SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (39729)12/18/2009 1:15:09 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 71588
 
Re: [The ban on drug imports is a violation of free market principles.} "Your right,"

Thanks.

I believe it is self-evident that it is a violation of Free Trade principles, and the rights of Americans.

Re: "... but the price controls and/or government enforced monopsony buying by the various countries who have lower priced on patent prescription drugs, are themselves a violation of free market principles."

Maybe, maybe not. (Remember: governments ALL OVER the world have very different laws on their books with regard to Patents. And who is to say that a 28 year patent grant is "supportive of free markets" but that an 18 year patent grant, or a 12 year patent grant is *not*?)

As far as certain governments around the world (because they consider access to health care to be a citizen's BASIC RIGHT, just as we consider, say, free speech, or gun rights or what-have-you to be 'natural rights' of each and every citizen) using their purchasing bulk to negotiate lower prices when they buy, you are right, they certainly do. But is that anything more then ANY big purchaser does? Use the power of your position as a big customer to negotiate for the best possible price you can get? If companies don't wish to sell in some particular place they don't have to.

Re: [It is (or should be) an illegal restraint of trade, and an illegal restriction on the economic activities of American citizens and companies.] "No more so than the various tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers".

I agree.

They are ALL restraints of trade and violations of the fundamental rights that American citizens should have.



To: TimF who wrote (39729)12/18/2009 2:52:47 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Respond to of 71588
 
Drug Importation, Senate Votes And Money

Posted: 18 Dec 2009 05:20 AM PST
Pharmalot

The recent Senate squabbling over whether cheaper imports from Canada and elsewhere should be allowed into the US was full of intrigue. Why, for instance, did President Barack Obama flip-flop on his oft-stated campaign remarks that imports should be allowed? Was it the $80 million deal that PhRMA cut on discounts that would help pay for health care reform legislation?

Meanwhile, some questioned the sudden appearance of a letter from FDA commish Margaret Hamburg, who worried aloud that her agency couldn’t guarantee the safety of meds coming into the country. Byron Dorgan, the North Dakota Democrat who fought for the importation amendment, tells The Wall Street Journal that he thinks the White House drafted her letter. Ironically, more active pharmaceutical ingredients are coming from China, which is home to scandal after scandal (think Heparin) and where the FDA has only two inspectors (background).

Senators from states where drugmakers are headquartered reiterated this argument. For those who are wondering how each senator voted, the contributions they receive from pharma and what that might mean, here is a handy breakdown, courtesy of MapLight.org, which found that, among all Senators, those voting to block imports received an average of $85,812 each from drugmakers, which is 69 percent more than those who voted in favor of imports.

All Democrats (and Independents)
Average to Yes votes (allow imports): $41,894
Average to No votes (block imports): $73,729

All Senators
Average to Yes votes (allow imports): $50,767
Average to No votes (block imports): $85,812

Campaign Contributions to Senators from Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Interests, January 1, 2003 - August 12, 2009

Senator Party State Amount from pharma interests Vote on allowing imports:

