#media statement

[indizombie]

Everyone is waiting for our words but what words could we possibly use for a pain such as this that we are going through? Now is the moment for tears. Then there will be the moment for words. We are in mourning. We feel like a boxer who has been knocked out. We are in shock. A devastating blow for both city and club.

SSC Napoli

[techfreedom]

Congress Can Save E-Vapor, Save Lives

WASHINGTON, DC — Today, TechFreedom and a dozen other free-market organizations urged Congress to amend Food and Drug Administration rules that will cripple the e-vapor industry, destroy jobs, and deprive smokers of a far safer alternative.

In August 2016, the FDA established February 15, 2007 as the “predicate date” for e-vapor products. Any product that came to market after that date must now undergo a premarket tobacco application (PMTA) process that, even by the FDA’s more conservative estimates, would cost around $6 million per product within the first two years of regulation. The e-vapor industry is largely made up of small businesses and products that look nothing like their predecessors of ten years prior. Since all but the largest businesses can’t afford to comply, this predicate date would force most of the industry to shut down entirely.

The letter calls on Congress to pass an amendment that would change the predicate date to August 16, 2016, the effective date of the Deeming Regulations. This would save vapor products currently on the market which, according to the bulk of the research conducted so far, are 95% safer than traditional cigarettes. Further, there is no evidence that secondhand vapor causes significant harm.

The letter states:

The Amendment would change only the predicate date, not the FDA’s rules themselves. This would have no effect on the FDA’s ability to protect consumers and regulate vapor products, including safety standards, marketing, sale to minors, and batteries. Manufacturers would still be regulated under the Deeming Rule and would have to abide by FDA standards for their products to remain on the market. In requiring the FDA to consider the vapor market through a modern lens, the Amendment simply makes the approval process more fair, realistic, and affordable.

“Fixing the predicate date would avert catastrophe, but it’s only the first step,” said Evan Swarztrauber, Communications Director at TechFreedom. “While the language in the Cole-Bishop Amendment would preserve the current market, further legislation is required for a lasting framework that protects consumers without stifling innovation.”

“Technology isn’t just about apps and social media,” concluded Swarztrauber. “Innovation transcends regulatory silos, and we’ve already seen the potential for telemedicine and Big Data to disrupt healthcare — as e-vapor has done for tobacco harm reduction. Decades of education and anti-smoking efforts have helped humanity enormously, but smoking still remains a top global killer. Congress should intervene to ensure that technology remains a lifeline for the billion lives still threatened by smoking.”

###

We can be reached for comment at [email protected]. See our other work on e-cig regulations, including:

Our amicus brief in support of a challenge to the FDA’s regulations

A blog post on the problems with the FDA deeming rules

Tech Policy Podcast #111: FDA Cracks Down on E-Cigs

[morningtonpeninsulanews]

STPL News Rejects Mornington Peninsula Shire Council Claims and Affirms Independent Reporting

STPL News rejects Mornington Peninsula Shire Council’s public statement and the implication that our reporting is unfair, inaccurate, or unethical. STPL News published reporting on 19 January 2026 regarding the terms of reference for the state-appointed municipal monitors at Mornington Peninsula Shire Council. On 21 January 2026, Council contacted STPL News advising it would cease media…

STPL News Rejects Mornington Peninsula Shire Council Claims and Affirms Independent Reporting

[reportwire]

CDC Recommends COVID-19 Vaccines for Young Children | CDC Online Newsroom

CDC Recommends COVID-19 Vaccines for Young Children | CDC Online Newsroom

Today, CDC Director Rochelle P. Walensky, M.D., M.P.H., endorsed the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) recommendation that all children 6 months through 5 years of age should receive a COVID-19 vaccine. This expands eligibility for vaccination to nearly 20 million additional children and means that all Americans ages 6 months and older are now eligible for vaccination.  Parents…

View On WordPress

[reportwire]

COVID-19 vaccines continue to protect against hospitalization and death among adults | CDC Online Newsroom

