Can Anybody Make Anything Of This?

[Imsomint]

I don't know jack shit about Government so I can't tell if this is something to be concerned about or not. I pasted it from (deleted due to nht). The stuff that pertains to us is highlighted in some way. Sorry about the annoying fucking format, I can't figure out how to change the spacing.

Legislative Bulletin………April 1, 2009

Contents:

H.R. 1256 — Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act

Key Conservative Concerns

Take-Away Points

--The bill limits the freedom of speech.

--The bill severely weakens the core health-promoting function of the FDA.

--The bill increases taxes on tobacco companies by $995 million over 10 years on top of

the $72.1 billion tobacco tax over 10 years scheduled to take effect April 1, 2009 in

order to fund the expansion of SCHIP.

-- The bill imposes numerous mandates on states and on private businesses.

--Many conservatives may question the motivations behind loopholes created for

Menthol and Indians.

For more details on these concerns, see below.

H.R. 1256 — Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act

(Waxman, D-CA)

Order of Business: The bill is expected to be considered under a structured rule on

Wednesday, April 1, 2009. The rule provides for a Self Executing amendment adding

language that, in addition to technical corrections, clarifies that study on the use of

menthol cigarettes in the underlying bill will examine the impact among children and

strikes all the non-tobacco portions of the bill. The non-tobacco portions, included in HR

1804, will then come to the floor as a separate bill under suspension of the rules and upon

passage of both H.R. 1256 and H.R. 1804, the rule will marry both vehicles back

together.

Finally, the rule provides for the consideration of an amendment in the nature of a

substitute by Rep. Buyer, which would create a Tobacco Harm Reduction Center under

the Department of HHS to regulate all tobacco products and establish a regulatory

scheme to provide for tobacco prevention, education, and cessation programs.

The amendment would promote tobacco harm reduction strategies to move smokers who

cannot, or will not, quit smoking along a continuum of risk from the highest risk products

(cigarettes) to the lowest risk products (smokeless tobacco or nicotine replacement), with

the ultimate goal of complete tobacco cessation. The amendment would incentivize the

development of reduced risk tobacco and nicotine products and discourage continued

investment in the most dangerous combustible tobacco products, protect America's

tobacco farmers, and address minors' tobacco use – all through the normal appropriations

process and not through new taxes disguised as user fees.

Major Changes Since the Last Time This Legislation Was Before the House: The

tobacco portions of H.R. 1256 are nearly identical to those of H.R. 1108, which passed

the House in the 110th Congress under suspension of the rules by a vote of 326 - 102 on

July 30, 2008. The relevant changes include the removal of two Republican amendments

requiring studies by the Government Accountability Office regarding youth smoking and

an FTC report on concentration within the tobacco industry both offered by Rep. Buyer

in the 110th Congress. In addition to other technical changes, the Congressional Budget

Office's estimates of revenue lost due to reduced tobacco consumption have increased by

$509 million over 10 years because of the tobacco tax increase scheduled to go into effect

April 1, 2009 (to pay for SCHIP expansion passed earlier this year).

The rule for the bill will remove all non-tobacco provisions including the Thrift Savings

Plan (TSP) Enhancement and the elimination of sick leave in the calculation of survivors'

annuity benefits for participants in the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) in

order to deny Republicans options for a Motion to Recommit.

Previously the TSP and sick leave provisions were added to pay for federal tax revenue

lost as a result of the projected 2% reduction in tobacco use, which the Congressional

Budget Office (CBO) estimates would cost $210 million over five years, and $955 over

ten. The bill previously incorporated the text of a measure from the 110th Congress (H.R.

6500) making changes to the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) for federal workers. That bill

would require auto-enrollment of workers in the TSP, costing $290 million over five

years, and $892 million over ten, due to revenue loss associated with additional

employees making pre-tax TSP contributions. However, H.R. 6500 (as incorporated into

H.R. 1256 this Congress) would result in a net revenue gain, due to an additional

provision establishing an after-tax savings component (similar to the Roth IRA or Roth

401(k) options) in the TSP, which CBO estimates would generate $504 million in

revenue over five years, and $2.26 billion over ten, resulting from employees substituting

pre-tax TSP contributions with after-tax ones.

