PACT ACT - Let's act! We can't let this pass.

[snupy]

If the government was really concerned about the well being of it's citizens it would ban the production/sale of cigarettes

The government is not about to give up the cigarette tax gold mine. You don't slay the goose that lays the golden eggs. That's exactly why the FDA bill specifically prohibits a ban on cigarettes.

[Mohave]

Dogg, I'm glad you found it at least somewhat clarifying. The whole thing just gives me a headache, which has been getting worse for months with this senseless prohibitionist crap. Personally I don't find dip a useable alternative for me at all. Tried it because it's easier to get locally, but it makes me sick.

I'm doing what the guy above is doing. Stocking up. Gradually, not in a panic because there is time, but building a stockpile. And I have the same questions about how long it can really be held in long term deep freeze.

After that, it'll be relocation to the Republic of the Philippines for me.

[snupy]

I'm doing what the guy above is doing. Stocking up.

I am not stocking up yet, although I plan to begin to do so very soon. My main idea in stocking up early, is to avoid the situation that recently occurred with ryo tobaccos, prior to the recent tax increases. Many retailers were completely sold out, because so many stocked up too late, right before the tax increases took effect.

And I have the same questions about how long it can really be held in long term deep freeze.

That's my question, particularly with respect to loose snus.

After that, it'll be relocation to the Republic of the Philippines for me.

I have considered getting the fluck out of this country as well,

[Mohave]

Given Phillip Morris is behind this bill, how wonderful it will be for their profits to insure their market share by means of the government.

• ... <SNIP> ...

The intention is to protect Phillip Morris market share, which is why that company had such a huge hand in the writing of this bill.

The most honest of the public health advocates have been publicly referring to it as the "Philip Morris Protection Act." Which has the additional advantage of pissing off Congressman Henry Waxman, making his insipid little Hitler moustache twitch.

[snupy]

The most honest of the public health advocates have been publicly referring to it as the "Philip Morris Protection Act."

And all this time, I thought it was for THE CHILDREN!

There is no difference whatsoever between the Dems and the GOP, outside of which industries each party will bend the public over for. Both parties represent aristocrats. Both parties do the will of the aristocrats.

[lxskllr]

I've had lös snus frozen for 1.5 years with mild degradation. These are freezer bagged, then put in a normal freezer. If I were going for long term storage, I'd vacuum seal the snus, and freeze at lower temperatures. Under those conditions I would expect the snus to usable(if not ideal) for 10 or more years.

[chadizzy1]

The most honest of the public health advocates have been publicly referring to it as the "Philip Morris Protection Act."

And all this time, I thought it was for THE CHILDREN!

or against global terrorism, because as we all know, Swedish Snus was behind 9/11....

[rscott222]

Any updates on this?

[Snusdogg]

Barring any last minute swing overs, it looks like this thing is going to pass tomorrow on the final vote. I did remember though that PMI and SM formed a partnership to bring snus to the world including the USA. They are also planning on bulding a snus manufacturing facility in the US. Just go to SM online and check out the press releases. Perhaps not all hope is lost.

[sagedil]

SM has already verified that they had snus on the market here before the cutoff date. It is posted somewhere in the Talk with Professionals board.

[SeneNatten]

From what I see, we could still buy snus from Sweden, at least with the PACT Act.

My reading of S. 1147, section 2, specifically how the Jenkins act is modified in section 2A: tobacco must, per subsection (a), be taxed, per subsection (d), and the shipping container must be labeled, per subsection (b). From S. 1147, section 3: the US postal service cannot ship tobacco.

Which is to say, we will have to pay for UPS/FedEx/DHL shipping, and snus might triple in price, but we'll still be able to get it. I've seen Swedish snus retailing in my area for about $7 a can. Online, it'll probably be a little cheaper.

Paying the excise tax and paying for the seller to figure out how to handle tax payments to all the different states they ship to isn't fun, but that's a far cry from it not being available. And, in my opinion, isn't nearly as debilitating as the tax on RYO tobacco. Snus will still be cheaper than cigarettes.

The question with the PACT Act is essentially whether you are willing to pay taxes on snus. I don't think that it is realistic to challenge that essential component of the Act.

The real problem, as I read it, is with S. 982 (Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act), which requires face-to-face sales, see proposed 21 USC 906(d)(4)(A)(i).

Under this Act, you must buy from a local retailer. This is a problem for many people who cannot buy snus locally, and who therefore cannot use a reduced-harm product and may resume smoking.

And then there's the FDA controlling tobacco thing: as I read it, most flavorings are banned from cigarettes but not smokeless tobacco (see modified section 907(a)(1)(A)), but the rest of the regulations must be based on scientific evidence of reduced harm (see modified section 907(b)(2)). Reduced harm favors snus.

Admittedly, I might have missed the bit that talks about additives in smokeless products.

Overall, this Act does prevent me from buying snus online, but I don't read it as banning snus altogether.

I'm thinking about writing my senator, favoring the PACT Act as a lesser evil than the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Two reasons: First, the FSPTC Act is way too big; if the FDA is going to control tobacco, that ought to be its own act. Second, the PACT Act is better at achieving its goals of reducing underage tobacco use and collecting tax revenue by reducing illicit sale of tobacco products; the PACT Act uses the global market and private, flexible entities to do the heavy lifting, while the FSPTC Act creates a large, expensive government entity to do the same thing.

The other alternative is to propose language that will explicitly favor reduced harm tobacco. Reduced harm is not addressed in the PACT Act, and, as far as I read, only in the FSPTC Act by way of marketing. There doesn't need to be any encouragement for reduced harm tobacco, but rather a requirement that any regulations promulgated under the act consider the public health benefits of reduced harm forms of tobacco use.

Any thoughts?

[Norex]

Yes some thoughts, I am starting a site so we can petition against harsh regulation on snus in the us... but do you think the petition should be against specific legislation or just a petition to get our gov. leaders to support snus? or I could just make it a pro snus petition which we can use when taking action against elected leaders who are anti snus. Either way I'm Launching the petition part of the site tonight so I need a firm goal for the petition. I'm planing on adding sections such as elected official's contacts and a canned message section so we can easily send our leaders messages urging them to support snus. Also adding a section which informs on the benefits of using snus so if anyone has any info pertaining to any of the things I touched on, including producing canned messages please get back to me so the US community can finally have an organized base location in which to protect our Snus!

P.S. I will be revealing the site around 10pm so I need to get that petition goal down really soon

[Lucky Striker]

S. Burr from NC has argued tooth and nail for the same smokeless tobacco exemptions you're talking about, but the Democrats shot him horribly: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2009-205 .

[lxskllr]

I think they should attach a bill to that legalizes kiddie porn, thereby guaranteeing it's failure.

[Code2]

Well good for S. Burr. And good for my 2 senators from TN who voted for his amendment. I'll be interested to see how they vote on the bill itself.