequent taxes haven't had that effect. (until ecigs, adult smoking rates were flat at around 23-24% - now with ecigs, under 20% and dropping) I think, because we've gotten down to the hard core smokers after the Clinton tax. Same with NRT's. Worked with some smokers but not hard core smokers. And so have little effect today.

So if the alphabet agencies are pointing to the Clinton tax in an attempt to justify more taxes, but the context has changed.

 

[AndriaD]

More taxes sometimes have opposite consequences. The luxury yacht tax lost revenues after no one bought new yachts. The main bite in the adult smokers rate (from 30-40% down to 25%) took place after the Clinton cigarette tax in the 90's. Subsequent taxes haven't had that effect. (until ecigs, adult smoking rates were flat at around 23-24% - now with ecigs, under 20% and dropping) I think, because we've gotten down to the hard core smokers after the Clinton tax. Same with NRT's. Worked with some smokers but not hard core smokers. And so have little effect today.

So if the alphabet agencies are pointing to the Clinton tax in an attempt to justify more taxes, but the context has changed.

I must have been one of those hardcore diehard smokers, which is weird considering I smoked ultra-lights for 20+ yrs -- just goes to show you that a great deal of the smoking addiction has nothing whatever, or very little, to do with nicotine -- but all the rising price did to me was make me cut down; I smoked Virginia Slims for 30+ yrs in some version, but as the price went higher, I switched to their 120's, so I could smoke each one twice -- the same frequency as a 2pk a day smoker, but using just one pack. Which turned out to be a big benefit, when I was weaning off cigarettes; I never could tell any difference in the taste, whether it was the first or the 2nd half of the cigarette, but once I got down to <5 per day, my sense of smell, and some of my sense of taste, started returning -- and those 2nd halves tasted GODAWFUL!

Andria

 

[Endor]

More taxes sometimes have opposite consequences. The luxury yacht tax lost revenues after no one bought new yachts. The main bite in the adult smokers rate (from 30-40% down to 25%) took place after the Clinton cigarette tax in the 90's. Subsequent taxes haven't had that effect. (until ecigs, adult smoking rates were flat at around 23-24% - now with ecigs, under 20% and dropping) I think, because we've gotten down to the hard core smokers after the Clinton tax. Same with NRT's. Worked with some smokers but not hard core smokers. And so have little effect today.

So if the alphabet agencies are pointing to the Clinton tax in an attempt to justify more taxes, but the context has changed.

This is true. A certain percentage of the population will smoke (or use nicotine) and we've probably been at that percentage level for some time (hence the flat numbers). That won't change, it's just human nature at a population level. Raising taxes will result in users will figure out a way to work around the system, and organized crime flourishes to meet the demand in contraband tobacco.

Let's look at the track history for large tobacco tax hikes:
1) Canada in the 1990s. A huge black market emerged, fed by reselling of US-purchased cigarettes as well as thefts from convenience stores (many on the US side).

It is still an issue, even now. An article from 2014 states: "Contraband tobacco is thought to incur global annual tax losses in the order of $40 billion-$50 billion (U.S.). Estimates range from 10.7 to 11.6 per cent of cigarettes consumed worldwide. Canada’s contraband cigarette problem is outsized and disproportionate by comparison: our illicit tobacco market is estimated at 15 to 33 per cent of all cigarettes consumed."

2) Australia. I was there on business about a year ago, and a pack of cigarettes was about $20 AUD. Luckily I was vaping and brought plenty of eliquid with me. Again, a black market has emerged.

According to The Age: "New data from Australian Customs and Border Protection reveals the amount of illegal tobacco detected and seized at the Australian border has remained ''fairly consistent'' over the past six years. But in 2012-13, tobacco smuggling detections jumped from 55 to 76, with the number of seized cigarettes jumping from 82 million to 200 million.

A customs spokesman attributed the recent rise to crime syndicates increasing the number of smaller shipments, rather than an overall increase of smuggling activity. But he said Australia remained a lucrative target for international smugglers because the high cost of tobacco products provided greater profit margins for the gangs."

 

[Kent C]

1) Canada in the 1990s. A huge black market emerged, fed by reselling of US-purchased cigarettes as well as thefts from convenience stores (many on the US side).

I recall that. Pretty sure that included one of the first 'drive-by' shootings for cigarettes. There were 'over the counter' and 'under the counter' stocks in many convenient stores to where some vendors went totally 'under the counter' and iirc, the tax was reduced for a while.

Working at the coal docks, we had several Canadian boat workers arrested (truck drivers as well). One guy had his whole compartment on a boat filled with cases of cigarettes and whiskey (whiskey tax went up at that time as well).

 

[Endor]

I recall that. Pretty sure that included one of the first 'drive-by' shootings for cigarettes. There were 'over the counter' and 'under the counter' stocks in many convenient stores to where some vendors went totally 'under the counter' and iirc, the tax was reduced for a while.

When all that was happening back in the 90s, a liquor store I frequented to purchase cigarettes got hit. Group broke in overnight, stole every pack of cigarettes the store had (they literally ripped down and took the entire overhead cigarette case, you know, the big one above the cash registers most liquor stores have?).

Cash registers and everything else was completely untouched... they didn't steal a single penny, just the smokes.

I spoke with the owner... he attributed it directly to the Canada black market, stating that it's been happening to a lot of other stores nearby since Canada raised their taxes (and the fact that is the only thing they stole).

 

[Kent C]

I spoke with the owner... he attributed it directly to the Canada black market, stating that it's been happening to a lot of other stores nearby since Canada raised their taxes (and the fact that is the only thing they stole).

Pretty sure that was part of the 'problem' - those vendors that didn't have an 'undercounter stash' suffered in sales. Soon everyone was defying the law. Which is when the tax was reduced.

A good "lesson" for vaping perhaps Vendors take note....

 

[choochoogranny]

I had that thought also, but I also don't think he will want to hurt his party. I'm sure he would like to see another Dem in the White House after him, and try to regain control of Congress.

So I suppose it could come down to whether he wants to do the right thing more. I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy though. Wasn't one of the first things that happened under his administration the $1.01 federal tax on a pack of smokes?

Believe that's right, roxy. They were pushing this tax as a way to support health insurance for poor children. Later it was revealed that people with incomes of $80K were able to get on the program. Why wasn't this tax increase dropped with the advent of ObamaCare?

 

[roxynoodle]

Believe that's right, roxy. They were pushing this tax as a way to support health insurance for poor children. Later it was revealed that people with incomes of $80K were able to get on the program. Why wasn't this tax increase dropped with the advent of ObamaCare?

We know why.