that is something that is used in many cases by women who have already had children and may need it for other reasons or it's simply the safest and lists -- means for family planning and that form of contraception if it is not provided in this at can-free manner, th cost up to a full month's pay for someone who is working a minimum wage job. that means the decision of what form of contraception to use will likely be made by what she and her family can afford and not between her and her doctor as to what is the safest and most guest: that is simply not true. iuds are available today as they were years ago. says, what the government can do and should have done is provide direct

access without regarding the employers to provide drugs and devices to which they have morally-based religious objections. if the government had done , there will be no issue at all for those who need some form of subsidy. host: independent caller from virginia. go ahead. guest: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i have been listening to the conversation. really unnerved by all of the warble implications that will be added -- moral implications that will be added to this dialogue. this is not about religious freedom. when it's really about is allowing employers to insert themselves into decisions made by women and their doctors about

what is in their own best interest. i find it mind-boggling that we are even having this conversation. i don't think under any other circumstances would we be talking about whether we should fund medically approved forms of drugs that people decide they need. host: i was just looking for -- here it is. theprotest outside of supreme court yesterday. one of the signs being held up his bosses don't belong in the bedroom. the board room not decide your health care. guest: when you were asking your boss to provide your health care, i'm not sure how you can have your boss not involved in your health care. sayink it's inconsistent to

we want our employers to subsidize and provide our health care insurance, but we don't want our employers to have anything to do with it. guest: it's interesting about this whole recruiting employers into health care. the affordable care act went through the existing system of employer-sponsored health insurance instead of going with a single-payer system which people would have howled and screamed about if they tried to set up a single-payer health care system. what the folks who opposed the contraception provision are asking for were the government should pay for this coverage gets away from that existing market-based employer-sponsored health plan. if the administration can really -- can'tat score really win on that score. host: hi, barbara. caller: good morning.

i might suggest to all of these liberals and people saying this --against women >> watch today's washington journal online at c-span.org. take you live to the pentagon for the briefing with john kirby. >> we will use it for something else. announcements.ck secretary hagel wants to congratulate michelle howard for moted today to full admiral. it is a milestone in her exemplary career. also a milestone for the united states navy as she becomes the first four-star african-american female admiral.

duties -- it'sr a job of immense responsibility. the secretaries eager to seeer get in the seat and get to work. i can confirm that that is why i'm not able to start the trans-shipment of the material. out a, we just sent statement from secretary regarding the government of japan state policy -- japan's new policy. he welcomes the government's new

policy which will enable the japan self-defense forces to engage in a wide range of .perations and make ou lastly, since i won't let you watch the soccer game, i'm pretty sure you will have questions about members of people -- numbers of people in iraq. i want to walk you through what we are doing here and how. we will start going through. as we get through this, it's important -- there are two separate and distinct mission sets. first when a security assistance. a one is assessment teams. -- second one is assessment teams. two distinct tracks here. the first order was on the 16th 270.ne 4 2for

them arrived that same day. they float in before the letter went to congress. 270 then, we had a total of authorized. 170 and country. -- went on ther 26th of june. tot authorized up to 300 advise and assess troops. buys are. -- advisers. 180 had been in country. 90 at the joint operation center in baghdad and another 90 that comprised our assessment and ory teams. 350 on the ground.

the third order came on the 30th of june yesterday. 200 and theional security assistance mission. -- in the security and assistance mission. an additional 200 -- all of them are now in baghdad. you will see the 100 up there in the top under the first order. 275.was up to them all int country. we told you we would leave 100 of them outside the country in case they needed to be put in. we did put them in yesterday. that other hundred came from the first order on the 16th of june. all of that comes down to the 770om, the total uof

authorized. ok? you can have a copy. it's not classified. we will not show the game. you will have to pay attention to me for 25 minutes. the 100 --round with >> there are approximately 100 and other troops that will working.e in iraq the 750 --d to them i'm talking about of the authorized for these three missions come a we're at 650. -- these three missions, we are at 650. >> he said the new troops getting there would be have with additional capabilities. how much more can you talk about that?

will they be flying those uavs from the baghdad airport? they will be basing out of the baghdad airport. it's a mix of helicopters and uavs. the helicopters are attack helicopters. apaches. exact numbers.e we can see if we can get that for you. >> these are american army apaches that will be flown by american crews? >> that is correct. how long was the materials are loaded aboard that ship will have to sail around and neutralize it. take 2-3 days for the trans-shipment of materials .ired they will ge i don't know if i've got an estimate.

some of it will depend on sea state and that kind of thing. estimate.ve an i will have to see if i can get back to you on that. guest --the process of translating >> there is no plans right now -- we have legitimate safety concerns. people who will be working the ship are trained and se typesd to handle the of materials. it's not the environment that is conducive to having media presence. only those were trained will be involved.

will bere trained involved. it's a safety issue. we will keep you informed of how the process is going. there is no reason why not to. youre trying to keep plugged in as we march along and will continue to do that. >> what about trans-loading? >> i don't believe there will be media access to the transloading, either. this is dangerous stuff. there is a genuine concern for safety here. >> you failed to answer the question about the surveillance drones. how many, what kind and are they all surveillance? >> they are all surveillance unmanned systems. >> surveillance only? >> surveillance only. they will not be armed. i don't have the exact breakdown of what they are and how many. again, let's focus on the mission here. which is security assistance for

our facilities and the embassy. >> will the apaches be airborne 's a standard operating teacher or just responding to specific events? >> i don't have the exact sort of daily flight plan for them. 200 is ton of these provide for security at facilities that we have access to. the airport and the embassy. they will use them as appropriate to accomplish that mission. [indiscernible] >> are you talking about the assessment teams? at the pentagon is able to assess the situation on the ground.

do you still see a growing threat from isis? --rect me if i'm wrong sending another 300 troops to iraq looks like the situation make it worse in the coming weeks -- might get worse in the coming weeks. are justsessment teams getting -- they have been working. we need to give them time to get out and about and come back with their findings. i will not get ahead of that work. we are obviously watching the situation closely as we can. given the limited information we have. we are trying to get better information. remains -- isis

still remains a legitimate threat to baghdad. we believe the iraqi government has taken that threat seriously. andsecurity forces in around baghdad are continuing to reinforce themselves. and to go on the offensive in some areas. as we saw over the weekend. they are large swaths of the country that are still is or ared by is contested. our assessment teams are just getting started. we need to let them finish that work and we will go from there. these extra personnel that the president ordered in yesterday, the 200 in that security assistance mission -- that is what they are there to do. provide extra security for our

facilities, our people, our property. the stateow department in the embassy to continue to function as it is. >> if the situation is getting worse or not. -- i certainly would not would be in a position to declare the meter today one way or the other. it continues to be very dangerous. the threat continues to be very real. iraqi security forces around baghdad reinforcing themselves and preparing to defend and they are taking the offensive. we saw this over the weekend. it is a contested environment right now. >> is there feeling that the pentagon won't go beyond that in the number of troops? what is the maximum number the pentagon --

>> the president has been very clear with each -- >> he's going to send 300. >> he said he was going to send up to 300 to assess and advise. i laid out the numbers for you. to 275that, it was up and he added another 200. is there a grand total? no. grand total limit, he is the commander-in-chief. he makes these decisions. freedom to make those decisions as he and military commanders advise him to. >> [indiscernible] speculate one way or another. that's why i wanted to focus on what we've got much air going. that is the focus right now. does the department think

this authorized number is sufficient to carry out those combined missions? or should we expect additional the limits? >> i won't get to decisions that have not been made yet about the future. in terms of other deployments or other numbers. we believe that the numbers we have been authorized are sufficient to the task we've been given. >> nonetheless, the president has added three times in the last two weeks additional troops and you have just acknowledged that there is no grand total limit on this at this point. respect, how is this not escalation? -- whenhis not mission do you know this is mission accomplished?