COVID-19 vaccines continue to protect against hospitalization and death among adults | CDC Online Newsroom

COVID-19 vaccines continue to protect against hospitalization and death among adults COVID-19 vaccination continues to help protect adults against severe illness with COVID-19, including hospitalizations and death, according to two reports released in today’s MMWR. During Omicron, COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates increased for all adults, regardless of vaccination status, but rates were…

View On WordPress

[techfreedom]

Only Legislation Can Secure Net Neutrality

WASHINGTON D.C. — Today, activists and multiple Internet companies have called on the Federal Communications Commission to continue treating broadband Internet providers as common carriers (effectively, public utilities) under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act. The FCC is currently taking public comments on the claims of legal authority made by previous chairmen in 2010 and 2015 to support net neutrality rules. Yesterday, TechFreedom held a press call on the Day of Action and the broader questions surrounding the future of net neutrality. A recording of the call is available here.

“This fight isn't really about net neutrality at all, but the FCC’s sweeping claims of authority over the Internet,” said Berin Szóka, President of TechFreedom. “For nearly a decade, the FCC has attempted to regulate the Internet — despite clear instructions from Congress that the Internet should remain ‘unfettered by Federal or State regulation.’ This was unnecessary from the start: the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, and state attorneys general could, working together, have policed the broadband market, just as they police the offline economy. Once this FCC reverses its sweeping claims of power over the Internet, which deprived the FTC of jurisdiction, the FTC will again be the lead agency in the layered approach to consumer protection that kept the net ‘neutral’ and thriving long before the FCC ever had rules on the books.”

“The courts won’t resolve this fight,” continued Szóka. “The FCC has gone to court three times, and is now heading for a fourth battle. Far from ‘blessing’ the FCC’s claims, the courts have either blasted FCC overreach or granted the FCC the same deference administrative agencies almost always enjoy. The Supreme Court has already clearly held that the FCC would enjoy such deference in disclaiming power over the Internet. That’s why the Pai FCC will undoubtedly prevail in court when the forthcoming order is challenged. TechFreedom has argued that such deference shouldn’t apply in the converse situation, when the FCC claims broad power. Three judges on the D.C. Circuit agreed with us, in their dissents. We’ll be asking the Court to take the case in September, but won’t be surprised if they don’t — simply because the FCC is already moving to resolve the case.”

“This fight won’t end until Congress legislates,” concluded Szóka. “Do we really want to spend another decade — or two — playing political ping-pong with the Internet? That’s what will happen until there’s legislation. The FCC and Congress won’t ever really be able to focus on pressing issues like easing broadband deployment and promoting competition.”

###

We can be reached for comment at [email protected]. See our other work on net neutrality, including:

Tech Policy Podcast #174: Future of Internet Regulation (w/ FCC Chairman Ajit Pai)

Our explainer on the distinction between Title II and net neutrality

Our op-ed in Wired calling for legislation to resolve net neutrality

About TechFreedom:

TechFreedom is a non-profit, non-partisan technology policy think tank. We work to chart a path forward for policymakers towards a bright future where technology enhances freedom, and freedom enhances technology.

[techfreedom]

Revived National Space Council Could Mean Space Policy Rethink

WASHINGTON D.C. — On Friday, June 30, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order reinstating within the White House the National Space Council, which was disbanded early in the Clinton Administration.  The Council will be headed by Vice President Pence, who delivered a speech on July 6, 2017 at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) outlining his vision for the Council, which will consist of the Secretary of State, Defense, Commerce, and Transportation, plus the Director of National Intelligence, the NASA Administrator, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  

Vice President Pence said the Council will convene “before the end of the summer.” He also vowed to include the private sector in the Council’s activities; the Executive Order calls for establishing a Users’ Advisory Group made up of individuals from the private sector and academia.

