November 2005
Evelyn Pringle
or those with short memories, during campaign 2000, the Bush-Cheney team promised voters an energy plan that would lower gasoline prices and here we are 5 years later, paying the highest prices at the pumps in the nation's history.
With soaring energy prices putting our economy at risk, and dependence on oil from the Middle East putting our national security at risk, Americans are still being held hostage to price fixing schemes and Bush has not made a single move to remedy the situation.
In campaign 2000, he lead voters to believe that he knew how to deal with OPEC. In fact, the little twirp told President Clinton to get on the phone and "jawbone" OPEC.
"What I think the president ought to do is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots," he told reporters.
"OPEC has gotten its supply act together, and it's driving the price, like it did in the past," Bush said. "And the president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the prices," he advised.
Bush ended that little speech with this brilliant remark: "One reason why the price is so high is because the price of crude oil has been driven up." Duh-----really?
I guess phone service at the White House must have been cut off once Bush took office because on February 10, 2004, when OPEC announced its intention to cut its output by 1 million barrels a day, and crude oil reached a 13-year high in mid-March 2004, there was no "jawboning" on phone to OPEC by the blabber-mouth president.
By the end of 2004, higher oil prices had cost consumers over $25 billion since Bush took office. The big three American oil companies, ChevronTexaco, ExxonMobile, and ConocoPhillips, realized profits of $33.6 billion during Bush's first three years in office.
According the Wall Street Journal and CNN Money, during the first few months of 2004, top oil companies saw a gain in profits of close to 40%. And its been all downhill for Big Oil this year.
On October 27, 2005, Reuter's reported that Exxon Mobil posted a quarterly profit of $9.9 billion, "the largest in U.S. corporate history, as it raked in a bonanza from soaring oil and gas prices." Exxon's record earnings topped the $9 billion net profit previously reported by Royal Dutch Shell PLC, Reuters said.
Exxon reported third-quarter net income up 75 percent from the year-ago period. "It was among the biggest quarterly profits of any company in history, and amounted to a per-minute profit of $74,879.23 during the quarter," according to the October 28, 2005 Wall Street Journal.
"Shell, the third largest oil company by market value behind Exxon and Britain's BP PLC, said its third-quarter net income rose 68 percent to $9.03 billion, on $76.44 billion in revenue," the Journal reported.
These record profits are scandalous at a time when Americans are being squeezed dry at the pumps and heating costs are set to go through the roof in the coming winter months.
According to the Federal Energy Information Administration, the price of a gallon of regular gas in the same week the profits were announced, was up 28% from a year ago. Natural-gas prices have almost doubled in the past year and the EIA predicts that owners of gas-heated homes will see a 48% hike this winter over last year's already inflated prices, and homes heated with heating oil could see a 32% increase.
While Big Oil keeps raking in the dough, rising fuel costs are taking a heavy toll on other US industries. The added expense is creating havoc for the airline industry. For every 1 cent increase for jet fuel, the industry spends an additional $180 million a year. In 2004, increased costs for the airline industry were estimated to be more than $7 billion.
According to the American Trucking Association, truckers use about 30 billion gallons of diesel a year and for every 1 cent hike in price the industry incurs about $300 million more in operating costs. The increased cost to the trucking industry was over $6 billion in 2004.
Farmers are battling with much higher operating expenses since Bush took office. In 2004, farmers combined spent an additional $7 billion for gasoline and diesel fuel for agricultural needs.
During the dynamic duo's reelection campaign, Bush-Cheney spokesman, Scott Stanzel, told reporters: "President Bush and Vice President Cheney want to keep taxes low and keep the economy moving. They have proposed an energy plan that will provide for a stable, affordable and secure energy supply."
To that I say, then where the hell is it?
By now, the administrations policies and tax cuts are having trickle down adverse effects on the average family's everyday life as well. During their 2004 campaign, a Bush-Cheney campaign slogan was "results do matter." Lets compare overall "results" on families since Bush moved to Washington.
When Clinton left office, life was much better for the average American than when he took the reins from the first president Bush. The nation's record of economic success was unprecedented. Budgets were balanced, family income was up by 17%, 23 million jobs were created, nearly 8 million Americans had moved out of poverty, there was record homeownership, and Clinton left a huge budget surplus.
In comparison, the Bush-Cheney record is atrocious. While it is certainly true that corporate profits are at an all-time high, average wages for American workers haven't even kept pace with inflation. Millions of jobs have been lost, there has been a continuous increase in poverty year after year, household debt is at a record high, college tuition will soon be unreachable for many families, over 3 million people have lost their health insurance, and family insurance premiums have increased by an average $2630 a year.
The $397 billion surplus, previously projected by the Congressional Budget Office for 2004, has been frittered away through $2 trillion worth of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and the war profiteering scheme that was launched 3 years ago could end up bankrupting the whole country before its all over.
In hindsight, I say give me a guy with an overactive libido who cares about average Americans any day, over our current president, who at best is completely incompetent, and at worst is a greedy, self-centered control freak who doesn't give a damn about anybody besides himself and his rich cronies.
Showing posts with label Counterpunch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Counterpunch. Show all posts
Sunday, August 1, 2010
What Qualifies Bush to Lead Iraq War?
May 29, 2007
he tax dollar funded photo op of Bush landing on an aircraft carrier all dressed up in a flightsuit to announce Mission Accomplished was a desperate attempt to give the illusion that Bush actually did serve his country in the military and to bolster his image as a self-described "war president."
This country is now paying a heavy price for Bush's lack of military experience, and his taunting invitation of "bring it on," that has resulted in a never ending stream of challengers traveling to Iraq to teach our loudmouth President a lesson.
When evaluating Bush's performance as the Commander-in-Chief leading the Iraq war, it might be helpful to take another look at his years of service in military, or lack thereof.
The story of the draft-dodger in the White House who keeps sending more troops off to die in Iraq began in 1968 while the Viet Nam war raging and his student deferment ended, meaning it would only be a matter of time before he would be drafted.
However, his father jumped in to save him from that certain fate by lining up a slot in the Texas Air National Guard to make sure that sonny boy remained far away from Nam.
Of course for his part, Bush, the honest guy that Americans have come to know, has always denied that he received any help. "There was no special treatment," he said when running for governor in 1993. "They were looking for pilots and I was honored to serve."
"I can just tell you," he mumbled to reporters during campaign 2000, "from my perspective, I never asked for, I don't believe I received special treatment."
To put the whole special treatment debate in perspective, it should be noted that at the time Bush was accepted in the Texas Air National Guard, there was a waiting list of roughly 500 men and it usually took about a year and a half to get to the top of the list.
When asked about the waiting list issue, Bush spokesman at the time, David Beckwith, claimed that Bush was more qualified. "A lot of people weren't qualified" he said, "so special commissions were offered to those willing to undergo the extra training required."
However, Charles Shoemake, chief of personnel at the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980, publicly denied that there was a shortage of pilots or qualified applicants. "We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified," he said.
Any claim that Bush was more qualified than 500 other men is laughable being he only scored 25% on the Pilot Aptitude Test, which happens to be the lowest score permitted for a wannabe pilot at the time.
The truth was finally revealed in 1999, when Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, said that he helped Bush get in the Guard at the request of Bush family friend, Sid Adger, according to an account of the events in a statement released after Barnes testified in a deposition for a federal lawsuit in September 1999.
Barnes also testified that he had met with a top Bush adviser to discuss the matter of rebutting rumors that Bush got special treatment, and to prove that the meeting took place, Barnes produced a note from Bush himself thanking him for his help in rebutting rumors that Bush's father had helped find a slot for his son in the Guard.
And true to form, with full knowledge that he wrote the note, on September 9, 2000, that pathological liar Bush still claimed, "No Bush ever asked Sid Adger to help."
Bush also claims that he got no special treatment when he received a direct appointment to Second Lt right out of basic training without having to go through officer candidate school which cleared the way for a slot in pilot training school. "Our information is there was absolutely no special deal," said Bush spokesman Beckwith.
However, in the September 1999 deposition Barnes testified that after receiving a request from Adger, he called Gen James Rose and recommended Bush for a pilot position.
When Bush joined the Guard his stated goal was "making flying a lifetime pursuit," and he signed a document that stated: "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation."
Based on that statement alone, Bush should have been shipped to Viet Nam in 1972 when he was permitted to move to Alabama to work on a political campaign and was ordered to attend drills at Dannelly Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama from May 1972 to November 1972, and went AWOL.
There is no record that Bush ever showed up. During the 2000 campaign, Bush claimed he attended drills at Dannelly and said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time."
"I made up some missed weekends," he said, "I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes.".
"I fulfilled my obligations," he stated.
His spokesman Dan Bartlett also vouched for the tall tale. "He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama," Bartlett said, "he did his drills."
Although there is no record of Bush being at Dannelly, there is plenty of evidence to prove that he was supposed to be. For instance, military records show a September 15, 1972, order stating: "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on "7-8 October, and 4-5 November."
In later interviews, Turnipseed and his administrative officer, Kenneth Lottsaid, said Bush never showed up. "Had he reported in I would have had some recall, and I do not," Turnipsee said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there, If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered," he stated.
When questioned by reporters about Tunispeed's interview, the truthful and honest coward now sitting in the White House, brushed him off by saying: "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
By far the most colorful comments about Bush being AWOL were quotes in the February 13, 2004 Memphis Flyer, from interviews with 2 former guardsmen, Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop, who were members of the Alabama unit when Bush claimed he was there.
These men did attend drills in the summer of 1972 and both said they were certain Bush was not there. "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas," Mintz said. "And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence."