Summary: H.R. 1256 would amend the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act

and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to grant broad new authority to the Food

and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate and impose new restrictions on the

manufacture, distribution, advertising, labeling, disclosure, promotion, sale and use of

tobacco (cigarettes and smokeless) Specific bill provisions include the following:

Findings and Purpose. The bill contains 13 pages of findings purporting the need to

regulate tobacco products to protect the public health, and language designed to ensure

that the bill does not affect the authorities of the Secretaries of Agriculture or Treasury.

The bill also includes severability language providing that judicial invalidation of one or

more sections of the legislation will not result in the nullification of the entire regulatory

regime proposed by the bill.

Regulatory Authority. H.R. 1256 gives FDA the authority to regulate tobacco products,

which are defined as "any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for

human consumption, including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product"

and establishes a new Center for Tobacco Products within the FDA to exercise regulatory

authority. The bill states that tobacco does not qualify as a drug or medical device for

purposes of FDA regulation, and limits the FDA's regulatory authority to tobacco leaf in

the possession of tobacco manufacturers (thus excluding tobacco growers).

Adulterated and Misbranded Products. The bill defines adulterated and misbranded

tobacco products, defining the former to include products that "consists in whole or in

part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance," and defining misbranded products to

include those that are "false or misleading," as well as those which do not adhere to the

registration, labeling, and other regulatory regimes established under the bill. The bill

grants the FDA, through the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the right to preapprove

statements made on tobacco product labels.

Information Disclosure. The bill requires all tobacco manufacturers, not later than 6

months after the date of enactment, to disclose to the Secretary the names and

descriptions of all ingredients and additives added to the tobacco product as well as

content, delivery, and form of nicotine in each. The bill grants authority to the Secretary

to obtain information from tobacco companies on the health effects of smoking and

requires the Secretary to publish "a list of harmful and potentially harmful constituents"

in tobacco products by brand. The bill further requires manufacturers, upon the

Secretary's request, to release all documents related to current and future products.

Registration and Inspection. H.R. 1256 requires all tobacco manufacturers to register

their names and places of business with the Secretary and requires the Secretary to make

such information public. The bill also requires inspection of every domestic tobacco

manufacturing establishment at least once every two years, and a requirement that

overseas tobacco manufacturing establishments have "adequate and effective means" for

the Secretary to ensure that tobacco products manufactured overseas should be refused

entry into the United States. (Your shisha comes from overseas!!!!!)

While the Secretary is required to contract with states to

enforce the FDA-promulgated regulations the Secretary is prohibited from contracting

with states to enforce the tobacco regulations on Indian tribal lands—or directly engage

in enforcement activity on tribal lands—without the express written consent of the tribe

involved.

General Authority. The bill would permit the Secretary to restrict by regulation the sale,

distribution, and advertising of tobacco products "if the secretary determines that such

regulation would be appropriate for the protection of the public health." In exercising this

authority, the Secretary may not 1) "prohibit the sale of any tobacco product in face-toface

transactions by a specific category of retail outlets;" 2) set an age limit on the sale of

tobacco products higher than 18 years of age; or 3) require use of a physician's

prescription in order to obtain tobacco products. However, the bill does require the

Secretary to promulgate regulations addressing the sale, distribution, and marketing of

tobacco products remotely so as to discourage the purchase of tobacco products by

underage individuals.

Product Standards. H.R. 1256 would ban all "artificial or natural flavors" except for menthol, (guess we only get to smoke Newports from now on!!!!!! ALL YOUR FLAVORED SHISHA WILL BE BANNED!! THAT MEANS HOOKAH SMOKING WILL BE ILLEGAL!!!!) and requires all tobacco products to meet domestic standards with respect to

pesticide use. The bill permits the Secretary to impose further restrictions should the

regulations be in the interest of the public health. However, "because of the importance of

a decision of the Secretary to issue a regulation" banning all cigarettes or reducing the

level of nicotine permitted in tobacco products to zero, the bill explicitly prohibits the

Secretary from taking either action.

