Looks like the PACT act will be discussed on the 19th… http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=4177

The concept of this greatly angers me. I really have nothing more to say about it. It just amazes me…the way we are controlled.

The Senate’s overlords (i.e. Altria/Philip Morris USA) really are determined to ram this nonsensical corporatist crap through the Congress ASAP, aren’t they? (Sigh.)

I’ve just sent out another round of letters to the senators on the committee. I did so before the last time it was supposed to be discussed and never received any replies. Mr. Cornyn from TX, that I helped vote into office, I think would have at least replied being that I am a constituent. This angers me to no end. The fact that my own senator cannot or did not send me so much as a form letter really bothers me. If I don’t receive correspondence in a timely manner this time I will be on the phone with the congressional switchboard asking to talk to someone in his office.

Regrettably, no one from Michigan is on the committee, but I doubt they’d be much help anyway…Michigan is hell on tobacco taxes; they up and made it flat-out illegal to order ANY sort mail-order tobacco. Thankfully, that dog is toothless; they’ve absolutely NO way to track and enforce it (cigarettes excepted; they did spank a few who ordered from US-based cheap smokes websites that coughed up their customer d-base under the Jenkins Act). As far as snuff or snus goes, I doubt you could find one legislator in Lansing who could even cohesively define them…

Oh yeah, Senator Cornyn. When I went through the entire committee back in May or June and emailed each one, I accidentally signed up for Senator Cornyn’s email updates. Without starting a whole 'nother political thread, from what I’ve glossed over on his updates, Sen. Cornyn and I do not share many political ideologies. I never did get a real reply from him either, only one I got was from McCain (I was in AZ at the time). Anyway, I know these folks have many constituents, but it’s hard not to be apathetic about the whole political process when it feels like nothing you do or say matters unless you have millions of dollars with which to lobby for their support.

Its ok to write to Senators from other states, but don’t expect a reply. Most of their websites will tell you straight out that they can only reply to their own constituants. However, you should expect a reply from your own senators. I got signed up to my senator’s email bulletins too, doing this. A quick ‘unsubscribe’ took care of that. Still no reply from him though on PACT, which is very rude. His staff probably put it on the “crazy talk” or “practical joker” pile and left it alone. Perhaps it was beyond their comprehension.

Here we go again with this. I wonder what will transpire tomorrow afternoon? The Judiciary Committee obviously wants to get PACT to the Senate floor as soon as possible.

It’s now out of committee and on the way to the floor. If they can get it on the docket before year’s end

I think they’re gonna really stick it to us now. All the roll your own companies have started labeling their tobacco as “pipe tobacco” to avoid the taxes. I only recently realized this when I was in a liquor store and was surprised to see a big bag of pipe tobacco. The clerk pointed out that it was being used by roll your own cigarette consumers. It was out of hand for them to up the tax rates 2000% for RYO, but since this was the answer by the tobacco companies now they’ll stick it to pipes and cigars and snuff to make up for their lost millions.

Oh well, what can you do?

When you deal with politicians remember that they want two things above all else: power and importance. There are a minority in most governments and legislatures who do their best but they are few and far apart. Our Prime Ministers first ambition as a child was to be PM and that scares me. If PACT, whatever it is, will sit on someones’s CV for future use, as it surely will, you can write letters until you run out of trees. In the UK I don’t see how anyone can now vote without a feeling of revulsion; the whole slimy lot of them have been abusing the MP’s ability to claim payment for various things - like second homes and one guy having the moat of his castle drained. Its no wonder the lunatic fringe are rubbing their hands with glee.

So, is this a thing that if passed would have me getting snuff only from walk-in stores? that would pretty much mean WE Garrett, and Apricot only in my case.

I hope this doesn’t pass, but if it does, it will only be yet another nail in the coffin of this nation.

The thing that really pisses me off is that cigars are exempt.

Same here, Carol. Elitist bullsh…

Maybe Roderick can start shipping us “crumbled cigars”?

hmmmm… Montecristo los?

