PACT: The push is still on

[LHB]

I contacted my Texas Senators recently about this, and one their aides (who I know personally, and who shall therefore remain nameless) suggested their office was getting more "anti" PACT calls than they expected. If you think your call won't make a difference, think again. Continue to hound them, and try to sound intelligent and well spoken.

One argument you might want to make is that it would establish a very dangerous and unusual precedent in using the Police Powers of the Federal Government to aid State Governments in the collection of taxes. It's one step away from using the Federal Government as an enforcement mechanism to tax ALL internet commerce.

The authors of this Bill saw this objection coming, so in Sec. 10 of The Act it says (quoting from memory) "It is not our intention to establish a precedent regarding the taxation of out of state transactions made via the internet..." But of course, it doesn't matter what their intentions are: once the Camel's Nose is under the tent, you can kiss your tax free Amazon transactions and Netflix subscriptions, etc. goodbye.

That's where the main opposition is coming from (along with the Seneca Indian Nation), but obviously it stays behind the scenes. When you register your opposition, do it in terms of the Dangerous Pro Statist, Anti Free Market precedents it sets, especially if you're talking to a Republican. That scares the crap out of them. They have a lot to worry about in upcoming primaries in terms of challenges from the Libertarian Right.

[CoderGuy]

I contacted my Texas Senators recently about this, and one their aides (who I know personally, and who shall therefore remain nameless) suggested their office was getting more "anti" PACT calls than they expected. If you think your call won't make a difference, think again. Continue to hound them, and try to sound intelligent and well spoken.

One argument you might want to make is that it would establish a very dangerous and unusual precedent in using the Police Powers of the Federal Government to aid State Governments in the collection of taxes. It's one step away from using the Federal Government as an enforcement mechanism to tax ALL internet commerce.

The authors of this Bill saw this objection coming, so in Sec. 10 of The Act it says (quoting from memory) "It is not our intention to establish a precedent regarding the taxation of out of state transactions made via the internet..." But of course, it doesn't matter what their intentions are: once the Camel's Nose is under the tent, you can kiss your tax free Amazon transactions and Netflix subscriptions, etc. goodbye.

That's where the main opposition is coming from (along with the Seneca Indian Nation), but obviously it stays behind the scenes. When you register your opposition, do it in terms of the Dangerous Pro Statist, Anti Free Market precedents it sets, especially if you're talking to a Republican. That scares the crap out of them. They have a lot to worry about in upcoming primaries in terms of challenges from the Libertarian Right.

Good advice and post, thanks.

CG

[LaZeR]

Re: PACT: The push is still on

PACT is not about banning tobacco...it's about taxing it.

I understand that but they are also using the "Save the Children", "Terrorist are being funded by our ability to buy imported -insert your favorite tobacco here-...."

And as mentioned there is still a push from the Anti-Tobacco radicals to get it all Banned or at the very least so overpriced that no-one will be able to afford it.

But yea, I agree the main push is BIG Gov. unconstitutionally forcing their powers down our throats and finding ways to impose illegal taxes by passing bogus and "honey coated" BS new laws to somehow justify their cause.

Not to go political here but this is the very MAIN reason I am a registered Republican even though they have lost their way, at least there is still some "Hope.... :lol: .. Pardon the pun u stupid ass Obama... for stealing your beloved phrase" that we won't be taxed into oblivion.

[GoVegan]

Don't kid yourself Lazer. Orin Hatch, a Republican, was the biggest promoter of the original PACT Act. A lot of legislation that interferes with our right to privacy, like the Patriot Act, was conceived by Republicans as well. And yes, in theory, your taxes might look like their going down but the problems is that spending is going up. Your screwed no matter who you vote for. I used to actually like Republicans until they got hijacked by idiots like Bush and Palin.