“The administration has a unique opportunity to develop a cohesive national space policy that can cut across agency ‘stovepipes’ that have hindered American efforts in space,” said James E. Dunstan, TechFreedom Senior Adjunct Fellow and founder of Mobius Legal Group. “Once up and running, the Council’s first order of business should be to identify current regulatory impediments that are slowing down innovative private sector space activities, and in some cases, driving U.S. companies overseas to set up shop in countries with more benign regulatory regimes. This effort could parallel the FCC’s widely acclaimed Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC).”

“The National Space Council could offer a long overdue re-think of U.S. space policy, but only if it's truly independent from other agency agendas,” cautioned TechFreedom President Berin Szóka. “If the Council is staffed solely from within other agencies, it won't have the clout necessary to break through some of the policies that have hindered U.S. space efforts, especially the entrepreneurial activities of companies seeking to create a whole new economy in outer space.”

“The Council’s overall mission should be nothing less than make America great at opening the space frontier again,” concluded Szóka. “As John Marburger, chief science advisor to President George W. Bush, said, the fundamental question is ‘whether we want to incorporate the Solar System in our economic sphere, or not.’ Absolutely, yes, and only private enterprise can do it. It’ll require not only removing regulatory barriers and that government works with the private sector instead of competing with it, but also a sound legal framework for space commerce. Congress started building that in late 2015 with legislation authorizing space mining, but now it must continue that process by crafting a light-touch legal framework to govern a wide variety of innovative activities — and the Council should help steer legislation in the right direction.”

###

We can be reached for comment at [email protected]. See our other work on space law, including:

Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of our space law series on the Tech Policy Podcast

Our statement on a recent bill establishing a light-touch approach to space regulation

Wired op-ed: How the US Can Lead the Way to Extraterrestrial Land Deals

Wired op-ed: Space Law: Is Asteroid Mining Legal

Tech Policy Podcast #165: Regulating the Universe

[techfreedom]

FCC Should Rethink its Media Regulation

WASHINGTON D.C. — Yesterday, TechFreedom and the Competitive Enterprise Institute urged the FCC to modernize its media regulations to keep up with the rapidly evolving video content industry, especially with regard to its cable ownership limits and set-top box regulations.

The filing states:

OVD [online video distributor] services have thrived in an unregulated environment, relying on licensing copyrights directly with content owners on a voluntary basis—and operating outside the Communications Act’s 23-year-old MVPD framework. Many OVDs offer essentially the same network and cable programming that traditional MVPDs also distribute—but, increasingly, firms are producing popular, high-quality original video programming for purely online distribution. Their success is an example of positive impact on an industry by a lenient regulatory regime.

“Given fundamental changes in the video marketplace, the 1992 Cable Act looks increasingly outdated, and the courts said as much eight years ago, yet the last two FCC Chairmen refused to reconsider the agency’s approach,” said TechFreedom President Berin Szóka. “Competition is alive and well in the video marketplace, as cable, satellite, and over-the-top providers trip over themselves to get the best content and attract the most eyeballs. Cable’s share of the MVPD subscription video market has tumbled from almost 100% in 1992 to roughly half that today — which doesn’t even count the growing number of Americans, currently one in seven, who have cut the cord completely. There’s no reason that antitrust law can’t protect consumers in this market.”

“After twenty-one years, previous FCC struggles over set-top boxes look increasingly pointless,” continued Szóka. “The 1996 Telecom Act simply failed to anticipate that the video market would move beyond set-top boxes, which modern streaming has made increasingly obsolete. A new approach, like the DSTAC’s apps-based proposal, would ensure continued competition without tying businesses and consumers to an outdated technology. But Congress should also reconsider whether the entire statutory framework still makes sense.”

###

We can be reached for comment at [email protected]. See our other work on the media regulation, including:

Our statement on the previous FCC’s proposal to regulate set-top boxes

A blog post on the FCC’s policy toward next-gen TV

Tech Policy Podcast #67: Killing the Cable Box

About TechFreedom:

TechFreedom is a non-profit, non-partisan technology policy think tank. We work to chart a path forward for policymakers towards a bright future where technology enhances freedom, and freedom enhances technology.