Earlier this year, I observed the clever way in which the RYO cigarette tobacco manufacturers maneuvered their way around the outrageous 2000% tax increase on loose cigarette tobacco. They simply reclassified their product as “pipe tobacco,” which places it in a much lower tax class. The feds and the states are well aware of this loophole, but are in a hell of a bind about what they can actually do about it. At the behest of Philip Morris USA, the 2000% tax increase was placed on RYO cigarette tobacco in order to kill off that industry (god forbid smokers buy cheaper and superior tobacco instead of buying overpriced crap from Philip Morris, right?). The problem is that Philip Morris USA certainly doesn’t want their own pipe tobacco taxed at that rate, nor do they wish to incur the wrath of the pipe tobacco vendors. So what can they do about this loophole? Not a damn thing – unless they want ALL tobacco products to be taxed at this rate, and, believe me, they most certainly do not want that. Hypothetically speaking (of course), if I were a snuff vendor, I would be the first to sell a new type of cigar. That is, finely powdered tobacco that comes wrapped in a cheap tobacco leaf. Between you and me, it would probably be a crappy thing to smoke, but, hey, there’s no law that states that every cigar has to be a fine cigar. After all, how many Swisher Sweets are sold every year? Perhaps those who buy Swisher Sweets don’t even actually smoke them. Perhaps they shove them up their arse, for all I know. You can’t blame the Swisher Corporation for that, now, can you? If some freak buys Swisher Sweets for the sole purpose of shoving them up his or her ass, Swisher has no control over how their customers use or misuse their products. No, sir. It’s not their concern; nor is it their problem. All they do is make cigars, and, yes, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Know what I mean? So, feel free to buy all the cigars you desire and have them mailed to your home. There won’t be any law against that. Once they arrive, you choose what you wish to do with your cigars. Place them in a humidor, or smoke them the minute you tear the package open. Or coat them in olive oil and shove them up your arse, if that is your desire. (That may be illegal in Alabama, but probably nowhere else.) Regardless, the USPS won’t know or care what you do with your legal product that you have purchased and had delivered to your home. You can even remove all of the finely powdered tobacco from your new cigars and shove it up your nose. Crazier things have happened. On a related note, the local headshops have been unable to legally sell bongs for decades, which is why they’ve spent the last 25 years selling “vases” and “cigarette holders” instead. Some citizens and politicians don’t care for this, but there’s nothing they can do about it, vases and cigarette holders being completely legal and harmless products.

bigmick, I was thinking…cigars in the same flavors as his snuffs. Cigars are also exempt from the FDA rulings on flavored tobacco. The cigars could then be ground up at home.

I’ve been a fan of the “powered tobacco leaf” cigar since I read it on another thread. If a snuff company was willing to try such an outlandish thing it would keep our noses happy in the event this crap passes…but think of all the poor snuff that would be smoked in ignorance!

According to the new law, what is the definition of “cigar”. Have they defined it or do they merely assume the definition. Because unless it is defined or there is an official definition specifically stated by say the Tobacco and Fire arms agency, then I am presently enjoying a very nice tin of Toque fine cut cigar. And you will have to spend a whole lot of money in court somewhere to say that it is in fact not what I am enjoying at all. Imagine a court room. The lawyer for snus and snuff stands and holds up a cigar. What is this he asks? If they cannot tell or say with certainty then they cannot say or tell with certainty that what we are selling is in fact not the same thing. We win. The category of cigar is non-determined and thus non-exclusive. If they say, “It’s a cigar” Then our wily lawyer remove a pair of scissors from his brief case cuts the cigar in half and asks, “if I take this cigar and cut it in half to share with a friend, is it still a cigar? What if I quarter it, is it still a cigar then? Now he removes a Tobacco grinder from his brief case and grinds one of the cigar quarters into flake consistency asking, “ If I chop it up is it still a cigar? What if I grind it into fine powder?” Then he smiles and says, my simple question to the court is this: at what point did the cigar stop being a cigar and become something else? And what is the measurable quantifiable nature of that change? Now the definition of a cigar can’t be based on use or intended use, can it? Last I checked the main use of a cigar was taste and smell (not inhalation like a cigarette) Now this is important because, taste puts cigars clearly in the category of an oral tobacco while smell puts it clearly in the category of a nasal tobacco, which in turn brings us back to my question: when did the cigar cease being a cigar? Is the federal court about to make it law that you MUST SMOKE or your cigar is illegal? Is PACT then in reality a mandated backdoor smoking policy? Didn’t the major producers of smoking tobacco in this country support this bill? It is the burden of the law makers to define what they mean by the laws they pass. It is not the responsibility of the constituency to guess or fill in what they mean. Roderick, Tom, David and the rest- get me a labeling gun and some sticky paper and I will solve this whole ordeal in 15 minutes.

Clove cigarettes were re-labeled as clove cigars. They are the same damn thing.