when you know that you have success here? what is the exit strategy? >> when you ask a question about exit strategy, it presumes that there is a major movement or occupation of foot and that is not the case here. >> 800 or so u.s. troops going into iraq. >> let me answer all your questions in turn. mission because the missions have been clearly defined from the onset. two missions. security assistance and ss and advise. those are the two tracks we are on. -- assess and advise. buffede one mission got up by another 200 personnel. the security assistance mission was additive.

there were numbers added to it because the situation on the ground continues to change. the threat to baghdad is still very legitimate. we also want to make sure that we are doing what we can to help our colleagues in the state department continue to function out of the embassy there and to have the flexibility if they want to make resource and that wechanges there are able to help them do that. they were relocating some personal. this is about meeting the need from our state colleagues. working closely with the iraqi government. doing this in full consultation with them and at their request. there is no mission. they have not changed. some of the numbers have been added in the security assistance realm. it is very fluid. the commander-in-chief and the military leadership here in the

haveing expect and should a certain measure of flex ability and how we manage the resources available. >> how do you know what success is here? you don't put in troops without knowing when you know when your .ob is done it is getting worse because you did not do this at the beginning. why two weeks ago did you not move to reinforce the airport? what is the situation or what information did you get that led you to now say in the last couple of days, ok, we have to reinforce the airport and the iraqi military cannot be counted on to do it? >> that is not what we are saying. that they are not up to the task. these troops are not there to protect the airport. it's not our airport third they

are there to protect u.s. facilities, personnel and property. some of which are at the airport. we have some facilities that we have access to at the airport. they are there to protect embassy personnel, the embassy itself and other u.s. facilities around baghdad. they are not there to defend the airport. your question about success -- i go back to the mission areas. we will know that we've had success when we are able to properly protect u.s. personnel and property. assist --ise and assessed and advise mission -- we will know how successful we've been when they report back. the state of isis and the state of security on the ground. thea better sense of what follow-on advisory mission can look like. when we are done, we will know.

>> two weeks ago, there was no discussion of needing to have u.s. troops at the baghdad airport. for whatever reason now -- >> two weeks ago, we ordered those 100 airport security personnel into the region, we kept them outside of iraq emma but we ordered them into the reason toause we had be concerned about the security of our facilities and our people at the airport. the situation has changed on the ground. it is not static. it's different every day. isis continues to pose a religion a threat -- a legitimate threat to baghdad. -- we watching this

continue to watch the situation and we are monitoring it as best we can. we will have better information in a couple of weeks when we get these reports back. thatn you confirm a report russian pilots have been flying jets -- should we be concerned about russian forces operating aircraft over u.s. forces operating on the ground? it is myt confirm -- understanding that these aircraft were purchased for use by iraqi pilots. you would have to talk to moscow about what they're doing with airplanes and their pilots. concerns, i will go back to what we said before. all nations that are becoming involved in this situation, including us, particularly our urge them we would all to do so in a way that does

not further inflame sectarian tensions. that does not make a bad situation work. -- bad situation worse. >> wouldn't they want to talk to the russians about what they are doing with air with airplanes in iraq? are they attempting to find out what their intent is? >> there are no active discussions with the russian military about what they are or are not doing in iraq. iraq is a sovereign nation. the negotiate, talk, discuss, purchase things from other countries. these are discussions that the iraqi government is having with russian -- the russian government. it is not our place to inject ourselves. we are being measured and deliberate about our force presence there, our posture there and what our mission is. inare being very deliberate

what we are doing and not doing. >> what precautions are you taking to protect -- what precautions are the americans taking to protect the sources of their intelligence? the are working with iraqis who are working on getting intelligence from the iranians. is there an effort to protect the sources? we are careful about protecting intelligence and we're pretty good at it. for the joint operation center is the one in to serve as a usefulghouse for a exchange of information between us and the iraqi security forces. that is the goal and the objective. we are always careful, of

course. when dealing with other nations and intelligence. we believe there is great value. we can't do our job as advisers unless there is a measure of trust and open dialogue that we can have with iraqi security forces. there are iranian forces on the ground and russian planes flying overhead -- >> i'm not sure if medicaid is the right verb. whatever we do will be informed which wegree of understand that actions of the other nations. -- mitigate is the right verb. >> the iraqi ambassador was talking about if iraq does not get what it needs from the u.s., they may turn to iran. to what extent as you put more forces on the ground does it concern you that iraq is saying

you are not doing the job? >> it's a sovereign state, sovereign government. they have the right to speak to whoever they want. discussionssecurity , i would go back to what i said before. we continue to urge all nations involved and interested in this not further inflame the sectarian tensions. we have had that message consistently from the beginning. that has been our message to tehran and it has not changed. we can neither control nor dictate the discussions that one head of state has with another. extent can iraq ask iran or other nations to get involved before the situation becomes untenable to have u.s. personnel there? point -- the iranians

get more involved and send more forces, at what point -- question presumes that we are in open conflict with iran. that does not need to be the case. has hade department discussions on the sidelines of the p5 with iranian officials about the situation in iraq. speaknation has to for itself. i can only speak for the u.s. and what we are doing. our missions are confined to these two areas. there is no need to presume open conflict here. does what it takes to not further inflame sectarian tension and make a bad situation worse. >> can i ask you about japan and

the decision in japan -- is there any concern that decision could inflame tensions in the region and conversely take any pressure off the pentagon's plan? there is not concerned about flaming tensions -- inflaming tensions in the region. we believe the opposite. there is a lot of work left to do inside the japanese government on this policy change they are seeking. the democracy. they have to buy it and vote on this. we think it's a very encouraging sign that will help inform the revision of the defense guidelines that we have with japan. it helps inform the process which is ongoing. we find it very help all. -- very helpful. is no reason to worry that it will make tensions worse.

quite the contrary. we think it will help with security ability in the region. we believe it will have a hopeful effect and continue to foster this rebalance. make our lines stronger. what makes this alliance with japan stronger by design and by default helps make the asian --ific rebalance more >> they have already expressed concerns about what this could mean. >> there is a lot of work left to do. i will not characterize the policy that has been announced by the japanese government. for them to explain in further detail to their neighbors. will be here next week to visit with

secretary hagel. i have no doubt that this will be a prime topic of discussion with these meetings. >> you said we believe in the numbers that have been offered. one --e only opened up the number of people you have on the ground, is that enough for the second one operation center? -- joint operation center? >> that is still ongoing. i suspect there will be additional personnel that will flow into help manage that joint operation center. i believe there will be additional u.s. personnel to flesh out advisory teams. withame back recommendations about how to set up further advisory teams. are more increases coming here. >> it looks like we have 770

authorized. into --t 100 factor factor into these slides. i was trying to keep them out of it. they work at the embassy. >> the 120 you have left there, that would be for the second joc? guest: inside would be the manning for the second joint operation center. we believe that the numbers we have been authorized for the missions we've been assigned is adequate to the task trade >. >> the drones flying out of the baghdad airport -- the people manning them are on the ground, correct? from -- can you explain for people at home who don't understand the need to have people on the ground in iraq flying drones?

systems areanned in duration and mission and capability. long-ranget the same or multimission is that of the uavs are capable of. this is what was determined to be the best use to accomplish that mission. it does require operators that are there with those aircraft. i will not get into the exact type. they are not those two airframes. i'm wondering if you could be more specific about what kind of support you expect from japan. >> separate and distinct from this announcement?