"I was a young bachelor then," he recalled, "I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
Mintz said the squadron only had 25 or 30 pilots and told the Flyer, "There's no doubt I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever."
He said, at the time he assumed that Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. Previously a Republican, Mintz also discussed his reaction to outright dissembling by Bush. "You don't do that as an officer," he said, "you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen."
"This guy's got a lot of nerve," Mintz said.
Mintz told the Flyer that no members of the Alabama unit remembered Bush being there. "I talked to one of my buddies the other day" he said, "and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
That buddy was Paul Bishop, who at the time of the interview was a pilot for a charter airline that was flying war supplies into Iraq. He was also a veteran of the first Gulf War and voted for Bush in 2000. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," Bishop said.
He told the Flyer that he did not pay much attention to Bush's claims in the 2000 campaign, but he had since the Iraq war started. "It bothered me," he said, "that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time."
"He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject," he stated, "I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country."
This interview with the Flyer is 3 years old and back then Bishop was already saying that he disapproved of the way Bush was handling the war and believed the problem was due to Bush's lack of combat experience. "I think a commander-in-chief who sends his men off to war ought to be a veteran who has seen the sting of battle," he said.
"In Iraq we have a bunch of great soldiers," he stated, "but they are not policemen. ... right now it's costing us an American life a day. ... We've got an over-extended Guard and reserve."
It would be interesting to hear what Mr Bishop has to say about Bush these days.
In light of his obviously low IQ, it could honestly be said that Bush simply can not remember the name of every guardsman in Alabama, but according to a spokesman for the Alabama Guard, there were 600 to 700 members in that unit and Bush can not remember one name, and amazingly, not one Alabama guardsman has come forward to proudly announce that he served his country right along side the current President of the US.
In any event, first hand sitings would be impossible to find because Bush's own military records prove he was AWOL in Alabama and Texas. In the fall of 1972 after the election Bush reportedly did return to Texas but not to Ellington Air Force Base.
On May 2, 1973, his Superior Officers at Ellington, Jerry Killian and William Harris, stated they were unable to complete Bush's "yearly" evaluation because: "Lt Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report."
Which means a year after he trotted off to Alabama, and 7 months after he returned to Texas, Bush's commanding officers in Texas still thought he was in Alabama. The report said Bush "cleared this base on 15 May 1972, and has been performing equivalent training in a non-flying status with the 187 TAC RECON GP, Dannelly Ang Base, Alabama."
Americans should tell members of Congress to consider the military service record of the man deciding the fate of our young men and women in Iraq before granting his next request for funding to keep them there until hell freezes over apparently.
he tax dollar funded photo op of Bush landing on an aircraft carrier all dressed up in a flightsuit to announce Mission Accomplished was a desperate attempt to give the illusion that Bush actually did serve his country in the military and to bolster his image as a self-described "war president."
This country is now paying a heavy price for Bush's lack of military experience, and his taunting invitation of "bring it on," that has resulted in a never ending stream of challengers traveling to Iraq to teach our loudmouth President a lesson.
When evaluating Bush's performance as the Commander-in-Chief leading the Iraq war, it might be helpful to take another look at his years of service in military, or lack thereof.
The story of the draft-dodger in the White House who keeps sending more troops off to die in Iraq began in 1968 while the Viet Nam war raging and his student deferment ended, meaning it would only be a matter of time before he would be drafted.
However, his father jumped in to save him from that certain fate by lining up a slot in the Texas Air National Guard to make sure that sonny boy remained far away from Nam.
Of course for his part, Bush, the honest guy that Americans have come to know, has always denied that he received any help. "There was no special treatment," he said when running for governor in 1993. "They were looking for pilots and I was honored to serve."
"I can just tell you," he mumbled to reporters during campaign 2000, "from my perspective, I never asked for, I don't believe I received special treatment."
To put the whole special treatment debate in perspective, it should be noted that at the time Bush was accepted in the Texas Air National Guard, there was a waiting list of roughly 500 men and it usually took about a year and a half to get to the top of the list.
When asked about the waiting list issue, Bush spokesman at the time, David Beckwith, claimed that Bush was more qualified. "A lot of people weren't qualified" he said, "so special commissions were offered to those willing to undergo the extra training required."
However, Charles Shoemake, chief of personnel at the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980, publicly denied that there was a shortage of pilots or qualified applicants. "We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified," he said.
Any claim that Bush was more qualified than 500 other men is laughable being he only scored 25% on the Pilot Aptitude Test, which happens to be the lowest score permitted for a wannabe pilot at the time.
The truth was finally revealed in 1999, when Ben Barnes, former Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, said that he helped Bush get in the Guard at the request of Bush family friend, Sid Adger, according to an account of the events in a statement released after Barnes testified in a deposition for a federal lawsuit in September 1999.
Barnes also testified that he had met with a top Bush adviser to discuss the matter of rebutting rumors that Bush got special treatment, and to prove that the meeting took place, Barnes produced a note from Bush himself thanking him for his help in rebutting rumors that Bush's father had helped find a slot for his son in the Guard.
And true to form, with full knowledge that he wrote the note, on September 9, 2000, that pathological liar Bush still claimed, "No Bush ever asked Sid Adger to help."
Bush also claims that he got no special treatment when he received a direct appointment to Second Lt right out of basic training without having to go through officer candidate school which cleared the way for a slot in pilot training school. "Our information is there was absolutely no special deal," said Bush spokesman Beckwith.
However, in the September 1999 deposition Barnes testified that after receiving a request from Adger, he called Gen James Rose and recommended Bush for a pilot position.
When Bush joined the Guard his stated goal was "making flying a lifetime pursuit," and he signed a document that stated: "I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation."
Based on that statement alone, Bush should have been shipped to Viet Nam in 1972 when he was permitted to move to Alabama to work on a political campaign and was ordered to attend drills at Dannelly Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama from May 1972 to November 1972, and went AWOL.
There is no record that Bush ever showed up. During the 2000 campaign, Bush claimed he attended drills at Dannelly and said, "I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time."
"I made up some missed weekends," he said, "I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have the same airplanes.".
"I fulfilled my obligations," he stated.
His spokesman Dan Bartlett also vouched for the tall tale. "He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama," Bartlett said, "he did his drills."
Although there is no record of Bush being at Dannelly, there is plenty of evidence to prove that he was supposed to be. For instance, military records show a September 15, 1972, order stating: "Lt Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training," on "7-8 October, and 4-5 November."
In later interviews, Turnipseed and his administrative officer, Kenneth Lottsaid, said Bush never showed up. "Had he reported in I would have had some recall, and I do not," Turnipsee said. "I had been in Texas, done my flight training there, If we had a 1st Lt from Texas, I would have remembered," he stated.
When questioned by reporters about Tunispeed's interview, the truthful and honest coward now sitting in the White House, brushed him off by saying: "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I remember being there."
By far the most colorful comments about Bush being AWOL were quotes in the February 13, 2004 Memphis Flyer, from interviews with 2 former guardsmen, Bob Mintz and Paul Bishop, who were members of the Alabama unit when Bush claimed he was there.
These men did attend drills in the summer of 1972 and both said they were certain Bush was not there. "I remember that I heard someone was coming to drill with us from Texas," Mintz said. "And it was implied that it was somebody with political influence."
"I was a young bachelor then," he recalled, "I was looking for somebody to prowl around with."
Mintz said the squadron only had 25 or 30 pilots and told the Flyer, "There's no doubt I would have heard of him, seen him, whatever."
He said, at the time he assumed that Bush had "changed his mind and went somewhere else" to do his duty. Previously a Republican, Mintz also discussed his reaction to outright dissembling by Bush. "You don't do that as an officer," he said, "you don't do that as a pilot, you don't do it as an important person, and you don't do it as a citizen."
"This guy's got a lot of nerve," Mintz said.
Mintz told the Flyer that no members of the Alabama unit remembered Bush being there. "I talked to one of my buddies the other day" he said, "and asked him if he could remember Bush at drill at any time, and he said, 'Naw, ol' George wasn't there.'"
That buddy was Paul Bishop, who at the time of the interview was a pilot for a charter airline that was flying war supplies into Iraq. He was also a veteran of the first Gulf War and voted for Bush in 2000. "I never saw hide nor hair of Mr. Bush," Bishop said.
He told the Flyer that he did not pay much attention to Bush's claims in the 2000 campaign, but he had since the Iraq war started. "It bothered me," he said, "that he wouldn't 'fess up and say, Okay, guys, I cut out when the rest of you did your time."
"He shouldn't have tried to dance around the subject," he stated, "I take great exception to that. I spent 39 years defending my country."
This interview with the Flyer is 3 years old and back then Bishop was already saying that he disapproved of the way Bush was handling the war and believed the problem was due to Bush's lack of combat experience. "I think a commander-in-chief who sends his men off to war ought to be a veteran who has seen the sting of battle," he said.
"In Iraq we have a bunch of great soldiers," he stated, "but they are not policemen. ... right now it's costing us an American life a day. ... We've got an over-extended Guard and reserve."
It would be interesting to hear what Mr Bishop has to say about Bush these days.
In light of his obviously low IQ, it could honestly be said that Bush simply can not remember the name of every guardsman in Alabama, but according to a spokesman for the Alabama Guard, there were 600 to 700 members in that unit and Bush can not remember one name, and amazingly, not one Alabama guardsman has come forward to proudly announce that he served his country right along side the current President of the US.
In any event, first hand sitings would be impossible to find because Bush's own military records prove he was AWOL in Alabama and Texas. In the fall of 1972 after the election Bush reportedly did return to Texas but not to Ellington Air Force Base.