Notification and Recalls. The bill grants the Secretary the authority to order notification

to the public, through public service announcements or other means, of tobacco products

that "present an unreasonable risk of substantial harm to the public health…and no more

practicable means is available…to eliminate such risk." The bill also authorizes the

Secretary to order recalls in the event that "there is a reasonable probability that a tobacco

product contains a manufacturing or other defect not ordinarily contained in other

tobacco products on the market that would cause serious, adverse health consequences or

death."

Record-Keeping. H.R. 1256 requires tobacco companies to create and preserve records,

as established by regulation, designed to determine that tobacco products are not

adulterated or misbranded and to protect the public health, and to provide reports of any

corrective action taken by tobacco manufacturers to remove products from the market for

health reasons. The bill language states that identities of any patients discussed in

applicable records should remain confidential, unless disclosure is necessary "to

determine risks to public health of a tobacco product."

Review of New Tobacco Products. The bill requires pre-market review for all new

tobacco products introduced after February 15, 2007, unless the product is "substantially

equivalent" to existing products. The application for pre-market review requires full

disclosure of the products' components, and research of the health effects of same. The

bill would require the Secretary to reject such new tobacco products if "there is a lack of

a showing that permitting such tobacco products to be marketed would be appropriate for

the protection of the public health," among other conditions necessary for approval. The

bill also permits the Secretary to withdraw premarket approval, due to a company's noncompliance

with regulations or new information on the public health effects of a product,

effectively removing the product from the marketplace.

Modified Risk Tobacco Products. H.R. 1256 places restrictions on the introduction or

marketing of modified risk tobacco products. Specifically, the bill requires that any

product marketed as modified risk must "significantly reduce harm and the risk of

tobacco-related disease to individual tobacco users" and "benefit the health of the

population as a whole," including both tobacco users and non-users. In the event that the

Secretary cannot make such a determination without long-term epidemiological data that

is not available, the Secretary may issue a temporary approval of not more than five years

for the marketing of modified risk products, provided that "the reasonably likely overall

impact of use of the product remains a substantial and measurable reduction in overall

morbidity and mortality among individual tobacco users," and the product is subject to

annual post-market surveillance review. The bill also places additional restrictions on the

marketing, advertising, and comparative claims presented by modified risk tobacco

products.

Judicial Review. The bill provides a process for individuals adversely affected by

regulations issued pursuant to the bill, or whose application for pre-market approval was

denied, to seek judicial review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the

party resides or has a principal place of business, subject to review by the Supreme Court.

Regulatory Requirements. H.R. 1256 requires the Secretary to issue regulations within

three years of enactment regarding tobacco product testing and disclosure of product

constituents, and permits the Secretary to require label or advertising disclosure of

tobacco product constituents. The bill provides for delays of regulatory and testing

requirements for "small tobacco product manufacturers," defined as those employing

fewer than 350 individuals. The bill also clarifies that none of its provisions prohibit the

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) from regulating tobacco advertising or sales.

Limited Pre-Emption. H.R. 1256 pre-empts state laws relating to tobacco product

standards, mis-labeling, adulteration, labeling, and related product standards; according

to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), this pre-emption language constitutes an

intergovernmental mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. However,

the bill retains states' ability to enact more stringent standards with respect to tobacco

advertising and promotion.

Scientific Advisory Committee. The bill establishes the Tobacco Products Scientific

Advisory Committee to provide technical expertise and recommendations to the

Secretary regarding the regulation of tobacco products.

Smoking Cessation. The bill requires the Secretary to consider approving the extended

use of nicotine replacement products "for the treatment of tobacco dependence."

User Fee. The bill assesses user fees on tobacco companies and funds FDA regulation of

tobacco activities in the amount of $85 million in Fiscal Year 2009, increasing each year

until reaching $712 million in Fiscal Year 2019 and each subsequent year. The bill

assesses user fees by class of tobacco products (e.g. cigarettes, cigars, etc.), and allocates

them to companies within a class of tobacco products, based on the percentages outlined

in tobacco buyout legislation (P.L. 108-357) passed in October 2004.