it's one of the strongest alliances we have in the world. we value the partnership and the friendship deeply. the relationship they get stronger every year. pacificthe exercise going on right now. japan is a big contributor. there is a lot of work left to do on this. that is for the japanese government to speak to. not me. we certainly see it as an encouraging sign for the alliance going forward. veryink we have e expectation that our alliance will remain just as strong, if not stronger. -- whatllow up on that of [indiscernible] i can't detail operations

that have not been landor done .et -- planned or done yet on we think this is strong for the alliance. deepenwill do is help our partnership. that is what we look forward to going forward. specifics for you yet because it would not be appropriate for me to do that. >> the japanese government -- the laid out options japanese chief -- >> i won't get into those details. that is for the japanese government to speak to. across the full range of military operations that we conduct with japan, you will see that alliance and that partnership getting stronger.

reaction toe your isil's name change? and their inability to move forward -- did that impact the west military operation -- u.s. military operation? >> i foresee no impact to that mission as a result of the political process. change, thatname is what they call themselves. that's up to them. declaredand they have -- it does not make it so. >> if you could react to the iraqi ambassador's remarks today russian airplanes flying

-- he said the current delivery process does not meet their immediate threat. process is the same delivery process we have been on. bey were never expected to in iraq and tell the fall. -- until the fall. there has been no delay. no halt to the process. it is still moving forward. potentialffected delivery is the situation on the ground. contractorsve some out. contractors that were there to help prepare her the arrival of those aircraft. they are no longer working there. that could have an impact on eventual delivery. it is swift were late or that we have not met our response abilities in that regard is just false. awfully.s. has an complicated process here.

it is hurting iraq at this point. is a complicated process. by design. it should be. these are big decisions. it's a lot of taxpayer dollars and spent for good reason. are not small decisions and they need to be thought through carefully. >> can you get us up to speed on the current health deliveries -- you track a couple of numbers that were somewhat confusing. you are not clear. -- you were not clear. it. don't know if i've got

i will keep looking. it's fine. see if i've got it in here. i don't want to mess it up again. i will have to get back to you on the exact numbers. i don't want to wing it. there are hundreds of others i know that are being expedited to go to iraq. groundsituation on the -- you are estimate was that the iraqi government forces were stiffening the resistance and so on. what is the laydown now?

what does it look like right now? >> we continue to see isil adding pressure on baghdad from the north and west. it is difficult to tell what their intent is. they are a presence there. we believe they pose a threat to baghdad. are consolidating their defenses and positions and plans for baghdad. everything we see indicates that they will fight to defend baghdad. they are being aided by shia militia. the prime minister did push iraq you security forces up to the counteroffensive that is difficult to tell right now whether it will be

successful. they were able to take back some territory. ehere are other areas insid that central swath that are still contested, like the oil refinery. as i said to joe, it is contested. still he contested environment. -- still a contested environment. that there concern deployment of these advisers could be perceived on the ground as the west taking sides in the sectarian conflict -- as the west taking sides in the sectarian conflict? >> the only side we are taking is an anti-isil position.

in order to do that, we believe it is important to both assess the state of the iraqi security forces and moved when advisory advisory roleo an to assist those security forces as they take the fight to isi l. we encourage neighbors to be mindful to not do anything that would further inflame the sectarian tensions. that is why the approach that secretary hagel has ordered the department to take his premeasured and very calibrated -- is very measured and very calibrated to achieve those results. >> is there any possible iran?ration with the possibility to wal cooperate with iran. >> there are no plans right now

to collaborate or communicate our military activities between andunited states military the iranian military. no plans to coordinate at all. >> could you better describe what you have said was continued on north andsil west of baghdad? aren't they engaging or ey advancing and troops? iraq yoi >> they continue to put pressure to the north and to the west of baghdad. major advancesny or anything like that. it is difficult to tell what their intent this. clearly, they are posing a threat to baghdad. presence andr activity and the fact that they are trying to consolidate gains

they have made elsewhere in iraq. moveve not seen any overt to come in. the securityess forces. korea fired a missile towards south korean territory yesterday. onthey need to focus more feeding their people and less on provocative activities that do nothing to advance their security on the peninsula. up,y day when they wake they have opportunities to make good choices for the peninsula and for their people. everyday day, they seem to wake up and ignore those choices. we have said the same thing over and over again. y --ou have any

>> they find it unhelpful and provocative and it needs to stop. whether it's a response or reaction to an exercise we are conducting or some political not matter. does it's uniformly helpful -- uniformly unhelpful. >> was this deployment of 200 personnel and the other 100 over the last couple days due to a sense that there was an increasing threat to baghdad in the airport? this tonk i answered barbara. it's a fluid situation. it changes everyday. it's not like we haven't been watching what's been going on in it's not like we aren't being mindful and the security assistance mission.

of our response ability to protect u.s. interests, personnel and property. it was a combination of factors. it led to the decision to add the security personnel at the airport and the facilities we have nearby. can't point to one thing. it was a commendation of factors and it was a function of how closely we were watching this and how much changes over time. thank you, everybody. admiral kirby was asked a number of questions about iraq. the iraqi ambassador to the u.s. said delays in u.s. aid had forced iraq to seek out help elsewhere. he said airstrikes were a crucial step against the

insurgency. you can watch that any time on our website at www.c-span.org. a look at the technological advances in consumer drones and their applications. the discussion includes industry developers and innovators, including remarks by iiib robotics ceo chris anderson. here's a look. , three projects launched. follow me as one of these nice things where the drone follows you if you are biking or skiing or running or whatever. feet upe stays back 30 and the camera focuses on you s that perfect hollywood view. that is exactly what the youtube generation wants. it's incredibly complex artificial intelligence.

,sing gps and image recognition spotting you and creatively trying to figure out what the right angle is. this is the kind of science ago.on stuff from years this is the droid you're looking for. just this weekend, there were three projects that launched. when raised half $1 million in a day. raised $500,000 in a day. that was just today. to mark, this mapping function we are talking about -- this notion of construction. the number two industry in the world. agriculture is number one. $300 drone can be a mapper. it takes pictures that get sent to the cloud and creates this 3-d model.

he that 3-d model gets snapped off the cad model that the engineering companies already -- you are theet client and you want to know what's going on in the construction site. you can drive there or you can watch on the cloud, watch you building, building up perfectly aligned. that is a $300 contract. imagine what's going to happen in another five years. >> you can see all of that discussion coming up tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. over on c-span2, book tv in prime time. lynne cheney's book on james madison, thomas picked the

tty's capital and big tent. we sat down with hillary clinton in little rock. >> getting to the point where you can make peace is never easy ecause you make it with people who are your adversaries. people who have killed ones you care about. it's a psychological drama. you have to get into the heads of those on the other side. you have to change their calculation enough to get them to the table. i talk about what we did in iran. we had to put a lot of economic rusher to get them to the table. -- pressure to get them to the table. we did ine about what afghanistan and pakistan trying to get the taliban to the table for a comprehensive discussion with the government of

afghanistan. , what we have to understand is that it is primarily a political problem that has to be addressed. the ascension of the sunni extremists, the isis group is taking advantage of the breakdown in political dialogue and the total lack of trust between the maliki government and the kurdish leaders. on saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2's book tv. depending on your point of view, the devices you're looking at are either promising tools for quitting cigarettes or a new way to get children addicted to nicotine. , a blooming business, have caught the attention of federal regulators and congress in recent months.

tonight, we are going to bring you a look at the issue from both sides, from all sides with portions of two recent senate hearings on the issue. later on, we will be joined by michael of the associated press. he covers the tobacco industry for ap. linesl open up the file -- phone lines for your comments on how these e-cigarettes should be regulated. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. this is all ahead of an fda ruling on e-cigarettes. they are considering regulations and is currently accepting comments. that would provide for no sales to minors on e-cigarettes. and require warning labels on products and no free sample at events. it would call for the disclosure of any ingredients in the e-cigarettes.