There obviously isn’t even a clear legal distinction between a “cigar” and a “cigarette” in the US. After the cigarette tax hike of early 2009, I’ve noticed an explosion of new “little cigar” brands this year – most of them filtered and with paper wrappings. They are a hell of a lot cheaper than cigarettes, because they are clearly labelled as … cigars. I see packs of 20 of these retailing for as low as $1.50 per pack. Appearance-wise, they are the same diameter and length as a cigarette, and they use the same filters one would find in cigarettes. The only visual difference is that the papers are brown in appearance. I see: cigarettes are white; “cigars” are brown. Gee, it certainly seems that a lot of smokers have switched from cigarettes to “little cigars.” @Carol: A local tobacco shop recently set up an entire display that covers half a wall, proudly showcasing their extensive selection of “clove cigars”. The proprietor happily explained to me that it has become his best selling product: “More brands than ever, and so much cheaper than the clove cigarettes that are now banned!”

It has been a while since I read this, but the legal definition of a cigar is something like tobacco wrapped in tobacco (sometimes that wrapper is a piece of “homoginized tobacco”, that is a sheet of brown paper like material made with some powdered tobacco in the slurry. If you wrap the same tobacco in paper it becomes a cigarette.

S. 1147: PACT Act (as amended 11/19) (B) EXCEPTION.—The term ‘cigarette’ does not include a cigar (as defined in section 5702 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)…" Here is that wonderful little definition (a) Cigar ‘‘Cigar’’ means any roll of tobacco wrapped in leaf tobacco or in any substance containing tobacco (other than any roll of tobacco which is a cigarette within the meaning of subsection http://www.taxalmanac.org/index.php/Internal\\_Revenue\\_Code:Sec.\\_5702.\\_Definitions This is really great news. The definition provided is absolutely and utterly worthless from a legislative stand point. Let’s apply this same definition to “cars” to illustrate. (a) Car ‘‘Car’’ means any motorized vehicle with 4 tires or any motorized vehicle (other than any motorized vehicle which is a Motorcycle within the meaning of subsection So my 18 wheeler is a car, my riding lawnmower is a car, my 4 wheeler, my 747 jet, my moped, Backhoe, my kids battery operated G.I. Joe toy, my….my…my Get the point? Relabel your product and make them enforce this definition.

@kjoerup yuo the resident lawyer? that was good one. same goes for Snifs good points and ideas int his thread. i have been so wrappe dup in the threat to the 1st and second ammendments i totally missed the ‘PACT’ thing. thanks for the heads up. another thing for me to fight! im running out of cardboard and sticks! and my sharpies are all but dried up!

So, then, if portioned snus came in, say, an “homogenized” tea bag wrapper material, of which the tea bag-like wrapping material contains a bit of tobacco introduced during the tea bag-like manufacturing process, that snus is no longer in fact “snus” but rather a “cigar.” Thank you, PACT Act semantic authorities! Seriously. One of the mail order snuff vendors should introduce NOW a “powdered tobacco cigar,” i.e. “a roll of tobacco wrapped in leaf tobacco or in any substance containing tobacco, or paper containing traces of tobacco substance.” Someone really needs to have this new cigar type out there as a pre-existing product prior to the passage of the PACT Act. I’d certainly buy these cigars. Besides, aren’t they even taxed at a lower rate than “smokeless tobacco”? What a bargain! Yes, it all goes to show the sheer lunacy of taxing “different” tobacco products at different rates – and it conclusively demonstrates that the system is set up that way solely to protect specific market interests. Note that nowhere in the PACT definition of “cigar” does it specify the intended use of the product in question. Is it a “cigar” only if one smokes it? According to PACT, that is immaterial. These gaping loopholes exist simply because Big Tobacco can’t have it both ways, much as they’d like to. It all goes to show what gullible, led-through-the-nose idiots the Congressional and state “representatives” are. Here in Texas, the state jacked up tobacco taxes on top of the federal ones that kicked in April 1, 2009. Once again, Philip Morris USA was there to “helpfully” assist the Texas Legislature with writing this bill. And Philip Morris made damn sure that “cigars” were excepted because they didn’t want tax hikes to affect the sales of their precious Black and Mild cigars –- the cheap crap they push relentlessly in impoverished, mainly African-American neighborhoods. Much as they did with the federal SCHIP, Philip Morris sold the Texas Legislature on the bogus idea that the new tax revenue would fund rural physicians that would in turn “help children.” Of course Philip Morris knew in advance what the reality of this was going to be: lower cigarette sales (hence, lower tax revenue collected by the state) and increased “cigar” sales (which have a much lower tax rate). End result: Philip Morris USA is now making more profit than ever, and the state is now collecting LESS tax revenue than they were before the tobacco tax laws were rewritten. Individual politicians may well have benefitted from whatever piss ant “perks” PM threw their way, but the people of the state were screwed by this. (Sadly, most will still vote for the same damn politicians once they open their lying snapping turtle lips again about “protecting the children against bin Laden’s secondhand smoke” or some such nonsense.)