Restores 1996 Rule on Tobacco Advertising. The bill requires the Secretary to publish

within 180 days of the bill's enactment a final rule on regulation of tobacco identical to

regulations published on October 28, 1996, with an effective date of one year following

the bill's enactment. The original regulations would restrict tobacco advertising by,

among other things, prohibiting billboards within 1,000 feet of schools and permitting

only black-and-white advertising. The bill would modify the original regulation to permit

the free distribution of smokeless tobacco only, and only in quantities of fewer than 15

grams (0.53 ounces) in certain "qualified adult-only facilities." The bill exempts the final

rule, as modified, from review under the Congressional Review Act.

Nullifies Earlier Documents. H.R. 1256 would nullify the precedent of certain documents

issued by FDA during 1995-96 as they relate to a prior attempt to classify nicotine in

tobacco products as a drug for purposes of FDA regulation. (H.R. 1256 would make

tobacco subject to FDA regulation, but as a "tobacco product," not a drug or medical

device.)

New Penalties. The bill would add failure to comply with the bill's requirements as

grounds for imposition of fines and/or criminal penalties, along with other offenses

relating to counterfeiting tobacco products or "the charitable distribution of tobacco

products." The bill also gives the Secretary the authority to impose a "no-tobacco sale

order" against retail outlets and establishes a new system of federal fines against retail

establishments selling tobacco products improperly, authorizing fines of up to $10,000

for establishments with six or more violations within a four year period.

Studies. The bill would require a study on cross-border trade and counterfeiting in

tobacco products, and require a specific study by HHS on raising the minimum age to

purchase tobacco products. The bill also requires, no later than one year after its

establishment, the Tobacco Product Scientific Advisory Committee to submit to the

Secretary a report and recommendations on the impact of the use of menthol in cigarettes

on the public health, including such use among African Americans, Hispanics, and other

racial and ethnic minorities.

Labeling Requirements. The bill requires all cigarettes and smokeless tobacco sold in the

United States to bear clear warnings about the risks associated with tobacco use and

prescribes the wording, typeface, and font size associated with such warnings. (Tobacco

products manufactured domestically for international use are exempt from this

requirement.) H.R. 1256 further requires that all advertising, including matchbooks,

contain language from the warning labels, and prescribes the proportions by which such

labeling warning must relate to the overall size of the advertisement. The bill gives the

Secretary of HHS the authority to alter or increase the size of the labeling requirements,

permits states to further regulate the type and manner, but not the content, of cigarette

advertising, and extends a prohibition on television and radio advertising to smokeless

tobacco products subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission.

Tar and Nicotine Disclosure. The bill gives the Secretary the authority to conduct a

rulemaking process to determine whether to require the disclosure of tar, nicotine, and

other constituent levels in tobacco advertising, subject to a memorandum of

understanding with the Federal Trade Commission.

Shipping Requirements. H.R. 1256 requires that all packaging and shipping containers

shall bear statements stating "sale only allowed in the United States" and requires the

Secretary to issue regulations regarding the maintenance of records by entities

manufacturing, transporting, or distributing tobacco products. The bill also requires

tobacco manufacturers and distributors to notify the Attorney General and the Secretary

of the Treasury upon obtaining information "which reasonably supports the conclusion"

that tobacco products formerly held by the entity have circumvented payment of

applicable taxes or "diverted for possible illicit marketing."

Cost to Taxpayers: According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), H.R. 1256

would result in $2.2 billion in mandatory spending over five years, and $5.4 billion over

ten, related to the Food and Drug Administration's regulation of tobacco. The bill would

offset these costs by imposing a "fee" on tobacco companies to finance the FDA

regulation. CBO also estimates a decline in revenues of $210 million over five years, and

$955 million over ten, related to a 2% reduction in overall smoking levels due to tobacco

regulation, and loss of commensurate tobacco tax revenue. In order to pay for this

reduced revenue, H.R. 1256 incorporates after passage of H.R. 1256, provisions in H.R.

1804, relating to the federal Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). The bill would establish a system

of auto-enrollment in TSP for all federal employees, causing a minor revenue loss, but

would on balance generate additional tax revenue by establishing a new plan to permit

after-tax TSP contributions, similar to a Roth IRA or the recently-established Roth 401(k)

option. Finally, CBO estimates a five-year increase in spending subject to appropriation

of $.1 billion over 5 years and $.08 billion over 10 years as a result of H.R. 1256's

enactment.