any health claims made by wouldrette companies require hard, scientific evidence. the proposed fda regulations are now ahead ofperiod making a ruling on e-cigarettes. they do not put restrictions on liquid flavors. there are no restrictions on the advertising of these products. the last two issues were the focus of a recent senate hearing where the chairman of the committee sharply criticized to e-cigarette-- two makers. we will open up the phone lines for your comments and we will hear your comments on facebook and twitter as well. >> today, the committee is examining the marketing of e-cigarettes. edge on thisi'm on

whole subject. i'm on edge. the product whose popularity has recently been soaring, including among young people. we will hear from the tobacco companies -- they are marketing to adults, which i will find an amazing answer. e-cigarettes are battery-operated products that vaporize a liquid containing nicotine. we?ll remember that, don't andnow that cigarettes e-cigarettes are somewhat different. nicotine is nicotine. little kids are little kids. they are looking for things and they are looking for things which they get to see a lot of in advertising. one of the nice things you can

mimic the act of smoking. it is cool. kids are cool. these products are relatively -- and they are long-term their long-term health effects are unknown at this point. which raises the question, why are you going ahead and marketing these things and telling these things and putting them online when the results of the health studies are still out? why would you do that? you want to make money. that is your answer. you tell me you are just talking to adults, but you're not. you want to make money. you plunge in, get what you can and the studies come out and you will go ahead and do it. puts some nice rules and regulations on you. these products are relatively new and their long-term health effects are unknown. they do deliver the nicotine,

which is a highly addictive .ubstance it can affect brain development among young kids. some people claim that adultsettes can help quit smoking combustible cigarettes. others are concerned that they may reduce quitting by encouraging will use of -- dual use of e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes. we have not done enough research yet to resolve this question. that is not the focus of the steering. -- of this hearing. we are going to focus on how the marketing of e-cigarettes reaches america's youth and what consequences that may have. since generations of

cigarette users have become addicted to nicotine in their youth, there is a similar path to addiction. addiction under any form is a bad thing. we figured maybe 4000 kids in west virginia are affected by this badly. last thing anyone should want to do is to encourage young people to start using a new nicotine delivery product. the last thing. i'm not sure what the long-term health consequences is, but there is an opening in the market. let's get in and make as much as we can because there are no regulations. that's our fault. i apologize for that. if you put west virginia and south dakota together, you have approximately 72% of the united states territory.

[laughter] health experts are sounding several alarms on these virtually unregulated products. in addition to the nicotine causeion, e-cigarettes calls to poison control centers to be on the rise. childrenrly involving under the age of five? yes, five. more studies indicate that toxins other than nicotine may be found in e-cigarettes. we don't know that. we don't up the answer is yes, partially or not at all. we don't know, do we? so we hold off until we know. .nd then we go ahead

concerns andlth the lack of data substantiating health benefits, it is imperative to restrict youth exposure to e-cigarettes. simply stated, children and teens should not be guinea pigs as we await more conclusive research. i don't understand that. i do understand the corporate view on that. making money is a wonderful thing. making money with something like this when you don't know the results are but you do know that those results are with nicotine , it does not reflect well on corporate america. unfortunately, awareness and use of e-cigarettes by youth has been surging. 2011-2012, one year,

e-cigarette use among teens more than doubled. 800,000 kids have tried these products. a study found that an awareness of e-cigarettes among youth is virtually ubiquitous. i guess they have to see something like advertising. we will talk about that. the growth in use awareness has coincided with a flood of recent

e-cigarette marketing activity. a report published this month in the journal of pediatrics found youth exposure to e-cigarette advertising on television increased 256% in two years. go for that dollar. extraordinary. a legacy foundation pretty loudly and pretty clearly they are getting the message, so while a major companies reiterate they only target audiencend large youth still appears to be getting their message loudly and clearly come a and particularly when in tv and the message magazines and social media and events which just really come down hard towards kids.

good morning. x good morning. >> you can wish me happy birthday. birthday. >> so to look more closely at this issues, i joined a group of representatives and senators, including senator durbin and waxman, senator harkin, like senator boxer, senator blumenthal, senator mark the, and a recent investigation asking manufacturers about their marketing practices. the results of this inquiry were troubling. we issued thist april concluded that e-cigarette manufacturers are aggressively promoting their products using techniques and venues that appeal to use. i understand whatever young probably goingre to find adults, so if you target

adults, you will have to overlook the fact that a lot of adults would know what you are targeting. but we will see. practices of surveyed companies include sponsorship of youth sporting and cultural events, handing out free product samples, and that is really nice. free product samples. i mean, that is neutral. nothing aggressive about that. nothing about enticing the money flow pickup in that. using celebrity spokespeople, god rest their souls, airing television ads during programs that reach large youth audiences , using social media, without imposing age restrictions, and marketing e-cigarette's in flavors that could appeal to children.

i am an adult, so would i be at crushed, to gerry chocolate treat, peachy keen, vanilla dreams? no, i wouldn't. 60 years ago, i probably would have been. that is the way it worked. the dollars flow in. this review provided just a snapshot of activities of nine market leaders in this industry, but there are hundreds of companies that do this in the marketplace. beyond the flavors identified in the report, refillable nicotine liquid is found in flavors that include bazooka joe, no turn on no, no,gummy bears, that is not adult stuff. chocolate tootsie. that is not adult stuff. that is aimed at children. products like these sound more

like a candy shop display than a means for delivering nicotine vapor, and is not hard to see how they could appeal to kid. many of the practices of e-cigarette companies are using to pitch their products are prohibited for cigarette are getting under measures including the comprehensive 2009 family smoking prevention and tobacco control act, which passed as law, but these restrictions do not currently, i say, apply to loophole in the law. a chance to rake in cash, worry about the kids later. 4000 kids in west virginia? well, you know, is that important or not? to me, it kind of is. to the companies, they might not be looking at that. it's worth noting -- that the tobacco control law was enacted following years and years of litigation that uncovered

internal tobacco company documents showing that despite claims that they only promoted their products to belts, the industry had targeted young people as a critical market. you have. that is where the money is, that is where the biking is. that is where the cash in the 12, 8, 14, out you go. you want to be cool, you can haul one of these things and look like you are gloria swanson -- was that her name? in april, fda proposed rules to regulate e-cigarettes, but finally, these rules could take a long time, making them complete. meanwhile, the e-cigarette industry is booming, and tobacco companies with a history of marketing secrets to youth have

been joking -- jumping into the market. i do not know, the day per week, but a lot. as the e-cigarette industry continues to rapidly evolve, we need to hold companies something called accountable. accountable -- that's an american tradition. gm is finding out about that. toyota found out about that. accountable for promotional activities that encourage kids to start using e-cigarettes before we know what the health affects really are. don't wait for what you might be getting into, what harm you might be doing, but jump in now and maybe congress and fda will be, as they always are, slow. you are making a lot of money while we sort this out.

and those 4000 kids from west virginia, not maybe at the top of your list. and because e-cigarettes look so similar to cigarettes, we must also make sure that e-cigarette marketing doesn't undermine decades of work to deglamorize and de-normalize smoking for american youth, and there we are making tremendous, enormous progress. in any event, i look forward to talking about these issues with the major e-cigarette companies represented here today, and our panel's accomplished experts. and now, senator thune. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and allow me to add my birthday wishes. happy birthday to you. i'm sorry you're stuck spending it with us. >> no, i'm not. i'm not at all. >> mr. chairman, i want to thank

you for today's -- thank you for holding the hearing, and thank today's witnesses for appearing before the committee. according to world health organization, there are more than 1 billion smokers in the world. sadly, in one year alone, more than 5 million of those people will die prematurely due to tobacco use. in 1976, professor michael russell, a leading expert on cigarette addiction, wrote, and i quote, "people smoke for nicotine, but they die from the tar." the introduction of cigarettes with making presents challenges for the public-health community. it is a new opportunity for increased public health to the extent that these new products may help reduce the number of individuals who smoke combustible tobacco cigarettes. dr. david abrams and the american legacy foundation, a nonprofit organization, funded by payments from the master summit between state attorneys

general in 1998, has called the e-cigarette a potentially disruptive technology able to render combustion of technology obsolete. similarly mitch zeller, director of the food and drug administration's center for tobacco products recently said, and i quote, "we have to have an open on the potential for these technologies to benefit public health. in addition, a recent study by researchers at the university college london on the efforts of people to stop smoking found that e- cigarettes are 60% van nicotine replacement therapies. many e-cigarette companies argue that their product is still an emerging technology and warned that restrictions on e-cigarettes that do not follow to create products that inhibit smokers. at the same time, we need to be mindful that even if e-cigarettes are shown to be less harmful than combustible tobacco cigarettes, nicotine is addictive. and the long-term use of these products is unknown.