I got an email back from my buddy Russ Feingold: Dear Mr. Ross, Thank you for contacting me regarding S. 1147, the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT). I appreciate hearing from you. As you may know, S. 1147 was introduced by Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) on May 21, 2009. The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member, but has not yet been considered. The bill would allow for easier enforcement of criminal laws intended to prevent the smuggling of cigarettes. Companion legislation was introduced in the House of Representatives by Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY) on March 23, 2009. The full House passed the bill by a vote of 397-11 on May 21, 2009. Thank you again for contacting me. I will keep your views in mind should the Senate Judiciary Committee, or the full Senate, consider this or similar legislation. For more information about my work on behalf of Wisconsin, you can subscribe to my monthly e-newsletter by visiting http://feingold.senate.gov/newsletter.cfm. I look forward to hearing from you in the future. === If he votes it down, I’m personally mailing him some of my ISOM Cohibas.

we could probably get the whole bill shot down with enough cuban cigars

You know what would be fun… Grind up some cubans into a good strong snuff, and bribe one of the senate workers to fill the senate snuffboxes with it.

those boxes are still there… --Anxious in CA.

I read that the snuff boxes in the Senate Chamber are still regularly filled. I wonder how they obtain the snuff? Through the mail? If I were a snuff vendor, I would immediately contact the Senate, volunteering to donate snuff in order to contribute to the upkeep of this venerable U.S. Senate tradition. Ha! By doing that, one may even be able to persuade some doting, tradition-bound Senator to insert into PACT an exception to the mailing of nasal snuff. It would certainly be worth a shot, anyway. Also, if snuff companies volunteered to do the same thing… Hint: write directly to the office of Senator Robert Byrd. He has taken a special interest in the Senate snuffboxes, and has even written a pamphlet on their history. He also has the seniority and power to insert exceptions into PACT.

I think poison should put added to the boxes, for those bastards!!! Lotzbeck perle

There really should be a clause in there about snuff. It’s not like we are avoiding the taxes by purchasing online…it’s really the only way.

anyone want to go on a snuff-mailing spree to our senators? well, everyone but ibild, that is… I’ll take care of Feingold with some Cheese & Bacon. Just a thought, we should probably make sure everything is WELL LABELED AS BEING SNUFF TOBACCO, otherwise we’ll see a lot of “suspicious powder” reports on CNN.

I believe that Roderick had sent them some snuff some time ago.

Really? Did Roderick ever receive a reply or acknowledgment of receipt? I have an unopened tin of Honey Bee that I received as a bonus from Nicotine Rush. I’m willing to pass it on to the Senate.

Maybe then it’s time to make our presence known. We shall call it… The D.C. Snuff Party.

It may be politically difficult to except snus, snuff, or pipe tobacco. No one, neither Democrat nor main-stream Republican wants to be seen as a supporter of cigarette or chew (tobacco) use. Rather, how the law is enforced may become the greater issue, similar to the dual standard of powdered and crack cocaine. As has already been shown, a company can make minor modifications and relabel cigarettes to attempt to circumvent regulation by taxation. When the assault weapons ban was put into force, the real focus was fully automatic firearms, and many workarounds that could have been closed on semi-automatic were left open. At the run up to that legislation, there was mass hysteria and assault weapons sales skyrocketed. With good money, you can legally buy a semi-automatic firearm today, more than eight years after a Democrat, Clinton, was elected. Likewise, even after the expiration of the assault weapons ban, you cannot legally buy a fully automatic gun without law enforcement restricted SWAT departmental credentials. The bottom line is that I hope that there will not be aggressive enforcement against non cigarette/RYO pipe tobacco and off-the-radar snuff. With respect to votes, the issue is already settled. When the 'conservative, Joe NRA House of Representatives vote is lop-sided, the discussion is over.

Well, I suddenly have a lot of time on my hands, due to being laid off. So if anyone can think of something productive I can do toward this, while I am looking for a new job, please let me know.

Remind them that the Senate publishes its own pamphlet in praise of its snuff tradition: [quote]For more information, an illustrated 2-page pamphlet called “Apropros of Snuff . . . a Few Words about Snuff and the U.S. Senate,” is available from the Office of Curator, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.[/quote] http://www.c-span.org/questions/week148.htm

Does anyone have a copy of that pamphlet? I’d love to see it. Do I have to mail for it?