On May 2, 1973, his Superior Officers at Ellington, Jerry Killian and William Harris, stated they were unable to complete Bush's "yearly" evaluation because: "Lt Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of this report."
Which means a year after he trotted off to Alabama, and 7 months after he returned to Texas, Bush's commanding officers in Texas still thought he was in Alabama. The report said Bush "cleared this base on 15 May 1972, and has been performing equivalent training in a non-flying status with the 187 TAC RECON GP, Dannelly Ang Base, Alabama."
Americans should tell members of Congress to consider the military service record of the man deciding the fate of our young men and women in Iraq before granting his next request for funding to keep them there until hell freezes over apparently.
Free Speech Banned by Big Pharma
What You Can't Say About Drug Importation
Evelyn Pringle October 2004
When Bush signed the new Medicare bill on December 8, 2003, he called it "the greatest advance in health care coverage for America's seniors since the founding of Medicare" in 1965.
No, he did not say this on Saturday Night Live, he said it at the White House.
The bill did more for the pharmaceutical industry than it did for seniors citizens. Drug companies can continue to charge outrageous prices because Republicans refuse to allow the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada and other countries.
Prescription drug spending is rising faster than any other health care expense. In 2003, total spending by Medicare beneficiaries on prescription drugs was $95 billion and senior citizens account for nearly 34% of all prescriptions sold.
The US is the only industrialized country without some form of price controls on drugs. It also accounts for more than half of the industry's profits. And profits would have to be high because according to recent reports from the top pharmaceutical companies, CEO compensation packages range from $23.9 million to $150.9 million for one year.
Who Is Peter Rost?
Peter Rost is a physician and pharmaceutical industry executive who began advocating for drug importation after he posted a positive review on Amazon.com about the book "The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It," written by former New England Journal of Medicine editor Marcia Angell.
On September 10, 2004, Rost, was a featured speaker at the annual meeting of the Society for Professional Journalists, and openly criticized the high cost of prescription drugs and the efforts by the pharmaceutical industry and politicians to block the importation of cheaper drug from other countries, according to Independent Media TV on 9/16/04
Rost is the first drug-industry executive to dispute publicly the industry and federal government position that importing drugs isn't safe. Rost, citing extensive experience with importing drug in Europe, says it is perfectly safe, according to Knight Ridder on 9/30/04.
For the past 20 years, Rost has been marketing pharmaceuticals and he is currently a Vice President with Pfizer. Rost says that his #1 concern is for the people who can not afford their prescription drugs. He believes that people going without medication is a "bigger safety issue than anything else," Independent reports.
Rost said that "[d]rug companies are testifying that imported drugs are unsafe. Nothing could be further from the truth" (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 9/24).
Does Importation Work? Springfield MA - A Case Study
According to FACSNET, in 1996, the city of Springfield, Mass, paid $33 million in health care costs. This year, the cost is estimated at $70 million, according to Michael Albano, who was mayor of Springfield from 1996 to January of 2004.
Albano and Peter Rost both spoke on the importation issue at the Sept 10, 2004, FACS seminar at the Society of Professional Journalists convention.
Albano says, "During my eight years as mayor, I watched this health care crisis develop: a 5 percent increase the first year, 10 percent, 15 to 20 percent increases ... It became abundantly apparent that no corporation in America, and cities are corporations, could sustain that type of growth without going bankrupt. As a business, you fold; but as a government, you have to continue to provide services that citizens expect, deserve and demand," Albano said.
Of the $33 million that Springfield paid for health care in 1996, prescription drugs accounted for $8.6 million. This year, out of $70 million in health care costs, prescription drugs will cost about $20 million. (Springfield has about 7,000 employees and 2,000 retirees and dependents. The employee numbers have changed little over the eight-year period.)
"Prices have more than doubled for the same amount of prescription medication," Albano said.
While he was mayor, the situation presented a tough choice: Find a way to reduce health care costs or cut city services.
"I said, That's enough," Albano said. "So I took trip to Windsor, Ontario. I looked at some pharmacies and selected a Canadian provider. And what a surprise: the exact same medications, the exact same name brands - no difference whatsoever - except the price."
"In the first year the city implemented the program, it saved $3 million. This year the city will save about $6.5 million," Albano said. "This is substantial for a city the size of Springfield."
Springfield is now considered a pioneer in the many efforts to legalize drug re-importation from Canada. Rost openly lauded Albano's efforts and successes in bringing affordable prescription drugs to Springfield.
Lawmakers Want Vote On Importation
Bush and Republican leaders in Congress are refusing to allow a quick vote on a bill for drug importation, even though many rank-and-file Republicans in Congress and most Democrats back the idea, says the New York Times on 9/16/04.
Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND) has co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Olympia Snowe (R- Maine) that would allow Americans to buy drugs from such heavily regulated nations as Canada, where some prescription drugs can cost as much as 50 percent less than in the United States. The bill is designed to provide American consumers with some relief from escalating drug prices.
Dorgan and several other lawmakers held press conferences to rally support for a vote to be taken on the importation bill, which has languished in the Senate for several months.
The House of Representatives has already passed a bill allowing FDA-approved drugs to be imported from Canada and other countries. But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) has refused to allow a similar bill to come up for a vote in the Senate.
Supporters wrote to Frist urging him to find time before the November elections to schedule a promised vote. Missouri Republican Jo Ann Emerson and other members of Congress say the law would pass if Frist would bring it to the floor, the Missourian reports.
According to The Hill on 9/14/04, Dorgan spokesman Barry Piatt said reimportation supporters would seek a vote regardless of Frist's position. "It's going to happen," Piatt said, adding that "everything that comes to the floor" is a possible vehicle.
Piatt said Dorganís reimportation bill has "broad consensus support in the Senate and in the country." A Democratic staffer said the Dorgan bill may have 60 votes, says the Hill.
Democrats said the Food and Drug Administration had no record of any dangers presented by imported drugs. They argued that leading Republicans were using safety as an excuse to protect drug companies that charge more domestically for their products.
Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND), said, "Miracle drugs offer no miracles for people who cannot take them" because of the cost. Rep Marion Berry (D-Ark) said, "Here we are in a global economy, and the United States allows these drug companies to take advantage and rob our own people. That can't continue," in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 9/24.
Now Frists claims, "I don't think we can address it adequately in the next 17 days."
That's despite the fact that members of both parties in Congress support what is being called drug importation and it's extremely popular with the public, which will decide whether to re-elect members of Congress in November, according to the 9/18/04 Enquirer.
In fact, according to the New York Times, Frist now says the Senate likely will not have time to debate the legislation this year, and Frist spokesperson Amy Call added, "Until he sees a way we can do this safely, he won't put the American people in jeopardy" by allowing drug importation, the Times reported on 9/24.
Dorgan claims that Frist made a commitment in March to allow a vote this year, in exchange for Dorgan agreeing not to block the confirmation of Mark McClellan as administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dorgan said, "I think he ought to keep that commitment."
I hate to say it but I guess the naive Dorgan is going to have to find out the hard way that a commitment by a Bush-Puppet Republican is meaningless.
Rost Speaks Out - At His Own Peril
Over the past month, Peter Rost has spoken out in favor of the various bills under consideration by Congress and state governments, that would allow the importation of cheaper drugs into the US from other countries.
Rost became the first drug industry executives to speak out in support of reimporting drugs from Canada. At all activities, Rost stressed that he was speaking as a private citizen and not as a Pfizer representative. Nothing could have been made this more clear.
On Sept 23, Rost attended a Washington rally with about 10 lawmakers to support a bill to legalize the sale and use of imported drugs from other countries where drugs are between 30% to 70% cheaper than in the US. He also attended a rally with Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) the following day, in attempt to convince Republican senators to allow a vote on the drug reimportation bill.
Drug companies have consistently opposed the move, arguing that US regulators could not guarantee the safety or quality of drugs brought in from other countries. But Rost counters that argument with the fact that European countries have used importation safely for 20 years, and he says drugmakers will "say anything" to prevent cheaper drugs from entering the US market.
Rost warns that, "The industry is making a big political mistake right now to fight reimportation."
"The biggest safety issue is people not taking the drugs they need," he added at at the news conference with Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Reps Dan Burton (R-Ind), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn) and Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill) (Wall Street Journal, 9/22).
"A lot of people cannot afford life-saving drugs. Drug re-importation provides an alternative supply at lower prices for people who cannot afford the full price," Rost said.
Europe has been trading pharmaceuticals for decades with no negative consequences, he explained. "The European union mandates free trade and movement of goods," he said. "Companies specialize in doing nothing but buying drugs cheaply and importing then to northern countries."
"Drugs don't work if you don't take them," he noted. "If you can't afford them, you can't use them."
"Drugs are supposed to improve life and make us healthy," Rost said. "In the US, we have shorter life expectancy and higher infant mortality rates than host of other developed countries - Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc. ... I hope speaking out will not only help patients but also wake up the drug companies."
Sen Snowe (R-Maine) added, "If European countries can safety trade prescription drugs, the United States should be up to the task as well," New York Times, 9/24.
According to Rost, "Holding up a vote on importation ... has a high cost not just in money, but in American lives. Every day we delay, Americans die because they cannot afford life-saving drugs." NYT / Sept 24th, 2004
Dr. Alan Sager, a researcher at the Boston University, says the same thing. "It is an abomination that any American continues to suffer pain, disease and premature death for lack of needed medications," he said.
Do Bush or his industry cronies or his Republican allies in Congress care that people are going without their life-saving drugs? Not for a minute.