Akaka, Daniel - Dem - HI - $4,000 - No
Alexander, Lamar Rep - TN $108,950 - Yes
Barrasso, John -Re- WY - $55,500 - No
Baucus, Max - Dem MT - $261,020 - No
Bayh, Evan - Dem - IN - $144,072 - No
Begich, Mark - Dem -AK -$7,500 - Yes
Bennet, Michael - Dem - CO - $10,750 - Yes
Bennett, Robert -Rep - UT - $124,000 - No
Bingaman, Jeff -Dem - NM - $48,500 - Yes
Bond, Christopher - Rep - MO - $99,003 - Yes
Boxer, Barbara - Dem - CA - $35,900 - Yes
Brown, Sherrod - D - OH $17,300 Yes
Brownback, Samuel - Rep - KS - $28,250 - No
Bunning, Jim - Rep - KY - $64,250 - No
Burr, Richard - Rep - NC - $301,898 - No
Burris, Roland - Dem - IL - $0 - No
Byrd, Robert - Dem - WV - $32,100 - Not voting
Cantwell, Maria - Dem - WA - $22,400 - No
Cardin, Benjamin - Dem- MD - $40,850 - No
Carper, Thomas -Dem - DE - $135,700 - No
Casey, Robert - D - PA - $34,750 - No
Chambliss, Saxby -Rep - GA - $83,949 - No
Coburn, Thomas - R - OK - $44,051 - Yes
Cochran, Thad -R - MS - $69,000 - No
Collins, Susan -R - ME - $70,500 - Yes
Conrad, Kent D - ND - $83,000 - Yes
Corker, Bob - R - TN - $65,200 - Yes
Cornyn, John -R - TX - $119,700 - Yes
Crapo, Michael - R - ID - $64,580 - Yes
DeMint, Jim - R - SC - $40,000 - Yes
Dodd, Christopher - D - CT - $174,525 - No
Dorgan, Byron - D - ND - $12,500 - Yes
Durbin, Richard - D - IL - $28,600 - No
Ensign, John - R - NV - $89,950 - No
Enzi, Michael - R - WY - $146,500 - No
Feingold, Russell - D - WI - $6,200 - Yes
Feinstein, Dianne - D - CA - $39,500 - Yes
Franken, Al - D - MN - $2,500 - Yes
Gillibrand, Kirsten - D - NY - $44,400 - No
Graham, Lindsey - R - SC - $55,250 - Yes
Grassley, Charles - R -IA - $103,700 - Yes
Gregg, Judd - R - NH - $122,500 - No
Hagan, Kay - D - NC - $4,650 - No
Harkin, Thomas - D - IA - $81,800 - Yes
Hatch, Orrin - R - UT - $262,950 - No
Hutchison, Kay - R - TX - $29,250 - Yes
Inhofe, James - R - OK - $20,250 - No
Inouye, Daniel - D - HI - $200 - No
Isakson, John - R - GA - $126,599 - No
Johanns, Mike - R - NE - $43,100 -Yes
Johnson, Tim D SD ($1,500) Yes
Kaufman, Edward D DE $1,500 No
Kerry, John D MA $21,170 No
Kirk, Paul D MA $0 No
Klobuchar, Amy D MN $2,290 Yes
Kohl, Herbert D WI $0 Yes
Kyl, Jon R AZ $117,350 No
Landrieu, Mary D LA $89,550 No
Lautenberg, Frank D NJ $97,550 No
Leahy, Patrick D VT $46,600 Yes
LeMieux, George R FL $0 Yes
Levin, Carl D MI $1,000 No
Lieberman, Joseph I CT $199,540 No
Lincoln, Blanche D AR $100,750 Yes
Lugar, Richard R IN $51,850 No
McCain, John R AZ $7,000 Yes
McCaskill, Claire D MO $6,050 Yes
McConnell, Mitch R KY $225,900 Yes
Menéndez, Robert D NJ $196,452 No
Merkley, Jeff D OR $18,500 Yes
Mikulski, Barbara D MD $70,995 No
Murkowski, Lisa R AK $63,050 Yes
Murray, Patty D WA $144,400 No
Nelson, Ben D NE $138,098 Yes
Nelson, Bill D FL $38,600 Yes
Pryor, Mark D AR $31,000 Yes
Reed, John D RI $34,100 No
Reid, Harry D NV $74,800 No
Risch, James R ID $22,100 Yes
Roberts, Pat R KS $80,650 No
Rockefeller, John D WV $44,000 No
Sanders, Bernard I VT $420 Yes
Schumer, Charles D NY $54,900 No
Sessions, Jefferson R AL $45,000 Yes
Shaheen, Jeanne D NH $2,250 Yes
Shelby, Richard R AL $25,000 Yes
Snowe, Olympia - Rep - ME - $4,000 -Yes
Specter, Arlen -Dem - PA - $353,550 - Yes
Stabenow, Debbie Ann - Dem - MI - $39,134 - Yes
Tester, Jon -Dem - MT -$14,000 - No
Thune, John - Rep - SD - $45,300 - Yes
Udall, Mark -Dem - CO - $102,275 - No
Udall, Tom - Dem - NM - $15,300 - Yes
Vitter, David - Rep - LA - $17,050 - Yes
Voinovich, George -Rep - OH - $63,750 - No
Warner, Mark -Dem - VA - $84,950 - No
Webb, Jim -Dem - VA - $8,750 - Yes
Whitehouse, Sheldon - Dem - RI - $11,800 - No
Wicker, Roger - Rep - MS - $67,600 - Yes
Wyden, Ron - Dem - OR - $27,800 - Yes

Hat tip to NPR Shots