Hmmm…now to compose a nice letter to Senator Byrd. Any tips on getting it through the screener so he actually sees it himself?

I’d suggest stroking his ego, writing that you find it commendable and admirable that Senator Byrd has selflessly paid proper tribute to this important U.S. Senate tradition that is such a vital and fascinating aspect of Senate history and American heritage, blah blah blah.I bet he’s never even received a fan letter for his snuffbox preservation efforts, so I’m certain that his aides will be more than happy to pass it along to him. Senators receive a lot of critical and angry mail, so they always enjoy hearing positive commentary, especially for deeds that go largely unrecognized.

I actually sent my senator a message about the PACT act today. I doubt it will matter much, but I repeatedly stressed the restriction on choices and trade between law-abiding adults and industry. Also mentioned the senate snuff boxes, as an illustration that the U.S. has a history of this type of tobacco use. Maybe by mentioning the boxes, my senator may notice them the next time he goes to the senate chamber, and remember my message. Probably not.

FyL, he’s more likely to think of them if you email him, than if you don’t.

@ carol, offer to name a snuff after him.

ibild I now officaly hate you. You want to poison the snuff box in congress. You have to know that what ever people actualy use the box are probably the 2 or three best people in that building. Of course I’am joking about the hatred part.

I’ve been trying to send them nightmares where the act passes and then zombies eat the senate. Probably not to effective but it’s still lots o’ fun.

anyone know if they actually discussed it on the 19th or what is currently happening?

It has passed committee and is currently on the Senate Legislative Calendar as General Order No. 216 (source: govtrack.us). Now to wait and see if they actually get around to voting on it. I sure hope not.

Thanks for the update James, I hope the upcoming holiday stalls this. Happy Thanksgiving everyone

Four legs good, two legs bad!

The Senate has taken this whole week off for Thanksgiving and I am sure they will take at least a week off for Christmas. They are going to be very tied up with the health care debate. Maybe we will get lucky and they won’t get around to it this year. The down side is they will try again next year if we miss the bullet this time.

There is another angle to this that goes beyond just our access to our sniffable/snusable of choice. As I’m sure you all know, there are real livelihoods at stake here as well. Seneca Nation President Snyder Predicts Significant Regional Hardships with PACT ActI have purchased cigs in the past from the Seneca Nation myself, and I can tell you they rely very heavily on their tobacco business as a source of income. Let’s hope for their sakes (as well as good folks like Tom & Roderick!) that this rotten legislation Phillip Morris wrote for itself gets thrown out the window.

Not only are there thousands of jobs at stake, PACT, if enacted, is going to end up costing hundreds of millions of dollars. And just where is that money supposed to come from? I am glad to read that tribal leaders expressed their concerns about the PACT act directly to Obama at this conference. Obama does want their support, so let’s hope he keeps this in mind when (not ‘if’) PACT lands on his desk. If he signs PACT, his support among the Indian Nations falls to absolutely nil. I really wonder if he feels that he can afford to take such a political hit during his first term. I must admit that I’m surprised that the Senate is even touching this bill right before an election year. One can only imagine how much Philip Morris USA has splashed out to get this bill onto the Senate floor at this time.

Maybe It’s Obama they are trying too stop here… He could be the ringleader of illegal cigarette cartel… He used the money to get himself elected, paid A.C.O.R.N nut jobs, continues to payoff judges and lawyers who investigate his illegal misdoings… @Bob I truly mean no harm to the boxes nor to the 2 or 3 good guys in the house!!! Just the rest of the 560 plus jokers who claim they represent us and our best interest… So how about hug!!!

560?

This PACT thing seems like it’s all a part of a conspracy to strip our rights more, and to further impoverish the nation to further debts and more unemployment. If it’s all about taxes, and legit items, and age, then make a system where you have registered seller, a method to may the tax, and an age verification, but we as citizens should not be forced to do without, and people who make their livlihood on this should not be forced into the unemployment line.

I’m willing to bet this bill was drafted lock, stock, and barrel by Altria’s lawyers, with the usual panic buzzwords (terrorists! tax evaders! our pwecious widdle childwen!) dangling like so much diseased cysts from it, so that our lawmakers will earnestly cluck and squawk over it before vindictively stabbing the “AYE” button. Never mind the fact they don’t bother to read it. I mean, God forbid the American citizen should be given a choice of products, after all, he’s lucky we let him have any of that HORRID tobacco at all. As long as that tobacco is the highly-processed, chock-full-of-filler excelsior that Phillip Morris peddles…

Yes, it pretty much was drafted lock, stock and barrel by Altria’s lawyers. The manner in which all of these senators were falling over themselves begging “ME TOO!” (to be listed as new sponsors of the PACT bill) during the Judiciary Committee meeting was truly nauseating.