Committee Action: The bill was introduced on March 3, 2009, and referred to the

Energy and Commerce. On March 4, 2009, a mark-up was held in Committee and the bill

was reported by a 39-13 vote.

Possible Conservative Concerns: Numerous aspects of H.R. 1256 may raise concerns

for conservatives, including, but not necessarily limited to, the following:

• Process: Some conservatives may be concerned that the non-tobacco portions were

removed from the bill by the rule in order to deny Republicans options for a Motion

to Recommit.

• User Fee as Tax Increase: Some conservatives may be concerned that on the same

day that one of the most regressive taxes in US history goes into affect, congressional

Democrats are planning yet another tax masked as a "user fee" on tobacco products

The bill includes $5.39 billion in assessments on tobacco companies, to finance the

FDA's work regulating tobacco products.

• Restricts Free Speech Rights: In addition to codifying federal restrictions, which

tobacco companies agreed to in their 1998 settlement with state Attorneys General,

H.R. 1256 places additional federal restrictions on tobacco advertising. Some of the

federal restrictions on advertising content in H.R. 1256 include the following

specifications for the size of warning labels on tobacco products:

The text of such label statements shall be in a typeface pro rata to the following requirements: 45-

point type for a whole-page broadsheet newspaper advertisement; 39-point type for a half-page

broadsheet newspaper advertisement; 39-point type for a whole-page tabloid newspaper

advertisement; 27-point type for a half-page tabloid newspaper advertisement; 31.5-point type for

a double page spread magazine or whole-page magazine advertisement; 22.5-point type for a 28

centimeter by 3 column advertisement; and 15-point type for a 20 centimeter by 2 column

advertisement.

Some conservatives may be concerned that the highly prescriptive,

constitutionally questionable restrictions described above, and elsewhere in H.R.

1256, constitute an undue intrusion on companies' constitutional free speech

rights to advertise a product that most Americans already know is unhealthy.

• Hinders Introduction of Reduced Risk Tobacco Products: H.R. 1256 places

stringent restrictions on the introduction and marketing of new products that would

reduce or modify the inherent risks associated with the consumption of tobacco. The

bill states that a reduced risk product may be marketed only if the product will

"significantly reduce harm and the risk of tobacco-related disease to individual

tobacco users" and also will "benefit the population as a whole," including persons

who do not consume tobacco products. Some conservatives may be concerned that

such onerous restrictions on the introduction of reduced risk tobacco products could

have the effect of inhibiting the use of products that could reduce the risks associated

with tobacco consumption while potentially serving as a barrier to entry for new

market competitors.

• FDA Improper Agency to Regulate Tobacco: As FDA Commissioner Andrew von

Eschenbach testified before the House Energy and Commerce Committee in October

2007, the FDA has heretofore been structured as an agency to promote and protect the

public health. In the Commissioner's opinion, requiring FDA to "approve" tobacco

products as a result of H.R. 1256 would dramatically change the agency's focus:

"Associating any agency whose mission is to promote public health with the

approval of inherently dangerous products would undermine its mission and likely

have perverse incentive effects."

• Other Important Priorities for FDA: Energy and Commerce Oversight

Subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak (D-MI), in holding a hearing on FDA's decision

to approve an antibiotic despite receiving false clinical trial data, called the incident

"a microcosm of the failure by all FDA stakeholders—FDA, pharmaceutical

sponsors, and third-party monitors—to ensure the integrity of clinical trials used to

support the safety and approval of new drug applications." On top of questions which

Democrats themselves have raised regarding FDA's competence, some conservatives

may question whether the food safety concerns that have arisen in recent months

make now an appropriate time to significantly expand the agency's regulatory

mission.

• Multiple Layers of Regulation: While establishing FDA authority to regulate

tobacco products, H.R. 1256 would also retain the FTC's authority to regulate

tobacco advertising and distribution on the federal level, and would provide only

limited pre-emption of state laws, allowing more stringent state restrictions on

tobacco advertising and promotion. Some conservatives may be concerned that these

multiple layers of regulation will impose undue bureaucratic and logistical difficulties

on tobacco manufacturers—even though H.R. 1256 would explicitly retain tobacco as

a lawful product.