No Free Speech For Pfizer Employees
So much for free speech if you work for a drug company. Pfizer has recently launched an investigation of Rostís political activities. Rost has informed Independent Media that Pfizer has started an investigation and the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP in New York will conduct the inquiry.
Rost told Independent, "The Pfizer inquiry came as a surprise to me, since I have always stated that I speak as a private citizen and do not in any way represent Pfizer in my public appearances and also do not comment on Pfizer. I am simply exercising my constitutional right to campaign for a candidate, a bill or an issue on the political agenda."
Depth of Probe
Rostís attorney, David Green of Morristown, NJ, said Rost was first questioned about his contacts with reporters on Sept. 21. Rost said the Pfizer lawyer asked him to list all of his contacts with the media and noted Rostís quotes in news articles.
In response to Independent's questions about his Pfizer interview, Rost says, "(I) spent a long and very intense day ... answering detailed questions about all my contacts with the press and my private discussions with Senators and Congressmen. The questioning was so intense that we didn't even break for lunch until 2:30 p.m."
"I have been interrogated about every detail of my contacts with the press; who I have talked to, who I've met with, who else was there, what was said, if the talk was recorded, who called whom, and a line by line review of many articles and quotes," Rost said.
Rost also told the Washington Post, "I was peppered with questions from morning to evening," said Rost. "As a private citizen in a protected political activity, my concern was getting all these questions about my discussions with elected representatives," on 10/1/04.
Rost was questioned about conversations with lawmakers and their staffs. "They were very specific about wanting to know everything I remembered from these conversations," Rost said. "They wanted to know who was there, who said what," the WP reported.
He told Independent Media, "Pfizer has also mapped all my contacts with Senators, Congressmen and their aids. I have been asked whom I met, at what time and where, who else was present, and I've been asked about every detail of my private conversation with Senators and Congressmen," Rost said.
Apparently Pfizer also plans to monitor Rostís future political activities. He told Independent, "I've also had to answer questions about all my planned future political activity, which Senators, Congressmen and Governors have contacted me, where I will appear to speak, and who is paying for travel."
Rost said he only responded to the questions because he believed his refusal might have been used as grounds to fire him.
Pfizer spokesman, Jack Cox, wouldn't discuss the nature of Rost's daylong interview, but said, "the meeting was professional and entirely consistent with Pfizer's policies regarding respect for employees," according to a 9/30/04 article in Knight Ridder.
The top dogs at Pfizer have shown themselves to be true Republicans. True to form, when they can't defeat the message, attack the messenger. This in depth questioning, is not the first indication that Pfizer was not too happy about Rost's activities.
On 9/28/04, Chuck Hardwick, a Pfizer senior vice president, sent a letter to Dorgan and other members of Congress attacking Rostís credentials and stating, "Dr. Rost has no qualifications to speak on importation, no responsibilities in this area at Pfizer, no knowledge of the information and analysis Pfizer has provided to the government on this issue, and no substantive grasp of how importation may impact the safety of this nation's drug supply."
Of course it might be a bit embarrassing to have Rost support importing drugs, when Pfizer happens to be the highest-profile company cracking down wholesalers in Canada. It lead the industry effort against drug importation. In fact, CEO McKinnell threatened to blacklist Canadian pharmacies that sell drugs to Americans.
Right To Free Speech OK If Pfizer Says So
From day one, Rost made it clear to Independent that he did not in any way represent Pfizer. He does not believe he can be fired for making statements on his own time, because such activities are protected in New York, where Pfizer is located, and in New Jersey, where Rost resides, by laws that prohibit employment discrimination based on political beliefs.
Rost contends that he is within his rights to speak out irregardless of where he works. "It is important to remember that Pfizer employment matters are governed by New York State Law and New Jersey State Law, among others," he says.
According to the Office of New York State Attorney General, "An employee who is discharged because of his participation, on his own time, in lawful political or recreational activities can bring an action against his employer for damages and equitable relief," quoting relevant laws.
Besides all that, if Rost was backing a candidate that Pfizer was supporting it would be permissible. Rost says Pfizer regularly distributes political literature to its employees.
"I also note that Dr. Hank McKinnell and his direct reports frequently use their positions within Pfizer to compel Pfizer employees to support political causes they believe in," he said. "I regularly receive direct mails and e-mails from Dr. McKinnell suggesting that I make political financial contributions or that I contact my elected representatives on a particular issue."
"I also find posters at work encouraging political activity," he added.
"When you do that as an employer, you also have to accept it if people are politically active about issues that you may not agree on. You can't say it's OK to just support certain things and not others," Rost said.
Lawmakers And Media Come Out To Support Rost
Rep Ann Northrup (R-Ky) said that Hardwick's letter concerning Rost was "insulting," adding that it "regurgitated the same sorts of claims they have made in the past, claims that have been refuted."
In response to the inappropriate tactics being used by Pfizer against Rost, members of Congress wrote a letter to Pfizer, on his behalf, condemning its intimidation of Rost. "If this is true, [Wednesday's] interrogation, during which attorneys demanded details of private conversations with Members of Congress and their staffs, was clearly intended to intimidate Dr. Rost," the letter said.
Rep Sanders, a Vermont independent, is also upset. "I find it an outrage that Pfizer would suggest that because somebody happens to work for Pfizer, that they're not allowed to exercise their constitutional rights to support a particular piece of legislation. ... My guess is those employees of Pfizer who are touting the company line in opposition of drug importation are not being brought before lawyers and cross-examined for hours," he said.
The Associated Press lists the 7 lawmakers who signed the letter as: Bernard Sanders, I-Vt; Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill; Dan Burton, R-Ind; Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio; Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.; Jim Langevin, D-RI; and Marion Berry, D-Ark.
It goes without saying that Independent Media plans to monitor this situation every single day. And at the same time, it goes without saying that Independent Media will be monitored.
Having said that, I'd advise Pfizer to pick its battles more carefully. Does it really want to go up against the press, politicians, Americans and especially senior citizens? It might want to rethink their strategy when attacking Peter Rost.
As Usual With Bush - It's About Money
Lawmakers also went to bat for Rost in Congress. "The issue of safety is a hoax, and when somebody tells you it is not about money, folks, it is about money," said Rep Rahm Emanuel. The Illinois Democrat pointed out on the House floor that Rost disputed his industry's position that importation can't be done safely.
Rost explains that at times, he felt pressured to donate money to specific candidates. "The push from Pfizer to donate part of my Pfizer salary to political causes is very strong," he said. "After I failed to pay $2,000 for a political fundraiser sponsored by Pfizer in 2003, I was contacted by Mr. Hank McKinnell, through a secretary who said she called on his behalf, reminding me to attend."
"I would hope that a company that so closely tracks political activity and donations among its employees and supports employee political activism also will tolerate dissenting individual initiatives that allow our democracy to flourish," Rost said.
Rost's assertions about Pfizer financially supporting politicians were easy enough to verify. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit group that monitors political contributions, Pfizer and its PACs are the largest contributors among drug companies, forking out $1.15 million in the 2004 cycle, with two-thirds of that amount going to Republicans.
And let's take a look at Pfizer CEO Hank McKinnell. He is a Bush Ranger, which means he has raised more than $200,000 for Bush's reelection. Until last year, he served as chairman of the board for Pharma. Pfizer is one of the most profitable companies in the country and it spent $3.7 million on Washington lobbying in 2003.
As of July, 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Bush has already received $ $844,349 from the Pharmaceutical Industry. This figure already dwarfs his 2000 total of $499,283. [Center for Responsive Politics, July 2004].
I just had an amusing thought. When Bush gets booted out of the White House, who's going to funnel pay-off money to the industry? Or are they about even now?
Industry Pay-Offs
During a recent debate on the issue, Congressman Burton said this is a perfect example, in my opinion, of where a special interest, the pharmaceutical industry, has been able to manipulate the Congress and the government of the United States to their benefit, and to the detriment of the American taxpayer and the American people.
Burton says the new law makes it clear the industry got its money's worth. He says billions of dollars are in it for drug companies in this new Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit.
A 1/15/04 report by Campaign Money Watch, asked "How blatant is the pay-to-play system between the pharmaceutical industry and those in powerful political positions in Washington? Consider this sentence from a letter from then RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson to then Bristol-Meyers CEO Charles Heimbold:
"We must keep the lines of communication open if we want to continue passing legislation that will benefit your industry."
The company and its employees have given over $4 million to federal candidates and party committees since 1999, over 80% to Republicans. Heinbold is no longer CEO of Bristol because he was appointed by Bush to be US Ambassador to Sweden, the reports adds.
The big shots of the industry were also out in full force during the Republican Convention. Among the drug company financed functions were 2 breakfasts, sponsored by Pfizer, for Oregon delegates, a state that has recently sought permission from the federal government to import cheaper drugs from Canada.
What Does Bush Say About Importation?
Just listen to what Bush had to say in return for all that money, to make sure the bills wouldn't be passed. "Before I'll allow that to happen, I'm going to make sure that you're safe," Bush said. "Because all you need to do is get a batch of drugs manufactured elsewhere that sounds like they're legitimate and get sick, and then you're going to be wondering, where were the people, why weren't they doing their jobs of protecting consumer safety?"
He said this with a straight smirk and it gets better.
At a health care forum in Blaine, Minn, Bush said, "Let me talk real quick about a subject I know is on your mind," claiming his administration is studying the issue. "I know it sounds attractive to some, importation of drugs. And it may work. But, sure enough, if we're not careful, drugs manufactured in the Third World over which we have no control could use Canada as a way to get into this state. And then we got a problem, a safety problem," the New York Times reported on 9/16/04.