Sigh…

So, will licensed tobacco vendors be exempt from this? I spoke to the lady who owns the smoke shop my significant other buys his loose tobacco from, and she said she’d be happy to order stuff for me. He bought some “pipe tobacco” today that looks suspiciously like the roll ups he used to buy, but it was only 15 bucks for a pound.

Oh, licensed retailers can certainly order things. Question is, will they? In your case yes, but in my case not so much luck. While at Smokeys (our local snooty cigar chain), I inquired about if they’d be selling any General snus, and the clerk said, “Oh, yeah, I heard of it but no, we’re not carrying it.” So that was about that. There’s only one brick-and-mortar store within 20 miles that sells General, and with Michigan OTP taxes it was like $6 (and expired to boot). I did like seeing all the ryo pipe tobacco tho. Yay, stick it to the man!

Well then I guess we will have to become a licensed retailer!!! doesnt sound like a bad thing always wanted my own tobacco shop/ barber shop!!!

The place we go to sells Garrett Sweet and Scotch, and it’s 50 miles away from me. The closer tobacco store, which is like 45 miles from me sells no nasal snuff at all. The only snus available is the Camel. As decent as it is, I’d hate only being able to have the Garrett!

Yeah, I’ve got a place by me that sells the Garretts (and, wonder of wonders, Days Work plug chew), but you’re right. It’s like being shown a huge buffet groaning with tureens of hummus, overflowing bowls of pasta and mountains of steak, but then being told all I can have is a cheeseburger. That’s not to say Garrett is the cheeseburger of snuffs, but when that or nothing are your only choices, it just really deflates you…

I have alot of snuff I have collected, that would really last me a long time, I still can’t empty a container, even though I bypass inhalation now and shove multiple pinches in. I just got back from my local Kroger grocery store, I live in the “black” end of town, as my wife is black, and I moved into her house, and they had WE Garrett, regular and sweet, Red Seal, Bruton, and Honest. I only mention that, as I read somewhere someone inquiring of the racial makeup of scotch snuff users.

Take heart friends. There will be more options for American snuffers soon enough.

carol … the goverment is onto the pipe tobacco wont be long tell its taxed the same as ryo the goverment is loosing $35 million a month in SCHIP taxes as most people are going the pipe route http://www.bnd.com/business/story/1014090.html.

@tom502: Hmm. I do live just outside of Detroit, maybe I could hit some grocery stores there. Detroit has a long history of southerners, both black and white, coming up to work in the plants. Might be some old grandfolks who still send Junior down the corner for their “medicine.”

[quote]“Take heart friends. There will be more options for American snuffers soon enough.”[/quote] Such as … ?

The 2000% (that is not a typo) tax increase applied *only* to RYO cigarette tobacco. It was a ploy by Philip Morris USA to kill the RYO industry, which was starting to take a serious chunk out of their cigarette business. Philip Morris certainly didn’t want their lucrative Middleton pipe tobacco products (Prince Albert, Carter Hall, etc.) taxed at that exorbitant rate. Thing is, at this point Philip Morris USA is probably prepared to sacrifice their pipe tobacco business in exchange for getting their way with PACT.

Got another response, this time from Senator Murray. Everything was pretty noncommittal as usual, but the tag at the end acknowledging my location made me feel a little less like it was an auto bot response: "Thank you for contacting me regarding S. 1147, the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act of 2009. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue. The PACT Act was introduced by Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI), with a similar bill introduced in the House of Representatives by Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY-9). The PACT Act, among other things, would prohibit the sale of tobacco products that are delivered by the United States Postal Service. This bill is currently before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and while I am not a member of the Judiciary Committee, I want to assure you that I will be following the progress of this bill and will keep your views in mind if this or related legislation comes before the full Senate for consideration. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates. Thank you again for writing, and please keep in touch. I hope all is well in Wenatchee. Sincerely, Patty Murray United States Senator

I use the Thomas Library of Congress and govtrack.us. Does anyone know how to get better, more current information other than what was last entered, “Nov 19, 2009: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 216.”?