opponents of the product also believe that e-cigarettes are a gateway to combustible tobacco cigarettes, especially among minors. recent studies have shown with an increase in e-cigarette marketing, awareness of the growing, andis some advertisements are reaching these audiences. in addition, the campaign for tobacco-free kids, represented here today by mr. myers, has identified e-cigarette advertisements that employees similar werempaigns as those that companiesy tobacco decades ago. there's also been a recent rise in the number of calls to poison centers involving children related to e-cigarette and the accompanying solution, which often contains nicotine and other ingredients. the american academy of pediatrics, represented here today by dr. tanski, has raised concerns about the lack of child-resistant packaging on

these products. a number of questions are being asked about just how these products should be regulated, especially how they can and cannot be marketed. given that these are relatively new products and the extent to which they may provide benefits to public health, i believe sound science should drive a escutcheon of regulation. i also think we should all agree that children should not be able to purchase these products. my home state of south dakota has banned the sale or by thosecigarettes younger than 18 and several other states have done the same. while i am opposed to smoking in general, i look forward to learning more about the apparent potential of e-cigarettes to reduce harm to current smokers. as with most issues we face, i believe more investigation and thoughtful discussion is needed, ballin is herer.

to discuss this. i'd like to end with a quote by dr. thomas glynn, who is a director at the american cancer society, who sums up the current debate surrounding e-cigarettes. as with so many were filed products, their true nature lies in between with the pros and cons to recommend or discourage their use. hopefully we can shed some light on these pros and cons here today. so thank you again to our witnesses for appearing today, and i look forward to hearing your testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. >> let's start with dr. tanski. >> good afternoon, and may i add my birthday wishes, chairman. >> no, please don't. please don't. >> happy birthday. [laughter] >> i'm dr. susanne tanski, a practicing pediatrician and associate professor of pediatrics at the geisel school of medicine.

i'm a chair of a tobacco consortium, and i conduct research on tobacco and adolescents. chairman rockefeller, ranking member thune, members of the committee, it's my pleasure to be here today to talk about electronic cigarettes. peter traditions have numerous concerns about the known and unknown risks and impact of the cigarettes. we are concerned each cigarettes a e-cigarettes may lead to lifetime of tobacco use. the aggressive marketing of electronic cigarettes and its impact on youth is particularly worrisome. we believe the increase is linked to unfettered advertising. while there is much we don't yet know about these products, we know enough to say this -- we must act now to protect children against these risks. e-cigarettes, as mentioned, are devices that heat and vaporize a solution containing nicotine, flavoring and other chemicals. contrary to claims, these

products are not without significant risk. nicotine is not a nine assessment. it is a psychoactive drug with reverend edition. it can lead to headache or disney's and seizure or death. it can be absorbed through the skin and it comes with workplace safety warnings. due to its extreme toxicity, the estimated lethal dose of nicotine is somewhere between one and 13 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. toxic effects are seen it lower in children. e-liquid is a likely candidate for ingestion by young children because it's colorful, it often smells like candy, and it often sold without childproof packaging. at the highest concentration, a small bottle can contain over 500 milligrams of nicotine. that is enough to kill several toddlers. we find it completely

unacceptable that no federal law or regulations currently require the sale of e-liquid in childproof containers. we call on congress and the administration were help to act quickly to ensure that this needless danger is eliminated. the emissions from e-cigarettes are also not harmless water vapor. the ingredients in e-liquids can cause lung irritation in the short term, and no research has yet been established to show their long-term safety. vapor contains numerous known toxins and carcinogens, albeit at levels lower than those found in its regular cigarettes. particular its admitted are similar to combustible cigarettes. flavored e-cigarettes are particularly concerning because of the well-known appeal of flavored tobacco products to youth. this is well understood by manufacturers. a website notes that kids may be vulnerable to try a cigarette due to an abundance of fun this same company

e-cigarettes in these flavors. other e-liquid flavors, as mentioned, include cotton candy, gummy bear, captain crunch, atomic fireball -- clearly enticing children. young children being enticed to experiment with nicotine is concerning because the adolescent brain appears uniquely susceptible to nicotine addiction. if each cigarettes cause addition, there is a risk that these users will progress to combustible tobacco products. anecdotal reports and limited data suggest that e-cigarettes may help many smokers or some smokers to reduce or quit smoking. further research is necessary. research also needs to identify whether these are used if it delays or inhibiting smoking sensations. e-cigarettes have yet another cause for concern, the renormalization of smoking. we know that children do what they see. it is important we allow -- we

do not allow this use to normalize smoking. given all these concerns, it's alarming to us that e-cigarette among young people is growing dramatically. marketing plays a large role. there is evidence that tobacco market in reaches adolescence. e-cigarettes are being advertised by big tobacco companies, celebrity endorsements, and a vent sponsorship. these practices must stop. america's pediatricians believe that strong regulation of e- cigarettes are absolutely essential to protect children from the risk of these products. we support the fda regulatory authority to reject the public health. it would be a tragedy if we failed to regulate these products only later to find out we caused serious harm.

they-duty first to protect children. thank you very much for the opportunity to speak here today. >> thank you very much, dr. tanski. and now mr. matthew myers. >> i'm matthew myers, the president of the campaign -- i'm matthew myers, president of the campaign for tobacco-free kids. mr. chairman, minority member, members of the committee, i want to thank you for the opportunity. we worked with many of you for over a decade to help pass the law giving us -- the food and drug administration authority over cigarette tobacco and other tobacco products to address many of the concerns that you raised today. over the last several years we have seen a dramatic growth in the marketing and sale of e-cigarettes. in the use ofse e-cigarettes, as you correctly noted, little is proven.

either about their health effects or their population impact. our core position is that responsibly marketed and properly regulated, e-cigarettes could benefit the public health if in fact they help people switch. e-cigarette pose a potential health risk to the public if they are not used by smokers or who stopacco users smoking altogether, if they cause children to start or read glamour at smoking in the eyes of our nation's children, or if they discourage smokers from quitting by providing doses of nicotine to sustain addiction rather than help people quit. today, as you correctly noted, as a result of the failure of the government to act swiftly and the most irresponsible action by the manufacturers

and marketers of e-cigarette companies, the marketplace for e-cigarettes is turning into a wild west. the rapidly growing and today completely unregulated e-cigarette marketplace has not only outpaced the science, the behavior of the industry itself raises serious concerns about the ultimate effect of e-cigarettes on the public health. how e-cigarettes are made can also impact whether they are effective at helping people quit smoking cigarettes or whether they lead to sustained use or introduce a new generation to smoking. unfortunately, it appears it could -- a substantial segment of the industry is neither designing their products nor marketing with an eye towards reducing the number of people who smoke cigarettes. let me address the issue of marketing, because it is the one this hearing is about. the marketing practices, themes and images of e-cigarette manufacturers today, mr. chairman, exactly as you noted, are virtually the same as those