[LHB]

Don't kid yourself Lazer. Orin Hatch, a Republican, was the biggest promoter of the original PACT Act. A lot of legislation that interferes with our right to privacy, like the Patriot Act, was conceived by Republicans as well. And yes, in theory, your taxes might look like their going down but the problems is that spending is going up. Your screwed no matter who you vote for. I used to actually like Republicans until they got hijacked by idiots like Bush and Palin.

It's not a matter of who's right or not (Republicans or Democrats). It's a matter of who's more susceptible to political pressure. And on this issue, Republican's are, since they are vulnerable challenges from Populists and Libertarians in the far-right wing of the Republican Party.

In many states like Texas, you can't vote in the primaries unless you are a registered Republican or Democrat. Registering as an "Independent" is a futile gesture; you can vote any way you want in any general election not matter what your party affiliation. It is unlikely that a Democrat will be elected as a Senator from Texas; incumbents are therefore only vulnerable in the primaries. Orrin Hatch rolls the way he does because he's from Utah. In many other states, anti-government, anti-incumbent sentiment has reached the tipping point. Many Republican's cannot afford to be labeled anti-free market, pro-higher taxes because of challenges from the Libertarian and Populist Right.

On issues like this, you have to play four dimensional chess, which often results in making temporary alliances with people who you want to toss under the train tomorrow. This is what happened to Margaret Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate Race: her defeat was mainly engineered by angry left wing Democrats (who formed a temporary alliance with their mortal enemies on the far-right) who wanted to send a message to a right-leaning Obama White House, despite the fact that Coakley is a Democrat.

I'm not suggesting that anybody support Republicans or Democrats for elected office. I'm just saying Republicans are FAR more susceptible to political pressure on this particular issue. Orrin Hatch is probably an exception. If you live in a state with a Republican Senator, give them a call, and tell them you oppose S.1147 (The PACT Act) and why you oppose it.

[Snusmun]

I agree with most of your points LHB and thank you for such detailed input. I do disagree with the notion that registering as an independent is a "futile" gesture. Many states are now entertaining the notion of allowing open primaries. The more independents there are, the more likely this will happen. The fewer party members there are, the less power the parties wield. Pretty simple solution to partisan politics IMHO.

[kreigle]

I don't want to start any arguments here, but I still don't understand how this is supposed to stop "illegal" sale of tobacco if they couldn't stop illegal booze in the 1920's or illegal drugs for the last ~40 years.

I understand it's all about the tax revenue, but this is just going to create a huge black market for un-taxed cigarettes and the tax revenue just won't be there for them, and it will just cost more billions of dollars to enforce.

Sometimes I wonder what alternate universe our politicians are living in since they obviousy don't live in this one.

[stubby2]

I understand it's all about the tax revenue, but this is just going to create a huge black market for un-taxed cigarettes and the tax revenue just won't be there for them, and it will just cost more billions of dollars to enforce.

Sometimes I wonder what alternate universe our politicians are living in since they obviousy don't live in this one.

You're right, the pact act will just push tobacco sales into the black market. Just look at our friends to the North. In Canada, with high tobacco taxes, including snus shipped from Sweden, up to 40% of cigarettes are black market. The government is now losing billions in taxes, plus enforcement cost. This is where it's going in the US.

[chadizzy1]

This may be off topic, it's not related to PACT, but Lars Erik Rutqvist (The VP of Scientific Affairs at Swedish Match) is on the FDA's Risk Assessment Committee for Tobacco. He's a non voting member, but his presence is reassuring. I'm sure if they listen, and look at the facts, and listen to what he has to say, they may understand that snus is a harm reduced tobacco product and is okay to sell in the US.

“In the US, knowledge of smokefree tobacco and its harmful effects is generally low and often wrong. Communicating what the relative health benefits of smokefree products represent will be a great challenge. A recently performed survey in which 3,500 people participated showed that 12 percent of the respondents were sure that smokefree tobacco products were just as harmful to people’s health as cigarettes,” he said.

LINK to committee assignments:
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Advisor.../UCM199769.pdf

I did an expanded article on this today, as well.
http://chadizzy1.blogspot.com/2010/0...ed-to-fda.html