O.k. this has me scared…what’s going to happen to Tom and the mighty and Wonderful Nicotine Rush if this bill passes? I already wrote to senator Robert p Casey in my state, he’s one of the oh-so-wise cosponsors of this bill. I doubt it will have so much as one full read by the eyes of anyone who matters, but I want to do what I can. If it’s made it to the Senta calendar, I’m thinking that is a really really bad sign. So my question is this. If this happens, what, if any, realistic options will we have, or will this as I am fearing, be the end for our common hobby except for a few tins of american made scotches we will have to drive (65 miles in my case) to obatain. I really am hoping Tom and Roderrick and other snuff merchants will have some kind of way to keep us going, because at this point in time I can’t really afford to go nuts with hoarding and I just bought a triple tech snuffbox that I don’t want to be empty and lonely. Options?

I don’t see it happening. But it wouldn’t suprise me if it did.

I’ve already spoken to a tobacco shop. They would have to exempt those with a tobacco license, you’d think. If this happens, the tobacco shop will order for me. It’s a 50 mile drive to the tobacco store though.

That homemade tomato snuff is sounding better all the time. Unless I can order my “Eskimo Kissing Powder” discreetly from Tom or Roderick.

Well, I love the freedom to order what I want. That’s the main point, freedom. if it passes, it will be another effort to curtail our freedoms, plus create more unemployment, because while we mainly discuss nasal snuff, many small companies do mail order tobacco of all types.

That seems to be the big fad these days. Take away the freedom of 1000 people to do something they enjoy, because 5 people don’t like it. The sad fact is the people we “elect” to represent us and govern us have little to no concern for most of us to begin with. Their own concern seems to really be their own individual agendas and the continued lining of their pockets. “Of the people, by the people and for the people” has died it’s cruel death and been interred in an unmarked grave. “Of the Corporation, by the manipulated, and for the dollar” has stepped up to take it’s place. The issue that concerns us all in this forum right now (PACT), is really just another symptom is a much bigger illness. That illness being a government that believes itself no longer accountable to the american people at large, but rather believes the people are accountable to it. That is a dangerous mindset to have, and it’s how freedom slowly dies. I’m proud of america, and mostly of americans…however my apprehension of our governing bodies grows daily.

I find it sort of ironic that we are on the the verge of legalizing one “bad” herb while criminalizing the other “bad” herb. It also occurs to me that one was able to acquire the former herb, although at a very high price (which hasn’t much changed despite certain dispensaries and abundance), on the street regardless of laws. I live in California and it seems like every day brings new tobacco restrictions. Hell, they’ve found a way to ban smoking in a whole city (Belmont). Additionally, is growing my own tobacco out of the question? I know the process to produce my favorite tobacco products is long and secretive. Just seems like in many ways we are going to be pushed back together as communities taking care of each other and not rushing out to the markets to by whatever we like.

I had wondered that myself wildhorsesmane, where to acquire the seed, growing conditions and needs…ect. As for the recipies to produce quality snuff…very secretive, but if people could figure it out 200 years ago, with a little trial and error and experimentation, I am sure a person could stumble onto something palatible. I know I am looking into Mcguyvering up my own “snuff” if the tobacoo gestapo gets their way.

VERY easy to grow your own! I did it in 5 gal pails.

F.D.A. Can’t Regulate Electronic CigarettesPublished: January 14, 2010 A federal judge says the Food and Drug Administration overstepped its authority in efforts to regulate electronic cigarettes. Regulators began halting shipments of electronic cigarettes last year. The F.D.A. said it found cancer-causing ingredients in the products, despite manufacturers’ claims that they are safer than tobacco cigarettes. The agency argued that electronic cigarettes, which use a battery-operated vaporizer to produce a nicotine mist, are a combination drug-device, and therefore subject to stricter safety standards than cigarettes. But Judge Richard Leon of Federal District Court agreed with manufacturers that electronic cigarettes are “the functional equivalent of traditional cigarettes.”

@ Herzl. There really needs to be a differentiation regarding tobacco products. But Alas, I do believe that our media do want to lump them all together. Its as if cigarettes are the only way to administer the joy of tobacco. Looks like we dodged a bullet this time but I really have no faith in our government to abandon the movement to ban tobacco. As long as the opinion crafters can criminalize the herb in the public mind, the politicians can stake there claim as guardians of the public and make a wedge issue out of it. That is the nature of politics. That is also why I can’t wait until I get paid so I can hoard more snuff. Segway… @bakdoor. Really glad to know growing my own can be done. Thanks to your online store I found my favorite snuffs. Now I can hoard. For, I am no farmer.