Is there any issue on which Bush won't try to use the terrorist fear tactics? Never mind that he allows the importation of everything else. "The president would import sneakers from Taiwan, T shirts from Hong Kong and coffee from Colombia," said Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.). "But drugs from Canada, no way! Again, the drug companies win and the seniors lose." Newsday on 9/18/04.
Ya know, somebody ought to tell Bush that while out on the campaign trail, he should really knock of the phony caring act because his words don't match his arrogant personality or his cowboy swagger.
Bush And Drugmakers Cut Off Supplies In One Way Or Another
Several of the world's biggest drug makers are restricting supply to online Canadian pharmacies that ship to the US, leading to delays of several weeks for many customers. In severe cases, some sites have stopped accepting new clients looking for the hardest-to-get medications, according to the 9/15/04 South Bend Tribune.
Rost is upset that companies are cutting off supplies. "It strikes me as immoral to limit trade to Canada under the guise that it is unsafe," he said in a telephone interview.
"The big safety issue is people not taking drugs -- people having heart attacks because they can't afford to stay on cholesterol-lowering medication," he told the Boston Globe on 9/23/04.
But that's not all they are up to. For his part of the bargain, Bush is striking out with the power of the government. "Hundreds of people in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Vermont had their Canadian prescription-drug orders seized and thousands more had their shipments delayed after about 450 packages arriving in Miami from the Bahamas were seized by U.S. Customs in July," USA Today reported on 9/16/04.
"The seizure was the first large-scale effort by U.S. Customs and the Food and Drug Administration to halt prescription shipments from Canadian pharmacies, although individual packages have been halted in the past." USA says.
"We have hundreds of seniors calling our office, saying, 'Where are my prescription drugs?'", says Chris Lisi, spokeswoman for Sen Mark Dayton, D-Minn, who strongly supports allowing importation of lower-cost drugs from Canada. Dayton and Democrat Wisconsin Gov Jim Doyle protested the FDA seizure.
Dayton issued a statement and responded to comments from seniors whose drugs were seized, saying, "Rather than scaring Minnesota seniors and taking their affordable prescription drugs, FDA should focus its resources on working with Congress to create legislation that would facilitate safe and legal drug importation. We should be confiscating only those packages that come from unknown or questionable sources or contain suspicious substances, not medicines sent to America's seniors from reputable Canadian pharmacies" (Miami Herald, 9/15).
According to an article on 9/15/04 by Associated Press, "Democratic Sens. Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold said in a letter to the agency they have received dozens of complaints from Wisconsin residents that the FDA had intercepted their orders of prescription drugs."
The senators said they were "concerned that the FDA's actions could pose health risks to American consumers" and asked if the FDA plans "to use any other enforcement mechanisms to try to curtail the purchase of prescription drugs from Canada."
Wisconsin Gov Jim Doyle said the seizure shows that the Bush administration has "decided it will do whatever it can to protect drug company profits."
And if you think this is bad, just wait and see what's in store for Americans if Bush is elected to 4 more years when he won't be facing reelection and can drop the phony caring act.
Canada Is Very Insulted
Rost has said that some of Bush's argument about the safety of drugs are greatly exaggerated like the one above. When the FDA Acting Chief Lester Crawford made the outlandish suggestion that terrorists could use imported drugs from Canada to poison Americans, he found it ridiculous.
Rost said, "Drugs from Canada are absolutely, positively safe," he said in a 9/18/04 phone interview with the Winnipeg Free Press. "What has been said (by Internet opponents) about Canadian drugs is, quite frankly, insulting, I would think, if I were a Canadian. Let's get real. It's exactly the same product that the same (pharmaceutical) companies are selling in Canada that they are selling in the U.S."
And indeed Canadians are insulted. At a convention of the Iowa Association of Health Underwriters, Canada's former prime minister defended the safety of his country's prescription-drug system during an appearance in Des Moines, according to the Des Moines Register on 9/16/04.
Jean Chretien, who retired last year, dismissed claims that Canada's drug-inspection system is less effective than the United States'. "Do you think we're crazy in Canada - that we would let people sell unsafe drugs?" he said. "Do you think that as prime minister I would face the Canadian people and say, 'Too bad, you know, but we don't inspect drugs?' . . . I hope you agree with me that we're not that uncivilized," the Register reports.
Of course I agree that Canadians are not crazy or uncivilized. If only the same could be said about the current occupant of our White House.
Bogus Research and Development Excuse
Pfizer questions Rost ability to understand the research and development issue. The industry says importing drugs would hurt profits that are relied upon to pay for research. Pfizer says Rost has ignored his company's extensive research.
I found that funny because I thought Rost sounded fairly knowledgeable on the topic. He seemed to grasp the amount of money involved in research. According to the 9/28/04 Missourian, at news conference, Rost said that of drug giant Merckís $22.5 billion in annual sales, it spent $3.2 billion on research and development and $3.3 billion on stock dividends and reported a profit of $6.8 billion. Although Merck would lose money if the legislation passed, he said, drug companies would still be profitable enough to encourage investment in research.
So Rost doesn't know what he's talking about on the subject of importation? Well he sure had me fooled.
Lawmakers Become Willing To Break The Law
Legislatures all over the country are responding to demands from their constituents, with 24 states considering bills to import drugs from Canada or elsewhere. West Virginia, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Vermont and Rhode Island have already enacted laws that take the first steps toward engaging in broad imports of prescription medicines from Canada, although the federal government is challenging the legality of some of the programs, according to the LA Times on 9/30/94.
Many state and local governments are vowing to disregard federal laws. According to the 10/1/04 Bangor Daily News, Maine will challenge the federal DHHS by initiating a program to re-import drugs from Canada, Gov John Baldacci announced: "The state can't wait ... for the federal government to enact reforms that ensure affordable access to medications for all Americans and will instead take action on behalf of Maine citizens."
Indiana Gov Joe Kernan says his state will help hundreds of thousands of public employees save money on prescription drugs next year one way or another, according to the 9/16/04 Washington Times.
Kernan plans to bring healthcare providers, business leaders and government officials together in early December to find ways to lower prescription drugs costs for state employees and eventually all Hoosiers, the Indianapolis Star Tribune said. If no state or federal solution is found by March 1, 2005, Kernan said he would support ways to help Hoosiers reimport drugs from Canada and other countries.
According to the 8/16/04 Boston Herald, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and city officials "shrugged off" a warning in a letter sent by FDA Associate Commissioner William Hubbard about the safety risks of a program that allows some city employees and retirees to reimport lower-cost prescription drugs from Canada.
In the letter, Hubbard asked Menino to end the "Meds by Mail" program, which began in August. About 14,000 city employees, retirees and their dependents covered under the city health plan qualify for the program. Boston officials have distributed more than 840 applications for the program.
Calgary-based Total Care Pharmacy provides the medications, and Menino has said that the contract between the city and the pharmacy requires safety measures and ensures quality. Hubbard warned that the FDA in the future might ask a judge to issue an injunction against the program but currently seeks to convince Boston officials to end the program voluntarily (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 8/5).
Since March, Wisconsin has filled 1,663 prescriptions under a state reimportation program. Susan Reinardy, a Wisconsin Department of Public Health and Family Services administrator, said that although in the early stages of the program Total Care shipped three generic medications not approved by FDA, the problem has not continued. "We're very happy with their responsiveness," she added (Boston Herald, 8/6).
Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Wisconsin all have websites that connect consumers to Canada drug importation companies. Additionally, the governors of Illinois, Iowa, Oregon, Vermont and West Virginia have come out in favor of importation (Stateline.org, Sept 14, 2004, "Minnesota gov. leads fight for legal Rx importsì).
Other Actions Against The Bush Drug Gang
Bush and his cronies in the industry are being hit from every angle. According to the 9/6/04 issue of American Medical News, Vermont has now sued the federal government for the right to reimport prescription medications.
The lawsuit alleges that the government wrongly denied Vermont's request to establish a reimportation program. The FDA rejected the request claiming it was worried about drug safety. The lawsuit is the first of its kind.
Gov James Douglas, says, "Vermont will not sit back and watch as the cost of health insurance and prescription drugs continues to rise. Nor are we content to simply ignore the law," Douglas said. "Real leadership means challenging those laws and policies you oppose and working within our systems to change them," notes American Medical.
In the law suit, the Vermont claims the FDA violated the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. Officials say the law requires the federal government to create rules that allow wholesalers, pharmacists and state benefit programs to import drugs and calls for the government to give guidance on the circumstances under which the FDA would give waivers allowing importation for personal use.
Vermont claims the Bush administration has done neither and is asking the court to require the government to establish rules and guidelines promptly. "It is our hope and expectation that Vermont's leadership will result in a legal precedent that benefits every Vermonter and every American," Douglas said. "The ultimate goal is to get the best possible market prices at our pharmacies here at home."
On another front, saying Kentucky could save more than $100 million a year in health care costs, state Auditor Crit Luallen called on the state to import cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, according to the 9/29/04 Currier Journal. If Gov Ernie Fletcher agrees, Kentucky would join other states, including Illinois, Maryland, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Vermont, in seeking federal waivers to allow the importation of drugs from Canada.
Almost two-thirds of Kentuckians want the federal government to make it easier to buy prescription drugs from Canada and other countries, according to a Courier-Journal Bluegrass Poll conducted in May. Kentucky Rep Anne Northup, R-Louisville, is also pushing federal legislation to allow prescription drug sales from Canada.
The battleground has been set between the States and the White House. If Bush and Pharma want to continue the war of blocking ways for Americans to obtain affordable prescription drugs, they had better be ready to do a lot more than harass employees who refuse to turn a blind eye to their corruption.