• Little Impact on Tobacco Use: The CBO estimate of H.R. 1256 notes that under its

budgetary model, smoking by adults would decline by only 2% after 10 years. Some

conservatives may question whether this marginal reduction in smoking levels

warrants the significant intrusion on free speech rights and government-run regulatory

bureaucracy that would be created under the legislation.

• Billions in Unfunded Mandates: The Congressional Budget Office, in its score of

H.R. 1256, calculates that the fee imposed in the bill would constitute an unfunded

mandate on tobacco companies of $235 million in Fiscal Year 2009, and more than

$2.2 billion over five years, greatly exceeding the threshold established in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ($139 million in 2009, adjusted annually for

inflation). CBO also notes that the bill includes several unfunded mandates that

would both pre-empt existing state tobacco regulations and require tribal governments

manufacturing or distributing tobacco products to comply with the new federal

regulatory regime.

• Violates Trade Agreements: Former HHS Secretary Leavitt, writing to Energy and

Commerce Committee Ranking Member Barton on last year's FDA tobacco bill,

noted that the legislation could be viewed by foreign governments as a hostile trade

action. Because the bill bans clove and other flavored cigarettes—many of which are

manufactured in foreign countries—while expressly permitting production of menthol

cigarettes, Indonesia or other foreign governments could file complaints at the World

Trade Organization claiming discrimination against their products. Some

conservatives may be concerned that passage of H.R. 1256 could ultimately result in

retaliatory measures being taken against American-made products—and could lead to

trade disputes with a negative effect on economic growth.

• Menthol Loophole. As noted above, H.R. 1256 would prohibit the use of all

"artificial or natural" cigarette flavorings—with the exception of menthol, which is

permitted under the bill. Because data from the Centers for Disease Control indicate

that 75% of African-American smokers consume menthol cigarettes, seven former

Secretaries of Health and Human Services, representing both political parties, wrote

to Congress to criticize a menthol "loophole" that "caves to the financial interests of

tobacco companies" by "send[ing] a message that African-American youngsters are

valued less than white youngsters." Some conservatives may note the hypocrisy in

this loophole.

Administration Position: A formal Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) was

unavailable at press time.

Does the Bill Expand the Size and Scope of the Federal Government?: Yes, the bill

would grant new authority to the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco

products.

Does the Bill Contain Any New State-Government, Local-Government, or Private-

Sector Mandates?: Yes, the bill imposes new fees on tobacco companies, which CBO

estimates would total $235 million in Fiscal Year 2009, $2.2 billion over five years, and

nearly $5.4 billion over ten years, all greatly exceeding the thresholds established in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ($139 million in 2009, adjusted annually for inflation).

Also, the bill imposes a variety of in-depth mandates on private-sector manufacturing,

labeling, marketing, packaging, shipping, and other aspects of private business.

Does the Bill Comply with House Rules Regarding Earmarks/Limited Tax

Benefits/Limited Tariff Benefits?: The Committee on Energy and Commerce, in House

Report 111-058 - Part 1, reports that "H.R. 1256 does not contain any congressional

earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or

9(f) of rule XXI.."

Constitutional Authority: The Committee on Energy and Commerce, in House Report

110-762, cites constitutional authority under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (relating to the

regulation of interstate commerce) and Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (relating to

legislation promoting the general welfare of the United States).

RSC Staff Contact: Emily Henehan, Emily.henehan@mail.house.gov,

(202) 225-9286

[Click]

Looks like the FDA could start regulating shisha imported to the US.  Brands like tangiers, starbuzz, fumari probably wouldn't have much of a problem seeing that they are in the US.  I would think that Al Fakher, Nakhla and other big imported brands would allow more oversight of their manufacturing and packaging process.  Don't see it raises prices but possibly slowing down the amount of imported shisha until the FDAs regulations are met.

[speel]

This is good and bad ..bad because it would stop importation to the US and thus us not smoking overseas shisha ..which would be horrible. But on the other hands they might add additional factories to the states, I mean if the US is a major portion of their income of course their going to open plants here ( look at the car industry ) thus increase competition which is good for every one. But if they don't then it only hurts the consumer and the producer.