I found it’s best to scare our represenatives. Go into lurid details about how history will remember the people that voted for this bill as the people who were not intelligent enough to see they where playing into the terrorists hands by allowing only the criminals to sell cigarettes and forcing them to skirt the law even more hurting the u.s. economy and helping the terrorist. I"am serious everytime I’ve successfully written a congressman with well calculated fear it’s seems to have possibly worked. Ask me about the gay goverment guy soon.

I do like the way you think bob! Write with well calculated fear. All I’ve ever received have been the auto generated replies. You approach warrants much thought for me. How best to put the fear of the electorate into the elected. Oh, I like that (-;

I’ll put it this way I’ve never been written back but it seems likely it could have been influenceal

I just wrote my senator and requested that he introduce an amendment to except nasal snuff and pipe tobacco from s.1147. I think that the bill is going to pass easily since only 14 in the house voted against a similar measure. It seems we would be more effective requesting an exemption than opposing the bill. I hope they listen. As pipe tobacco is more popular than snuff and less than cigars we should include it so there is a category that is logical.

My favorite analogy is the scotch taxes of 1644 and 1823; it will never be illegal, but they will try to make it too expensive for most. Legalization of marijuana is years away, but eventually it will be as legal nationally as it is in California

I just received a reply from my senator on the pact act in which he said basically “It is for the kids, to keep them from buying tobacco and for our local retailers, to keep them from having an unfair disadvantage.” In other words, I wasted my time.

Well at least they responded back. It really saddens me to see the ever popular villianizing phrase “could allow terrorist groups to profit” is still as popular as ever. Why not shut down e-bay because a terrorist could hock his $20 chinese knockoff I-pod touch to buy a clip worth of AK-47 rounds, or a box of fuse lit colored smoke bombs (I just used the words Terrorist, AK47 and smoke bomb…the internet communication interceptors at the NSA and CIA will be lighting up now.) I’m glad he at least took the time to answer but it would be nice to see them cut out the panndering and just be honest. “Dear Mr. Rowles, Philip Morris is paying us a fortune to do this, we don’t care about your obscure little hobby. You’ll buy what we tell you for how much we tell you. Have a nice day pleibian.” Dear Mr. Rowles: Thank you for taking the time to contact me about S. 1147, the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act, of which I am a cosponsor, and its companion bill in the House of Representatives, H.R. 1676. I appreciate hearing from all Pennsylvanians about the issues that matter most to them. The PACT Act, introduced on May 21, 2009, would help eliminate illegal tobacco distribution through the mail, which results in lost government revenues, allows minors to illegally purchase tobacco and could allow terrorist groups to illegally profit from these transactions. It would treat cigarettes and smokeless tobacco as nonmailable items and require better record-keeping by tobacco distributors. On November 19, 2009, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, of which I am not a member, approved S. 1147 by a voice vote. Should this legislation come before the full Senate for consideration, I will have your views in mind. Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you. If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my web site, http://casey.senate.gov. I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania. Sincerely, Bob Casey United States Senator

I love how not one of these sons-o-bitches will give you a straight answer. They all say, should this come up, I will certainly consider your views. How about “yeah, I understand what you are saying, this legislation had some good intentions, but parts of it are unfair and completely bullshit. So, my friend (my ode to John McCain) I will make sure and request the changes you suggested, but if they aren’t included, I’ll vote no. I mean after all, you elected me into this office”

Thank goodness for bootlegging entrepreneurs like Roderick!

The prohibition in PACT is against using the US Postal Service to deliver tobacco. Other carriers presumably would be exempt. Wouldn’t a retailer or web shop only need to use a private company like UPS or FEDEX ? While I don’t like limiting the options of legitimate companies to conduct business, I don’t see this as the death knell for domestic suppliers. Or did I miss something?

supposedly the privates like ups and fedex said that they would also follow suit. However saying that certainly isn’t legaly binding and can easily be turned around on. I think it’s only illegal to sell it through the mail I think sending is fine. So as long as the tobacco isn’t being charged for that fine I think. Damn expensive boxs I keep ordering.

My repeated readings of s.1147 along with rather involved discussions on other forums a few months back left me with the understanding that the bill would require state taxes, possibly federal, paid per sale by the vendor. This would require additional layers of bookkeeping for the vendors. Prohibition of delivery by USPS seems to be only to private individuals, USPS could still deliver to businesses. I’d think that the vendors would have had trained legal council look at both S.1147 and H.R. 1676 to determine possible impact to their business if passed. Any insights from the vendors on this?