Rost Vows To Stay The Course
Peter Rost vows to continue his support of importation efforts no matter what Pfizer does or doesnít do. In closing, he shared some personal thoughts that would never in a million years lead anyone to think that he is employed in the pharmaceutical industry:
--I don't believe we are put on this earth to make as much money as we can. --I donít think weíre here to rip off the weakest and poorest. --We are here to help each other and make it a better world.
Evelyn Pringle October 2004
When Bush signed the new Medicare bill on December 8, 2003, he called it "the greatest advance in health care coverage for America's seniors since the founding of Medicare" in 1965.
No, he did not say this on Saturday Night Live, he said it at the White House.
The bill did more for the pharmaceutical industry than it did for seniors citizens. Drug companies can continue to charge outrageous prices because Republicans refuse to allow the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada and other countries.
Prescription drug spending is rising faster than any other health care expense. In 2003, total spending by Medicare beneficiaries on prescription drugs was $95 billion and senior citizens account for nearly 34% of all prescriptions sold.
The US is the only industrialized country without some form of price controls on drugs. It also accounts for more than half of the industry's profits. And profits would have to be high because according to recent reports from the top pharmaceutical companies, CEO compensation packages range from $23.9 million to $150.9 million for one year.
Who Is Peter Rost?
Peter Rost is a physician and pharmaceutical industry executive who began advocating for drug importation after he posted a positive review on Amazon.com about the book "The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It," written by former New England Journal of Medicine editor Marcia Angell.
On September 10, 2004, Rost, was a featured speaker at the annual meeting of the Society for Professional Journalists, and openly criticized the high cost of prescription drugs and the efforts by the pharmaceutical industry and politicians to block the importation of cheaper drug from other countries, according to Independent Media TV on 9/16/04
Rost is the first drug-industry executive to dispute publicly the industry and federal government position that importing drugs isn't safe. Rost, citing extensive experience with importing drug in Europe, says it is perfectly safe, according to Knight Ridder on 9/30/04.
For the past 20 years, Rost has been marketing pharmaceuticals and he is currently a Vice President with Pfizer. Rost says that his #1 concern is for the people who can not afford their prescription drugs. He believes that people going without medication is a "bigger safety issue than anything else," Independent reports.
Rost said that "[d]rug companies are testifying that imported drugs are unsafe. Nothing could be further from the truth" (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 9/24).
Does Importation Work? Springfield MA - A Case Study
According to FACSNET, in 1996, the city of Springfield, Mass, paid $33 million in health care costs. This year, the cost is estimated at $70 million, according to Michael Albano, who was mayor of Springfield from 1996 to January of 2004.
Albano and Peter Rost both spoke on the importation issue at the Sept 10, 2004, FACS seminar at the Society of Professional Journalists convention.
Albano says, "During my eight years as mayor, I watched this health care crisis develop: a 5 percent increase the first year, 10 percent, 15 to 20 percent increases ... It became abundantly apparent that no corporation in America, and cities are corporations, could sustain that type of growth without going bankrupt. As a business, you fold; but as a government, you have to continue to provide services that citizens expect, deserve and demand," Albano said.
Of the $33 million that Springfield paid for health care in 1996, prescription drugs accounted for $8.6 million. This year, out of $70 million in health care costs, prescription drugs will cost about $20 million. (Springfield has about 7,000 employees and 2,000 retirees and dependents. The employee numbers have changed little over the eight-year period.)
"Prices have more than doubled for the same amount of prescription medication," Albano said.
While he was mayor, the situation presented a tough choice: Find a way to reduce health care costs or cut city services.
"I said, That's enough," Albano said. "So I took trip to Windsor, Ontario. I looked at some pharmacies and selected a Canadian provider. And what a surprise: the exact same medications, the exact same name brands - no difference whatsoever - except the price."
"In the first year the city implemented the program, it saved $3 million. This year the city will save about $6.5 million," Albano said. "This is substantial for a city the size of Springfield."
Springfield is now considered a pioneer in the many efforts to legalize drug re-importation from Canada. Rost openly lauded Albano's efforts and successes in bringing affordable prescription drugs to Springfield.
Lawmakers Want Vote On Importation
Bush and Republican leaders in Congress are refusing to allow a quick vote on a bill for drug importation, even though many rank-and-file Republicans in Congress and most Democrats back the idea, says the New York Times on 9/16/04.
Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND) has co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Olympia Snowe (R- Maine) that would allow Americans to buy drugs from such heavily regulated nations as Canada, where some prescription drugs can cost as much as 50 percent less than in the United States. The bill is designed to provide American consumers with some relief from escalating drug prices.
Dorgan and several other lawmakers held press conferences to rally support for a vote to be taken on the importation bill, which has languished in the Senate for several months.
The House of Representatives has already passed a bill allowing FDA-approved drugs to be imported from Canada and other countries. But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) has refused to allow a similar bill to come up for a vote in the Senate.
Supporters wrote to Frist urging him to find time before the November elections to schedule a promised vote. Missouri Republican Jo Ann Emerson and other members of Congress say the law would pass if Frist would bring it to the floor, the Missourian reports.
According to The Hill on 9/14/04, Dorgan spokesman Barry Piatt said reimportation supporters would seek a vote regardless of Frist's position. "It's going to happen," Piatt said, adding that "everything that comes to the floor" is a possible vehicle.
Piatt said Dorganís reimportation bill has "broad consensus support in the Senate and in the country." A Democratic staffer said the Dorgan bill may have 60 votes, says the Hill.
Democrats said the Food and Drug Administration had no record of any dangers presented by imported drugs. They argued that leading Republicans were using safety as an excuse to protect drug companies that charge more domestically for their products.
Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND), said, "Miracle drugs offer no miracles for people who cannot take them" because of the cost. Rep Marion Berry (D-Ark) said, "Here we are in a global economy, and the United States allows these drug companies to take advantage and rob our own people. That can't continue," in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 9/24.
Now Frists claims, "I don't think we can address it adequately in the next 17 days."
That's despite the fact that members of both parties in Congress support what is being called drug importation and it's extremely popular with the public, which will decide whether to re-elect members of Congress in November, according to the 9/18/04 Enquirer.
In fact, according to the New York Times, Frist now says the Senate likely will not have time to debate the legislation this year, and Frist spokesperson Amy Call added, "Until he sees a way we can do this safely, he won't put the American people in jeopardy" by allowing drug importation, the Times reported on 9/24.
Dorgan claims that Frist made a commitment in March to allow a vote this year, in exchange for Dorgan agreeing not to block the confirmation of Mark McClellan as administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dorgan said, "I think he ought to keep that commitment."
I hate to say it but I guess the naive Dorgan is going to have to find out the hard way that a commitment by a Bush-Puppet Republican is meaningless.
Rost Speaks Out - At His Own Peril
Over the past month, Peter Rost has spoken out in favor of the various bills under consideration by Congress and state governments, that would allow the importation of cheaper drugs into the US from other countries.
Rost became the first drug industry executives to speak out in support of reimporting drugs from Canada. At all activities, Rost stressed that he was speaking as a private citizen and not as a Pfizer representative. Nothing could have been made this more clear.
On Sept 23, Rost attended a Washington rally with about 10 lawmakers to support a bill to legalize the sale and use of imported drugs from other countries where drugs are between 30% to 70% cheaper than in the US. He also attended a rally with Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) the following day, in attempt to convince Republican senators to allow a vote on the drug reimportation bill.
Drug companies have consistently opposed the move, arguing that US regulators could not guarantee the safety or quality of drugs brought in from other countries. But Rost counters that argument with the fact that European countries have used importation safely for 20 years, and he says drugmakers will "say anything" to prevent cheaper drugs from entering the US market.
Rost warns that, "The industry is making a big political mistake right now to fight reimportation."
"The biggest safety issue is people not taking the drugs they need," he added at at the news conference with Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Reps Dan Burton (R-Ind), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn) and Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill) (Wall Street Journal, 9/22).
"A lot of people cannot afford life-saving drugs. Drug re-importation provides an alternative supply at lower prices for people who cannot afford the full price," Rost said.
Europe has been trading pharmaceuticals for decades with no negative consequences, he explained. "The European union mandates free trade and movement of goods," he said. "Companies specialize in doing nothing but buying drugs cheaply and importing then to northern countries."
"Drugs don't work if you don't take them," he noted. "If you can't afford them, you can't use them."
"Drugs are supposed to improve life and make us healthy," Rost said. "In the US, we have shorter life expectancy and higher infant mortality rates than host of other developed countries - Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc. ... I hope speaking out will not only help patients but also wake up the drug companies."
Sen Snowe (R-Maine) added, "If European countries can safety trade prescription drugs, the United States should be up to the task as well," New York Times, 9/24.
According to Rost, "Holding up a vote on importation ... has a high cost not just in money, but in American lives. Every day we delay, Americans die because they cannot afford life-saving drugs." NYT / Sept 24th, 2004
Dr. Alan Sager, a researcher at the Boston University, says the same thing. "It is an abomination that any American continues to suffer pain, disease and premature death for lack of needed medications," he said.
Do Bush or his industry cronies or his Republican allies in Congress care that people are going without their life-saving drugs? Not for a minute.
No Free Speech For Pfizer Employees
So much for free speech if you work for a drug company. Pfizer has recently launched an investigation of Rostís political activities. Rost has informed Independent Media that Pfizer has started an investigation and the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP in New York will conduct the inquiry.
Rost told Independent, "The Pfizer inquiry came as a surprise to me, since I have always stated that I speak as a private citizen and do not in any way represent Pfizer in my public appearances and also do not comment on Pfizer. I am simply exercising my constitutional right to campaign for a candidate, a bill or an issue on the political agenda."
