As Jane Hamsher noted today, Marcy Winograd, the progressive challenger to Jane Harman in CA-36, released a letter savaging Harman for her support of the Eshoo amendment on biologics in the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Though Congressman Waxman (D-Santa Monica/West LA) had introduced an amendment for a 5-year fast-track of generic biologics, Harman joined with Rep. Eshoo (D-San Mateo) in committee to kill the Waxman amendment and protect the profits of big pharmaceuticals by enacting a 12-year exclusivity on the use of Big Pharma’s clinical trial data. Under this amendment’s ambiguous “ever-greening” clause drug companies could continue their monopoly indefinitely by changing a dosage instruction — thus thwarting the sale and marketing of biosimilars or less expensive generics.
I denounce Harman’s committee vote to kill the Waxman amendment. There is no excuse for putting drug company profits before patient needs. Lowering regulatory obstacles to allow for more generics not only saves patients’ lives, but also billions of dollars in taxpayer money spent on prescription drug medicines. Why should Big Pharma have a monopoly on medical research often subsidized by the taxpayers? We need representatives who will represent the people, not the big corporations.
A May 15, 2009 financial disclosure statement Harman filed with the House of Representatives reveals Harman’s 2008 investment portfolio included stock in at least three biologic manufacturers: Pfizer, Abbot Labs, and Johnson & Johnson.
I just got off the phone with Winograd and asked her how she decided to use the biologics issue. “Well, I was perplexed why Big PhRMa was airing ads on the Thom Hartmann Show praising Harman, and asking people to call her office and thank her for supporting health care reform,” she said. “Then I read Jane Hamsher’s post and that Time Magazine story about the biologics issue, and I put two and two together.”
Winograd noted that Harman has been offering press release after press release about her support for health care reform, but nothing on this particular issue, where Harman sided with pharmaceutical interests and allowed them to perpetually hold their patents. The progressive candidate plans to release a position paper on how to fix this issue, and “when I am elected to Congress I will work to repeal this.” She cited favorably the FTC report that recommended no exclusivity period for biologic drugs.
Winograd noted that she called Anna Eshoo’s office recently to inquire about the issue, and the staffer both denied that there was an evergreening clause in Eshoo amendment and referred Winograd to Eshoo’s response in the Huffington Post making the same claim. “I went back to the bill, and I read that portion, and it sure sounds like evergreening to me. I’m not a pharmacist, but I can read, and it said that slight modifications would allow drugmakers to restart the clock.”
“As someone with a father who had Parkinson’s and a best friend with breast cancer, I would always support the ability for patients to get the life-saving care they need,” Winograd said. Asked about Harman’s stated support of the overall bill, including a public option, Winograd replied, “As progressives, we have to be cautious about who we support. If someone has played a key role in passing this sellout to Big PhRMa, then it behooves us not to support those politicians who are working for large corporations instead of their constituents.”
19 Comments
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Advanced search
a big duh! for me.
couldn’t figure out why Harman went out of her way on tape, to assure Lynn Woolsey of her support for PO but it was obvious at the time she was bearding for somethin’
daughter cbl lives in the district – and will be working for Winograd
Harmon is just not to be trusted. It’s too bad because she could have been great in Congress. Do I expect more from women on the issues like health care? – you bet I do.
If we go after Calfornia Democrats for conflicts-of-interest, we could lose half our Senate delegation and many ‘critters as well.
Why do Anna Eshoo and Jane Harman hate Americans? Seemingly, they do… Barton I can understand, he’s a republican after all and hate is in his DNA. I guess when the Benjamins roll in, the principles really do go out the window, as we have been finding out this year, with “our” alleged representatives.
You know, there are only 535 federal legislatures. At this point, I’m beginning to wonder if maybe, just maybe, we might be better off in the long run to just set up all of their pay to be, oh I dunno, $25 million per year.
Maybe if they’re already rich, they won’t feel the need so much to try shit like this??? Maybe that money spent on those salaries would save even more in boondoggle legislation written for their corp masters. I dunno. Damned tired of this.
Democrat, Republican, they’re all in it for themselves. Maybe the way we do campaigns today means that these are the only type of people we get. Maybe the truly good ones in it for others just can’t bear today’s campaign climate. I dunno, but we’ve gotta drastically change something, or healthcare, climate change, all of ‘em are just going to be new boondoggles.
That half of Ca Senators you are speaking of is STILL thinking of running for governor ! Yikes !
…it said that slight modifications would allow drugmakers to restart the clock.”
forget tort reform – it’s already in place in 48 out of 50 states. If one were to want to hold litigation costs down, they would look at this issue, which is the source of never-ending litigation between drug companies.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics there are 237 members of Congress worth over a million dollars or 44% of Congress. Another 55% are doing all they can to join their “esteemed” colleagues who benefit from a corrupt and ossified system.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/
OT Eight people shot in Orlando. Suspect not in custody.
…we might be better off in the long run to just set up all of their pay to be, oh I dunno, $25 million per year.
I have never opposed a pay raise for legislators, because if you want the best people, you pay for the talent.
Unfortunately, it is simultaneously true that NO ONE ever thinks that they have enough money, and will always be on the lookout for a way to make more.
Strict campaign financing reform is the only answer (which leaves remaining the question – who is going to pass such a law?)
No one is going to pass such a law. Your grandchildren will have grandchildren before this is ever considered.
The best talent, however, rarely gets elected. That approach works when hiring people, not electing them.
Jane Harman is the second richest rep or senator with assests of $244 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). that puts here in about the upper .0000001 % of all Americans. She is a card carrying memeber of the super-ultra wealthy.
Blue Texan’s regularly scheduled post is ready: “Right-Wingers: “Political Correctness” to Blame for Ft. Hood Shootings”
Called Eshoo’s office, left voicemail for her Senior Field representative Rachel…
Will report further if/when I get a return call. Given that I’ve had no response to 2 emails I’ll not be holding my breath.
but is it enough?
I’m OK. Lockdown mode in the area though. No traffic. Kind of spooky.
It’s not a question of money, it’s about being in the Club, or in the Village, or whatever perceived social group you want. Movie analogy: Pablo (Akim Tamiroff) in For Whom The Bell Tolls kills the people who gave them horses because Pablo looks after his own. That’s Jane Harmon. She looks after her own. And the voters are not her tribe.
test