used by the cigarette manufacturers to successfully attract kids to smoking cigarettes for 50 years. it is a apple we have been fighting in are slowly but significantly winning. yet for e-cigarettes today, what do we see? we see celebrity spokespeople with themes like freedom and imagery like this. we see the use of sex as we saw with the cigarette companies with themes and images like this. we seek basement in sports illustrated, with placement of the brand name on the bikini bottom of this giddily clad the magazineably that is read by more adolescent boys than any other single magazine in the united states. if seeing a return to sponsorship of sporting events,

rock concerts, attended by youth all over the country. now, when cigarette companies used these exact same images in these exact same places in the exact same way, the impact was tragic and we're still paying for it. it was a dramatic rise in flood in youth tobacco use. mr. chairman, as you noted in, the day we are seeing a decline in cigarette smoking, but we are also seeing a rapid rise in youth use and experimentation of the e-cigarettes. no one should be surprised. while it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at these ads and figure out who they're targeted to, we in fact have a whole body of science done by the national cancer institute, the institute of medicine, the surgeon general, at that plethora of others who have looked at these techniques in

marketing and have determined they are directly and causally related to the increase in use of cigarette smoking among kids. logic, it defies science to say that the same techniques, the same ads will not have the same effect on our nation plus youth with regard to eat cigarettes. -- two e-cigarettes. now, you're going to hear i'm sure that the e- cigarette manufacturers say we don't target kids. well, in fact that's exactly what the cigarette companies have been saying for 50 years. to this day they have never admitted running a single ad targeted kid. the third prong of those eight ceo's who stood up there after they said that they didn't believe that smoking caused diseases or addiction was we do not market to children. quote from a decision the was eight years after companies promised to start --

stop marketing to gay. this is the same company that markets blu cigarettes. and as you've correctly said, and i won't repeat, it isn't a surprise that we're just seeing the dramatic rise in youth because in the last two to three years we have seen a fundamental change in e-cigarette change marketing and in the amount of e-cigarette marketing. what we are seeing is the start of a potential tsunami. because, not that e-cigarettes are good or bad, because of the behavior of the e-cigarette manufacturers and marketers. that is what is causing the rise here, and it is not germanic that we see the rise take off in unprecedented levels unless something is done to stop the

kind of marketing that i've shown you. now, the same is exactly true with flavorings. and they're asking us as well to turn the world upside down. the exact same flavors that you quoted that dr. tanski quoted, that prompted congress to ban flavors in cigarettes, are now being found in e-cigarettes. we are hearing the same thing from then. these are not about targeting kids, they say. this is the bottom of an illiquid, cinnamon bun flavor. your fingers would stink if you touched it, and i would caution you not to open it, because of it touches your skin it is toxic. this is being sold over the internet with virtually no controls so that it is easily available. cherry crush. is a surprise that it is showing an increase of these berry

--vors question mark flavors? dr. tanski cited a tobacco company's own website. but i could cite you a string of quotes of internal tobacco industry documents and quotes that says that these flavors appeal primarily to young people. whether or not they may or may not help somebody quit smoking, we do not know. but what we do know is that the appeal dramatically to young getse and unless somebody a handle on the marketing of these flavors, and a new daddy out just in the last week shows that the number of new flavors is literally exploding, and i can guarantee you, nobody is testing this flavors as they would have to if they were being regulated by fda to see whether those flavors enticed kids. in short, mr. chairman, this hearing comes at exactly the right time. it is an urgent need for our government to step in and protect our kids.

this is not a hearing about whether or not e-cigarettes potentially have beneficial effect. it is about the behavior of the e-cigarette companies and how they are marketing and manufacturing these products. unless the fda asks and ask rapidly, and unfortunately the proposed regulation does not even address the question of e-cigarette marketing or the flavors in e-cigarettes. so that our kids will continue to be a come as you correctly said, human guinea pigs for an industry that has demonstrated no responsibility in how it has marketed, where it is marketed, to whom it is targeting its products. we urge you to take strong action to ensure these issues are dressed. thank you. >> thank you, sir. and now, mr. jason healy is president of lorillard subsidiary, "blu ecigs," in quotes, the market leader for sales and marketing in

the e-cigarette industry. we welcome you. >> chairman rockefeller, ranking member thune and members of the committee, i am jason healy, the founder and president of blu ecigs. it is a privilege to come here today to speak about a new product that has tremendous potential to reduce tobacco-related harm and disease and hopefully play a role in the eliminating of traditional cigarettes. back in 2008, i tried my first electronic cigarette. as a smoker, i saw tremendous opportunity for myself and other smokers. i immediately saw that this product could provide an alternative to smokers who enjoy smoking or who struggled to quit like myself. but do not want the negative effects of traditional cigarettes on their health. i became convinced that e-cigs are just as much a disruptive force in tobacco as digital cameras once were to the film industry. today, every time i use and e-cigarette instead of a

combustible cigarette, it is a good decision. i am not alone in seeing the potential. public health experts have long considered harm reduction an effective approach to the reduction of risk caused by various behaviors. desperately need an alternative policy that complements prevention and cessation. different types of nicotine use occupy different points along what fda calls a continuum of risk. some activities carry less risk than others. lacking combustion, e-cigarette fall lower on the continuum compared to traditional cigarettes. that is only logical because traditional cigarettes are very different. as one example of their significant difference, a recent study by our research has found that harmful constituents present in cigarette smoke were nondetectable levels in the

paper of e-cigarettes, and similar found in room air. i have included a summary of this analysis in my submission. >> sir, could you just say that last sentence once again, please? >> our finding -- sorry -- to the harmful constituents? >> yes. >> our study by our researchers found that harmful constituents present in cigarette smoke were at non-detectable levels in the vapor of blu e-cigs and similar to that found in room air. >> thank you. >> we support science-based fda regulation of e-cigs, and we are committed to working with the fda manufacturing standards to ensure safety, age of purchase to ensure this is an adult-only product, content and nicotine labeling to ensure the consumer is informed are supported by responsible manufacturers. we are encouraged that fda's preamble to the proposed regulation seems to acknowledge that regulations should be proportional to harm, and a

one-size-fits-all is not appropriate. we have to have an open mind on the potential for these emerging technologies to benefit public health. blu, however, has not waited for fda's action to address youth access. we have actively advocated for and supported state legislation to prevent minors from purchasing electronic cigarettes, and we require third-party age verification for online sales. blu began as a small entrepreneurial company, marketing a product in an emerging market with the challenge of introducing a product that did not effectively exist in the u.s.. with the help of our parent company, we adopted strict responsible restrictions that reflect a clear and focused -- a clear focus on adult smokers. our voluntary restrictions, such as limiting ad placement to media and events where the target audience is at least 85 percent adult, match or

exceed restrictions adopted by comparable adult consumer product committees. we believe these marketing restrictions demonstrate responsibility. to reiterate, our marketing focus is to communicate to adult smokers that e-cigs are a viable alternative to cigarettes. we previously provided you with an explanation of the voluntary marketing restrictions that we have adopted. we have included this explanation in our submission and i will provide it to the committee. e-cigs have a tremendous untapped potential to positively change the lives of adult smokers of traditional cigarettes. reaching this ambitious goal requires a new way of thinking and involves compelling marketing to normalize this behavior, and as result, the normalize smoking. so adult smokers know what is an ample -- what is a viable alternative. further, we believe that using a variety of flavors is critical to keeping adult smokers who have switched to e-cigs from returning to more harmful

combustible cigarette. e-cigarettes are likely the most significant product ever, and hb eight top priority. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. healy. and now mr. craig weiss, who is the president and ceo of njoy electronic cigarettes, the second-largest presence in the e-cigarette market. >> members of the committee and mr. chairman, thank you very much. my name is craig weiss, and i'm the president and ceo of njoy. njoy is an independent electronic cigarette company with no affiliation to the tobacco industry. we are proud to state that our corporate mission is is too obsolete the tobacco cigarette and the death and disease that it has left in its wake. i would like to focus on what i believe unites us and our company with the members of this committee, with the fda center for tobacco products, and