Depth of Probe
Rostís attorney, David Green of Morristown, NJ, said Rost was first questioned about his contacts with reporters on Sept. 21. Rost said the Pfizer lawyer asked him to list all of his contacts with the media and noted Rostís quotes in news articles.
In response to Independent's questions about his Pfizer interview, Rost says, "(I) spent a long and very intense day ... answering detailed questions about all my contacts with the press and my private discussions with Senators and Congressmen. The questioning was so intense that we didn't even break for lunch until 2:30 p.m."
"I have been interrogated about every detail of my contacts with the press; who I have talked to, who I've met with, who else was there, what was said, if the talk was recorded, who called whom, and a line by line review of many articles and quotes," Rost said.
Rost also told the Washington Post, "I was peppered with questions from morning to evening," said Rost. "As a private citizen in a protected political activity, my concern was getting all these questions about my discussions with elected representatives," on 10/1/04.
Rost was questioned about conversations with lawmakers and their staffs. "They were very specific about wanting to know everything I remembered from these conversations," Rost said. "They wanted to know who was there, who said what," the WP reported.
He told Independent Media, "Pfizer has also mapped all my contacts with Senators, Congressmen and their aids. I have been asked whom I met, at what time and where, who else was present, and I've been asked about every detail of my private conversation with Senators and Congressmen," Rost said.
Apparently Pfizer also plans to monitor Rostís future political activities. He told Independent, "I've also had to answer questions about all my planned future political activity, which Senators, Congressmen and Governors have contacted me, where I will appear to speak, and who is paying for travel."
Rost said he only responded to the questions because he believed his refusal might have been used as grounds to fire him.
Pfizer spokesman, Jack Cox, wouldn't discuss the nature of Rost's daylong interview, but said, "the meeting was professional and entirely consistent with Pfizer's policies regarding respect for employees," according to a 9/30/04 article in Knight Ridder.
The top dogs at Pfizer have shown themselves to be true Republicans. True to form, when they can't defeat the message, attack the messenger. This in depth questioning, is not the first indication that Pfizer was not too happy about Rost's activities.
On 9/28/04, Chuck Hardwick, a Pfizer senior vice president, sent a letter to Dorgan and other members of Congress attacking Rostís credentials and stating, "Dr. Rost has no qualifications to speak on importation, no responsibilities in this area at Pfizer, no knowledge of the information and analysis Pfizer has provided to the government on this issue, and no substantive grasp of how importation may impact the safety of this nation's drug supply."
Of course it might be a bit embarrassing to have Rost support importing drugs, when Pfizer happens to be the highest-profile company cracking down wholesalers in Canada. It lead the industry effort against drug importation. In fact, CEO McKinnell threatened to blacklist Canadian pharmacies that sell drugs to Americans.
Right To Free Speech OK If Pfizer Says So
From day one, Rost made it clear to Independent that he did not in any way represent Pfizer. He does not believe he can be fired for making statements on his own time, because such activities are protected in New York, where Pfizer is located, and in New Jersey, where Rost resides, by laws that prohibit employment discrimination based on political beliefs.
Rost contends that he is within his rights to speak out irregardless of where he works. "It is important to remember that Pfizer employment matters are governed by New York State Law and New Jersey State Law, among others," he says.
According to the Office of New York State Attorney General, "An employee who is discharged because of his participation, on his own time, in lawful political or recreational activities can bring an action against his employer for damages and equitable relief," quoting relevant laws.
Besides all that, if Rost was backing a candidate that Pfizer was supporting it would be permissible. Rost says Pfizer regularly distributes political literature to its employees.
"I also note that Dr. Hank McKinnell and his direct reports frequently use their positions within Pfizer to compel Pfizer employees to support political causes they believe in," he said. "I regularly receive direct mails and e-mails from Dr. McKinnell suggesting that I make political financial contributions or that I contact my elected representatives on a particular issue."
"I also find posters at work encouraging political activity," he added.
"When you do that as an employer, you also have to accept it if people are politically active about issues that you may not agree on. You can't say it's OK to just support certain things and not others," Rost said.
Lawmakers And Media Come Out To Support Rost
Rep Ann Northrup (R-Ky) said that Hardwick's letter concerning Rost was "insulting," adding that it "regurgitated the same sorts of claims they have made in the past, claims that have been refuted."
In response to the inappropriate tactics being used by Pfizer against Rost, members of Congress wrote a letter to Pfizer, on his behalf, condemning its intimidation of Rost. "If this is true, [Wednesday's] interrogation, during which attorneys demanded details of private conversations with Members of Congress and their staffs, was clearly intended to intimidate Dr. Rost," the letter said.
Rep Sanders, a Vermont independent, is also upset. "I find it an outrage that Pfizer would suggest that because somebody happens to work for Pfizer, that they're not allowed to exercise their constitutional rights to support a particular piece of legislation. ... My guess is those employees of Pfizer who are touting the company line in opposition of drug importation are not being brought before lawyers and cross-examined for hours," he said.
The Associated Press lists the 7 lawmakers who signed the letter as: Bernard Sanders, I-Vt; Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill; Dan Burton, R-Ind; Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio; Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.; Jim Langevin, D-RI; and Marion Berry, D-Ark.
It goes without saying that Independent Media plans to monitor this situation every single day. And at the same time, it goes without saying that Independent Media will be monitored.
Having said that, I'd advise Pfizer to pick its battles more carefully. Does it really want to go up against the press, politicians, Americans and especially senior citizens? It might want to rethink their strategy when attacking Peter Rost.
As Usual With Bush - It's About Money
Lawmakers also went to bat for Rost in Congress. "The issue of safety is a hoax, and when somebody tells you it is not about money, folks, it is about money," said Rep Rahm Emanuel. The Illinois Democrat pointed out on the House floor that Rost disputed his industry's position that importation can't be done safely.
Rost explains that at times, he felt pressured to donate money to specific candidates. "The push from Pfizer to donate part of my Pfizer salary to political causes is very strong," he said. "After I failed to pay $2,000 for a political fundraiser sponsored by Pfizer in 2003, I was contacted by Mr. Hank McKinnell, through a secretary who said she called on his behalf, reminding me to attend."
"I would hope that a company that so closely tracks political activity and donations among its employees and supports employee political activism also will tolerate dissenting individual initiatives that allow our democracy to flourish," Rost said.
Rost's assertions about Pfizer financially supporting politicians were easy enough to verify. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit group that monitors political contributions, Pfizer and its PACs are the largest contributors among drug companies, forking out $1.15 million in the 2004 cycle, with two-thirds of that amount going to Republicans.
And let's take a look at Pfizer CEO Hank McKinnell. He is a Bush Ranger, which means he has raised more than $200,000 for Bush's reelection. Until last year, he served as chairman of the board for Pharma. Pfizer is one of the most profitable companies in the country and it spent $3.7 million on Washington lobbying in 2003.
As of July, 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Bush has already received $ $844,349 from the Pharmaceutical Industry. This figure already dwarfs his 2000 total of $499,283. [Center for Responsive Politics, July 2004].
I just had an amusing thought. When Bush gets booted out of the White House, who's going to funnel pay-off money to the industry? Or are they about even now?
Industry Pay-Offs
During a recent debate on the issue, Congressman Burton said this is a perfect example, in my opinion, of where a special interest, the pharmaceutical industry, has been able to manipulate the Congress and the government of the United States to their benefit, and to the detriment of the American taxpayer and the American people.
Burton says the new law makes it clear the industry got its money's worth. He says billions of dollars are in it for drug companies in this new Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit.
A 1/15/04 report by Campaign Money Watch, asked "How blatant is the pay-to-play system between the pharmaceutical industry and those in powerful political positions in Washington? Consider this sentence from a letter from then RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson to then Bristol-Meyers CEO Charles Heimbold:
"We must keep the lines of communication open if we want to continue passing legislation that will benefit your industry."
The company and its employees have given over $4 million to federal candidates and party committees since 1999, over 80% to Republicans. Heinbold is no longer CEO of Bristol because he was appointed by Bush to be US Ambassador to Sweden, the reports adds.
The big shots of the industry were also out in full force during the Republican Convention. Among the drug company financed functions were 2 breakfasts, sponsored by Pfizer, for Oregon delegates, a state that has recently sought permission from the federal government to import cheaper drugs from Canada.
What Does Bush Say About Importation?
Just listen to what Bush had to say in return for all that money, to make sure the bills wouldn't be passed. "Before I'll allow that to happen, I'm going to make sure that you're safe," Bush said. "Because all you need to do is get a batch of drugs manufactured elsewhere that sounds like they're legitimate and get sick, and then you're going to be wondering, where were the people, why weren't they doing their jobs of protecting consumer safety?"
He said this with a straight smirk and it gets better.
At a health care forum in Blaine, Minn, Bush said, "Let me talk real quick about a subject I know is on your mind," claiming his administration is studying the issue. "I know it sounds attractive to some, importation of drugs. And it may work. But, sure enough, if we're not careful, drugs manufactured in the Third World over which we have no control could use Canada as a way to get into this state. And then we got a problem, a safety problem," the New York Times reported on 9/16/04.
Is there any issue on which Bush won't try to use the terrorist fear tactics? Never mind that he allows the importation of everything else. "The president would import sneakers from Taiwan, T shirts from Hong Kong and coffee from Colombia," said Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.). "But drugs from Canada, no way! Again, the drug companies win and the seniors lose." Newsday on 9/18/04.
Ya know, somebody ought to tell Bush that while out on the campaign trail, he should really knock of the phony caring act because his words don't match his arrogant personality or his cowboy swagger.