[LJ04]

brace yourselves for more of this - and not just with tobacco - under this administration. fewer choices and more taxes.

[chinamon]

This is good and bad ..bad because it would stop importation to the US and thus us not smoking overseas shisha ..which would be horrible. But on the other hands they might add additional factories to the states, I mean if the US is a major portion of their income of course their going to open plants here ( look at the car industry ) thus increase competition which is good for every one. But if they don't then it only hurts the consumer and the producer.

you're comparing the hookah industry to car industry? thats like comparing apples to oranges. the hookah industry is extremely tiny compared to automotive. i cant picture any of the big brands, like nakhla and al fakher, investing millions of dollars to manufacture in north america. it would be easier for them to keep manufacturing where it is now and just increase the quality and quality control.

[Bye bye now have fun]

after minimal googling this site that looks semi shady says it doesnt regulate hookah

[TheScotsman]

flavored tobacco was singled out in cigarettes as an inducement to juvenile usage.

Unfortunately hookah is all too often misunderstood, but more, the limited number of people enjoying them makes us an easy target, even if only from a non-intentional limitation of some other use. At this point the law states flavored cigs only... but we all know how laws change in a second.


We are here from the government, and we are here to help you... ya, right.

I didn't vote for any of these jokers... don't blame me!

[hookah hippie]

more legislation this is such shit I don't see why smokers are always shit on by everyone else

[Bulldog_916]

This looks like just a bill rough draft. It doesnt look like it's going to go through without considerable changes. The legislature usually takes a bill, guts it, replaces stuff with their own stuff, then puts it out for a vote. This wont get through as it's worded now, bet me on that.

[AKammenzind]

more legislation this is such shit I don't see why smokers are always shit on by everyone else

The government dogs make a living out of shitting on all of us... it's not just smokers.

But yeah, props to anyone who's got the patience to even go through the first few bits of that text... right painful.

[wpw36]

i love it how they are talking about getting more people to quit by the cessation programs etc. but still protect the income of the tobacco farmer. and this just pisses me the hell off
"The bill increases taxes on tobacco companies by $995 million over 10 years on top of
the $72.1 billion tobacco tax over 10 years scheduled to take effect April 1, 2009"

[Bulldog_916]

i love it how they are talking about getting more people to quit by the cessation programs etc. but still protect the income of the tobacco farmer

They mean by replacing the tobacco crop with an equivalent crop or paying for them to shut down their farm, not protecting the tobacco farmer by regulating tobacco.

[speel]

This is good and bad ..bad because it would stop importation to the US and thus us not smoking overseas shisha ..which would be horrible. But on the other hands they might add additional factories to the states, I mean if the US is a major portion of their income of course their going to open plants here ( look at the car industry ) thus increase competition which is good for every one. But if they don't then it only hurts the consumer and the producer.

you're comparing the hookah industry to car industry? thats like comparing apples to oranges. the hookah industry is extremely tiny compared to automotive. i cant picture any of the big brands, like nakhla and al fakher, investing millions of dollars to manufacture in north america. it would be easier for them to keep manufacturing where it is now and just increase the quality and quality control.

The company that owns AF can most definitely invest millions.

[AKammenzind]

The company that owns AF can most definitely invest millions.

It's not a matter of if they can, it's a question of whether or not it would be a good financial decision, and looking at the recent nationwide smoking bans and new tobacco tax... it may not look terribly enticing.

[ilikemyusername]

no, because i don't feel like reading it, i don't see the point, weather or not i like it doesn't change whether or not it gets passed.

[Rani]

This looks like just a bill rough draft. It doesnt look like it's going to go through without considerable changes. The legislature usually takes a bill, guts it, replaces stuff with their own stuff, then puts it out for a vote. This wont get through as it's worded now, bet me on that.

Now that's the most intelligent statment in this thread. Proposed bills are usually not much like the version eventually signed into law, and also...... Does anybody really think the US government is going to do anything that would dramatically negatively affect imports considering they're getting all that lovely import tax money? Not to mention having an entire branch of law enforcement devoted to examining incoming containers - US Port Authority. Where there's money there will be allowances.

'Rani

[Scalliwag]

Government 101 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