with dedicated women and men in public health. we look forward to a day when combustion cigarettes are no longer part of the american landscape. we are appalled at the toll the tobacco epidemic has taken and continues to take each year in this country, including 480,000 adults americans who die prematurely each year from tobacco-related illness. the evidence clearly indicates that new approaches will be required to obsolete the combustion cigarette. electronic nicotine delivery systems hold the potential to play a critical role. they give smokers who cannot or will not put a positive alternative and provide smokers with the nicotine they are addicted to and craig without combustion of tobacco. and as stated by the 2014 surgeon general's report, quote, "the burden of death and disease from tobacco use in the united states is overwhelmingly caused by cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products, rapid elimination of their youth

will genetically reduce this burden. we understand the grave suspicion caused by the 2012 entry to the marketplace of the first of the three major american cigarette companies. while major tobacco companies have now entered the category as cigarette sales fall, they would not create this industry, and most companies do not sell combustion products. njoy, which was established more than five years before the first major american tobacco company purchased an electronic cigarette company, is independent of the tobacco industry and has absolutely no incentive to promote, combustible cigarette use. from a survey that experimentation of e-cigarettes by youth has risen should be taken seriously. early fears that electronic cigarettes would entice young people to initiate these products and migrate to combustion products appear to be unsupported by the data at this point.

to be clear, no minor should be using a nicotine-containing product of any kind. the maximum public-health benefit will be achieved by itigating risks two youth without constraining the ability for e-cigarettes to effectively pete with combustion cigarettes among adult smokers. bans on sales to minors, which we were among the first to support, are essential. we have long supported fda regulation of this category, and the fda's issuance of proposed regulation is a critical milestone. cigarette-style advertising restrictions were not part of the fda's proposed regulations. subjecting electronic cigarettes to combustion cigarette-style advertising restrictions could only erect unnecessary barriers to effective promotion of these products to adult smokers. smokers are not going to purchase a smoking alternative that they are not aware of. it is important to realize that in the event thats face the same advertising restrictions of combustion cigarettes, the big

winner will be big tobacco who gets to maintain their stranglehold on americans who smoke. still, even responsible television and other advertising should be delivered in a manner that is consistent with the assertion that it is intended smokers, rather than for kids. friendsvision campaign do not let friends smoke is a clear list ration of this principle, and we need more of this advertising. analyzing information collected for its may 2014 report on e- cigarette advertising that chairman rockefeller referenced in his opening remarks, the american legacy foundation noted ofs suggests the marketing njoy is marketing mainly toward adults. the best thing we can do for the

health of all of our children is to ensure that they grew up in a world in which neither their parents nor any of their adult role models are smoking cigarettes. providing smokers who cannot or will not quit with a positive alternative may be the long-sought solution to a massive public-health problem that has... cost millions of lives, and members are making their voices heard in support of this technology. we need to approach relation in a manner that is guided by science. there's too much at stake to do it any other way. njoy looks forward to working with the committee to achieve the goal of obsoleting combustion cigarettes. thank you. >> thank you, mr. weiss. and finally, mr. scott ballin. did i get that right? >> ballin. >> i apologize. >> close enough. >> i was betting on ballin. >> and happy birthday, sir. >> mr. scott ballin is a tobacco and health policy consultant. >> yes. mr. chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the

opportunity to be here. i've spent much of my professional career dedicated to working in the public health arena and in particular tobacco and nicotine area. i worked with the heart association for many years, the coalition on smoking and health. i have been around a long time. i also feel the age. i come here today to give you my thoughts on issues being raised in this hearing as well as on related issues and some of those have come up here on what is a very dynamic, emotionally charged, and rapidly changing environment. this includes the broad topic of how all tobacco, nicotine, and other products, should be regulated, including their advertising and marketing. i and many others including the director of the fda center for leave we are in a new era, and evolutionary next stage, looking to develop a more collaborative, rational, and

workable approach to regulation of all tobacco and nicotine products. this next stage could potentially be as significant as our acquiring of fda oversight over tobacco just a few years ago. it entails how best to regulate a growing spectrum of e-cigarettes,ding that holds significant promise for phasing out or one day virtually eliminating the deadly combustible cigarette, but it has got to be done right. it entails accepting and using what is commonly referred to as the continued risk today, which would readily products based on their risks, relative risks, and intended uses. on are the days we can say where all tobacco products were equally harmful. fda oversight has changed the equation. science and technology and innovation have changed the equation. new entrants into the marketplace have changed the equation and consumers have changed the equation. while there are many issues and sub-issues needing to be addressed in this new era, two general areas of focus come

to mind when reducing the harm's caused by the use of tobacco. first, we need to ensure that no one, no one under the age of 18 should be able to purchase any tobacco or nicotine product and that we do everything feasible to prevent the initiation, possession, and use of any tobacco and nicotine product by anyone under the age of 18. this includes advertising and orketing, that intentionally unintentionally appeals to children or adolescents and includes a discussion about what researchers should be placed on flavorings. it is generally agreed if we can prevent youth initiation we are a long way towards advancing our public-health objectives. second, we need to ensure that the approximately 40 million smokers in this country are provided with consumer acceptable regulated alternatives to the deadly toxic cigarette. that is what is killing people in this country.

professor mike russell said many years ago people spoke for the nicotine and a guy from the tar, which in many respects is what this section is all about today. to do this effectively, we need regulation, so recognize that there are distinct differences in these products. one size does not fit all. we should also be encouraging better and more focused research in both the public and private sectors, encouraging incentives providing to develop science-based lower-risk products, and encouraging competition, rather than stifling it. in this rapidly changing environment, it is going to be essential we approach the discussions of these issues in a more civil manner. that is actually happening at this date today, and i appreciate your leadership. there are numerous stakeholders involved who have seemingly differing views. i believe there's a lot more in common ground than people think. the institute for environmental negotiation at the university of

virginia has been in the forefront and holding a series of eight tobacco dialogs where individuals can discuss issues in a non-adversarial manners. first dialogs involved the public health community and tobacco growers that led to policy changes in this body and the house that led to the enactment of the tobacco control act and the tobacco buyout. that was monumental and many people said it could not be done. the last three years have been focused on harm reduction issues and resulted in a set of core principles that were developed. additional safe haven dialogs are being planned and we are going to try to expand those escutcheons to include a broader number of people. the ftd's riposte regulations has -- where stakeholders can make their views heard. while some this agreement up specifics of the proposal, i believe that fda's also looking for new ideas and approaches. the door is opened, and i think

the fact they have not covered issues related to marketing and advertising e-cigarettes allows that discussion to start taking place in the agency as well. mr. chairman and members of this committee, there is a balance that needs to be achieved which in my view can be a win-win for public health. we can deal with the issue of youth initiation of tobacco products, and including the impact of advertising and marketing as well as helping millions of etiquette adult smokers. while we are making progress, it is not enough, which has been stated in this hearing well -- with in this hearing as well. i agree with the idea that we need to think outside the backs. -- the box. within the next 10 years, i would like to see the number of children and youth initiating and using cigarettes cut by 75 percent, the numbers of adult smokers cut in half.

major shift away from the manufacturing of deadly toxic ,igarettes, to development manufacturing, and use of significantly lower-risk science-based related products. i believe that given the proper for -- proper tools of the fda coupled with incentives, innovation, research, competition, and cooperation for among the various stakeholders, we can do that and save a lot of lives in the process. thank you. >> thank you, mr. ballin. i almost don't know where to begin. mr. weiss, so i guess what you were saying is that you sort of had a corporate board meeting , and you made -- you decided that the corporate purpose of be to reducewould cigarette smoking among adults, and, therefore, you went to

e-cigarettes as a way of so doing. >> yes, corporate mission is to obsolete the combustion cigarette. >> so that would then lead necessarily to the conclusion that you don't do any advertising in some of these magazines and tv, which have been discussed. you do not advertise in areas that appeal to youth these e-cigarettes because you would not need to do that because you have a different mission. it is the adult you're working on. you're not working on kids. >> that's correct. we're only interested in adult smokers and our advertising -- >> so you don't do any advertising? >> we do advertising that's targeted towards adult smokers. >> and is that advertising that's aimed at adult smokers the kind that was discussed by mr. myers? >> he didn't hold up any of njoy's ads and, as i mentioned, the american legacy foundation -- >> well, come on. you understand what i'm saying. in other words, appealing to young people. >> i don't believe that our ads appeal to young people.