Bush And Drugmakers Cut Off Supplies In One Way Or Another
Several of the world's biggest drug makers are restricting supply to online Canadian pharmacies that ship to the US, leading to delays of several weeks for many customers. In severe cases, some sites have stopped accepting new clients looking for the hardest-to-get medications, according to the 9/15/04 South Bend Tribune.
Rost is upset that companies are cutting off supplies. "It strikes me as immoral to limit trade to Canada under the guise that it is unsafe," he said in a telephone interview.
"The big safety issue is people not taking drugs -- people having heart attacks because they can't afford to stay on cholesterol-lowering medication," he told the Boston Globe on 9/23/04.
But that's not all they are up to. For his part of the bargain, Bush is striking out with the power of the government. "Hundreds of people in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Vermont had their Canadian prescription-drug orders seized and thousands more had their shipments delayed after about 450 packages arriving in Miami from the Bahamas were seized by U.S. Customs in July," USA Today reported on 9/16/04.
"The seizure was the first large-scale effort by U.S. Customs and the Food and Drug Administration to halt prescription shipments from Canadian pharmacies, although individual packages have been halted in the past." USA says.
"We have hundreds of seniors calling our office, saying, 'Where are my prescription drugs?'", says Chris Lisi, spokeswoman for Sen Mark Dayton, D-Minn, who strongly supports allowing importation of lower-cost drugs from Canada. Dayton and Democrat Wisconsin Gov Jim Doyle protested the FDA seizure.
Dayton issued a statement and responded to comments from seniors whose drugs were seized, saying, "Rather than scaring Minnesota seniors and taking their affordable prescription drugs, FDA should focus its resources on working with Congress to create legislation that would facilitate safe and legal drug importation. We should be confiscating only those packages that come from unknown or questionable sources or contain suspicious substances, not medicines sent to America's seniors from reputable Canadian pharmacies" (Miami Herald, 9/15).
According to an article on 9/15/04 by Associated Press, "Democratic Sens. Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold said in a letter to the agency they have received dozens of complaints from Wisconsin residents that the FDA had intercepted their orders of prescription drugs."
The senators said they were "concerned that the FDA's actions could pose health risks to American consumers" and asked if the FDA plans "to use any other enforcement mechanisms to try to curtail the purchase of prescription drugs from Canada."
Wisconsin Gov Jim Doyle said the seizure shows that the Bush administration has "decided it will do whatever it can to protect drug company profits."
And if you think this is bad, just wait and see what's in store for Americans if Bush is elected to 4 more years when he won't be facing reelection and can drop the phony caring act.
Canada Is Very Insulted
Rost has said that some of Bush's argument about the safety of drugs are greatly exaggerated like the one above. When the FDA Acting Chief Lester Crawford made the outlandish suggestion that terrorists could use imported drugs from Canada to poison Americans, he found it ridiculous.
Rost said, "Drugs from Canada are absolutely, positively safe," he said in a 9/18/04 phone interview with the Winnipeg Free Press. "What has been said (by Internet opponents) about Canadian drugs is, quite frankly, insulting, I would think, if I were a Canadian. Let's get real. It's exactly the same product that the same (pharmaceutical) companies are selling in Canada that they are selling in the U.S."
And indeed Canadians are insulted. At a convention of the Iowa Association of Health Underwriters, Canada's former prime minister defended the safety of his country's prescription-drug system during an appearance in Des Moines, according to the Des Moines Register on 9/16/04.
Jean Chretien, who retired last year, dismissed claims that Canada's drug-inspection system is less effective than the United States'. "Do you think we're crazy in Canada - that we would let people sell unsafe drugs?" he said. "Do you think that as prime minister I would face the Canadian people and say, 'Too bad, you know, but we don't inspect drugs?' . . . I hope you agree with me that we're not that uncivilized," the Register reports.
Of course I agree that Canadians are not crazy or uncivilized. If only the same could be said about the current occupant of our White House.
Bogus Research and Development Excuse
Pfizer questions Rost ability to understand the research and development issue. The industry says importing drugs would hurt profits that are relied upon to pay for research. Pfizer says Rost has ignored his company's extensive research.
I found that funny because I thought Rost sounded fairly knowledgeable on the topic. He seemed to grasp the amount of money involved in research. According to the 9/28/04 Missourian, at news conference, Rost said that of drug giant Merckís $22.5 billion in annual sales, it spent $3.2 billion on research and development and $3.3 billion on stock dividends and reported a profit of $6.8 billion. Although Merck would lose money if the legislation passed, he said, drug companies would still be profitable enough to encourage investment in research.
So Rost doesn't know what he's talking about on the subject of importation? Well he sure had me fooled.
Lawmakers Become Willing To Break The Law
Legislatures all over the country are responding to demands from their constituents, with 24 states considering bills to import drugs from Canada or elsewhere. West Virginia, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Vermont and Rhode Island have already enacted laws that take the first steps toward engaging in broad imports of prescription medicines from Canada, although the federal government is challenging the legality of some of the programs, according to the LA Times on 9/30/94.
Many state and local governments are vowing to disregard federal laws. According to the 10/1/04 Bangor Daily News, Maine will challenge the federal DHHS by initiating a program to re-import drugs from Canada, Gov John Baldacci announced: "The state can't wait ... for the federal government to enact reforms that ensure affordable access to medications for all Americans and will instead take action on behalf of Maine citizens."
Indiana Gov Joe Kernan says his state will help hundreds of thousands of public employees save money on prescription drugs next year one way or another, according to the 9/16/04 Washington Times.
Kernan plans to bring healthcare providers, business leaders and government officials together in early December to find ways to lower prescription drugs costs for state employees and eventually all Hoosiers, the Indianapolis Star Tribune said. If no state or federal solution is found by March 1, 2005, Kernan said he would support ways to help Hoosiers reimport drugs from Canada and other countries.
According to the 8/16/04 Boston Herald, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and city officials "shrugged off" a warning in a letter sent by FDA Associate Commissioner William Hubbard about the safety risks of a program that allows some city employees and retirees to reimport lower-cost prescription drugs from Canada.
In the letter, Hubbard asked Menino to end the "Meds by Mail" program, which began in August. About 14,000 city employees, retirees and their dependents covered under the city health plan qualify for the program. Boston officials have distributed more than 840 applications for the program.
Calgary-based Total Care Pharmacy provides the medications, and Menino has said that the contract between the city and the pharmacy requires safety measures and ensures quality. Hubbard warned that the FDA in the future might ask a judge to issue an injunction against the program but currently seeks to convince Boston officials to end the program voluntarily (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 8/5).
Since March, Wisconsin has filled 1,663 prescriptions under a state reimportation program. Susan Reinardy, a Wisconsin Department of Public Health and Family Services administrator, said that although in the early stages of the program Total Care shipped three generic medications not approved by FDA, the problem has not continued. "We're very happy with their responsiveness," she added (Boston Herald, 8/6).
Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Wisconsin all have websites that connect consumers to Canada drug importation companies. Additionally, the governors of Illinois, Iowa, Oregon, Vermont and West Virginia have come out in favor of importation (Stateline.org, Sept 14, 2004, "Minnesota gov. leads fight for legal Rx importsì).
Other Actions Against The Bush Drug Gang
Bush and his cronies in the industry are being hit from every angle. According to the 9/6/04 issue of American Medical News, Vermont has now sued the federal government for the right to reimport prescription medications.
The lawsuit alleges that the government wrongly denied Vermont's request to establish a reimportation program. The FDA rejected the request claiming it was worried about drug safety. The lawsuit is the first of its kind.
Gov James Douglas, says, "Vermont will not sit back and watch as the cost of health insurance and prescription drugs continues to rise. Nor are we content to simply ignore the law," Douglas said. "Real leadership means challenging those laws and policies you oppose and working within our systems to change them," notes American Medical.
In the law suit, the Vermont claims the FDA violated the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. Officials say the law requires the federal government to create rules that allow wholesalers, pharmacists and state benefit programs to import drugs and calls for the government to give guidance on the circumstances under which the FDA would give waivers allowing importation for personal use.
Vermont claims the Bush administration has done neither and is asking the court to require the government to establish rules and guidelines promptly. "It is our hope and expectation that Vermont's leadership will result in a legal precedent that benefits every Vermonter and every American," Douglas said. "The ultimate goal is to get the best possible market prices at our pharmacies here at home."
On another front, saying Kentucky could save more than $100 million a year in health care costs, state Auditor Crit Luallen called on the state to import cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, according to the 9/29/04 Currier Journal. If Gov Ernie Fletcher agrees, Kentucky would join other states, including Illinois, Maryland, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Vermont, in seeking federal waivers to allow the importation of drugs from Canada.
Almost two-thirds of Kentuckians want the federal government to make it easier to buy prescription drugs from Canada and other countries, according to a Courier-Journal Bluegrass Poll conducted in May. Kentucky Rep Anne Northup, R-Louisville, is also pushing federal legislation to allow prescription drug sales from Canada.
The battleground has been set between the States and the White House. If Bush and Pharma want to continue the war of blocking ways for Americans to obtain affordable prescription drugs, they had better be ready to do a lot more than harass employees who refuse to turn a blind eye to their corruption.
Rost Vows To Stay The Course
Peter Rost vows to continue his support of importation efforts no matter what Pfizer does or doesnít do. In closing, he shared some personal thoughts that would never in a million years lead anyone to think that he is employed in the pharmaceutical industry:
--I don't believe we are put on this earth to make as much money as we can. --I donít think weíre here to rip off the weakest and poorest. --We are here to help each other and make it a better world.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)