>> boy, life is easy, isn't it, when you can just answer like that. all right, let's -- you're on the record there. this is to all the witnesses but not everybody has to answer. i am worried about e-cigarette working reaching youth that appears to be the case. have figured out a way to be just trying to effect -- affect adults but get 9.5 million people who read advertisements, 14 million people who see advertisements , that willarettes make an interesting discussion. but limiting cigarette marketing to youth has been central to the multi-decade effort to prevent young people from becoming addicted to smoking and it is well-established that

nicotine is the addictive ingredient in cigarettes. that amid au agree sustained and prolonged smoking prevention and tobacco control effort, there has been an encouraging decline in youth rates of cigarette smoking in this country? >> you're absolutely correct. there has been a wonderful decline in the rates of smoking. the data that just came out last week showed a low of 15.9 prevalence among high school youth. there have been great strides in reducing cigarette smoking among our youth. >> ok. i got the drift. now, e-cigarette manufacturers say that their target audience is just adult smokers and that the other -- of the youth don't figure in. oxleys really -- senator

-- senator boxer, this gets me to the integrity of corporate culture and what people will do when they are given the chance to make money. i am sorry, that is so deeply embedded in me, that is why i started out by saying i am on edge emotionally on this whole hearing. but by blanketing a wide variety of media with advertisements, aren't these companies also creating the risk of introducing a whole new generation of... young people, starting zero through five, to the highly active substance called nicotine? >> yes, sir, that's exactly our fear. there is a whole generation of young people who have grown up since the master settlement agreement and other restrictions who have never seen

a tv ad glamorizing cigarettes, who have never seen the kind of advertising i showed you come and i could have shown you dozens more of those ads as well. and we are deeplywho have neverf advertising i showed concerned t while e-cigarette companies should be free to inform adult consumers, there are ways to do it that do not require them to put ads on the bikini autumns of women in sports illustrated, sponsor rock concerts. ofould show you youtube's central and provocative images. >> i get your drift. i get your drift. now, the argument has been made that nicotine is what people get addicted to but tar is what kills them. i am sort of stunned by that, the one and the other

are the same. in other words, you have to prove that nicotine is sort of good for your health for young person. how would they possibly say that getting adjectives on nicotine, but not being tar present? >> you know, i think there's two points. nicotine is dangerous to young people specifically while their brains are being formed. >> right. >> so there is no such thing as the safe delivery of nicotine, particularly in the uncontrolled levels and in these kinds of things that we've seen for a young person. through fda regulation we have shown it is possible to deliver careful deliveries of nicotine to adults through time, and what is going on in the current marketplace for e-cigarettes, however, is that nicotine is being delivered in uncontrolled levels with uncontrolled flavors and no quality intro.

to say that does not pose a potential risk is a misstatement. the most recent surgeon general post -- general report focused on the toxicity of nicotine. it is a 100% true statement that nicotine is not what causes cancer, but nicotine is not a benign substance. it hasy -- that is what always been regulated by fda and why it needs to be regulated by fda in e-cigarettes to protect the public as well. >> thank you. my time is up, but with the indulgence of my distinguished ranking member, i just want to give mr. healy a chance to respond to what i'm positing. >> thank you, mr. chairman. firstly, for myself, i being a father besides a businessman, do not want my product in the hands of children. and it's something i think we take very seriously, but at the same time we try not

to lose sight of the big picture of the 41 million smokers like myself. , whetherook and watch it be our voluntary advertising restrictions that were put in place that we oxley -- that we actually got out of the tobacco ads, and we put his policies on ourselves, and we also looked at who is buying, and when we look blu, the buying average age is 51 years old. so we watch both ends of the equation, where we're showing it but also what the results of what we're doing are, because we have to be responsible for the results. >> as i said, my time is out, and i apologize to my ranking member, senator thune. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. myers, assuming we all agree that children should not be able to purchase these products, what's your view on whether e-cigarette have the potential to reduce harm if current adult smokers of combustible tobacco

secret switch to them? >> as i said, if properly regulated in terms of quantity of nicotine, how it's delivered, the manner it is delivered and it's targeted to a current smoker who could not otherwise quit, with levels significantly so they switch to e-cigarettes, there is no doubt there would be a reduction in harm. >> what's the -- what's your sort of general view with regard to the science around e-cigarettes? do you view it as settled? >> no, the science is not settled, and the science couldn't be settled because the product itself is changing. unfortunately we haven't had the kind of rigorous science for this that we have required for any product under the regulation of the fda. our organization and all the public health groups would welcome rigorous science so that if e-cigarettes the potential to

help millions of smokers quit, we do the kind of science so we are sure that the product we are selling to them what actually congress that goal. in the absence of regulation, what we've seen is product with nicotine levels of enormously different levels, high enough to be of concern and in some cases so low that the fear is it just makes it too easy for kids to start because the getting is harsh and the last thing we want to have is a perfect product for kids to start as well as advertising. so it is science that should drive it, the precautionary principle of protecting our kids, in how we go about developing that science. >> thank you. mr. ballin, there's been a lot of discussion about the benefits and harm of e-cigarettes, as you know. in your testimony, you agree with mitch zeller, the director you -- the director of fda tobacco products, said there is a continuing risk for the nicotine products. can you elaborate on how we can

find the appropriate balance for e-cigarette and what some of the key players can do to further that dialogue and scientific research? >> yeah. i think that, you know, what i'm hearing around this table is a -- is actually a common direction on what needs to be done. there needs to be more research. it needs to be done by fda internally and nih and other places, coupled with the universities and other academics, and also industry has a responsibility. there was a statement made by someone earlier there has to be accountability of this industry. as the agency begins to regulate these products and anybody wants to file an application with the agency, they will have to have the proof to back up whatever they are asking for the agency to reprove a product or allawi claim on anything else. we need to head that -- in that direction very quickly. i agree with a lot of what's been said at this table. the other thing is i think we need an aggressive monitoring surveillance system. we've talked about that many, many years over the years, you

know, in the public health community, and i think that in order to find what is going on in the marketplace, we need to be able to tap into the industry if it is proprietary information, fda needs to do a better job to coordinate effort so we can take the necessary steps to take action. there is a lot of things that need to be done. there's no question about it. but i think that collectively and responsibly if it's done properly we are going to be able to deal with some of the issues that we have talked about today. throwing grenades at each other and i do not think will be productive, and that is what over the use i have concluded sit down inople can a room without negotiating anything and have a civil conversation, off the record conversation, progress can be made. it may notbilly --

be, but it will not until you start talking. and i will say that again, for me, this hearing is beginning that process up here, and i appreciate it. >> let me ask you, what concerns do you have about advertising to children? and how has the emergence of the tobacco companies in the e-cigarette field... changed the changed the market or the perceptions of the advertising? >> some of the things that i have seen bother me as a hotel person. i do not think banning advertising is the route to go because at the same time we need to be providing truthful and accurate aberration to the 40 million smokers about these products and how they can be used. that is where we need to go. monitor this,d to which is what i said earlier. there are things that give me heartburn about