This bill is nothing but another bail out to corporations. I hope this amendment get’s passed and I would rather see no bill than a piece of crap bill called health reform

Seems like all the good stuff that will actually help people draws the most opposition
You know like the public option

screw Obama if he’s going to sell us out to the corporate profiteers

Me too …

The fucking loopholes that are just beginning to come out are all huge benefits to the corporate health care folks … now we are seeing why the obaminable administration wants to fast track this piece of garbage through their conduit whores in the senate without the house having much of a say.

Z

I thought Democrats with spines ahd become extinct. What shall we call this new creature? And are there any more to be found?

That’s all the stuff that is so unimportant … “unimportant” to the interests that the head pr man for the establishment represents. It’s unimportant supposedly, but they’ll fight tooth and nail against it …

I hate this administration. I hate this government and the two corporate whore parties that infest it.

Z

It’s not spines … they got plenty of spines to fuck over the vast majority of the American people that are for single payer health care and drug re-importation.

The democrats are corrupt, not cowards. The coward canard is just an act in the kabuki theatre ..

Z

Hats off to the guy, and here’s hoping he sticks to his guns. Aside from being good policy, this has got to play well with seniors. The US (public) is subsidizing low drug costs for the rest of the world. No reason for that to continue.

Got anything constructive to say? The broken record routine is already tiresome.

Corrupt or cowards? How about both.

We are officially there… I have been saying it for a while…

it is time for progressives to kill this bill and make them start over.

end the corporate welfare

and do not forget sec 1555, page 367 — the opt-out clause, without penalty, for insurance companies

So we can presume that Jay and any Democrat that cries about needing 60 votes to pass or win anything (60% of the Senate) will not accept re-election when running unless he gets 60% of the popular vote in his state?
That pesky 50.1% thingy isn’t important to them?
Maybe someone should ask him!

cannot think of many here that would disagree with you, I’d even suggest that this awareness fuels this site.

Have you been keeping abreast of the events in Greece, ‘Z’ ?

Why cannot these allegedly pro-consumer Democrats, attach these sorts of legislation to the DOD budget?!

Good for Byron Dorgan! I hope he sticks to his guns. If his amendment leads to the bill blowing up, i would say it already blew up. It just needs a funeral.

I hope Dorgan stands firm, but remember Congressman Weiner and how he was going to stand firm on single-payer in the House? And how he moved out of the way and we got Stupak instead?

Whatever happened to the Democratic Party being for the “Working People” who need help – and not becoming the “other party” for BIG Corporations?

If you find them, please put your finding on the top of some blog in big, bold letters.

what is constructive to you?

it’s too early to judge obama?
He inherited a terrible situation so we should all give him a pass?
He’s better than bush so we should be glad we got him and keep our mouths shot as he sells us out?

Z

And that last quote of the story … geez .. we’ve heard it about the other ND Senator before .. I hope people like BooMan reads it.

I know that there has been a lot of turmoil with the population raising hell against the government … is there something beyond that or more particular or recent developments that you are referring to?

Z

And also, I was replying to someone that is claiming the old democrats want to do good, but too cowardly to … that’s old and tired to me.

Z

If you find them, please put your finding on the top of some blog in big, bold letters.

Tombstone be a wee bit better place, methinks.

This is directed towards the southerndragoon …

Z

I’m sorry, do you want to talk about cats or something … am I off target here talking about the corrupt government that is fucking over the people in this country? Is this the wrong forum for this? Are you an a obamabot?

Z

Most of the senators have already eaten all their children (us), and now they’re starting to bite down hard on each other. Two years ago they blamed the previous eight years. Last year they blamed the failed economy. Two months ago it was the Teabaggers. Two weeks ago it was ‘the media’. Last week it was the bloggers. Now there’s no one left but themselves, and they know it. It’s become a Congress of cannibals.

Yes, damn good for Byron Dorgan. [I see the imperious Jay Rockefeller of last year's holy "bipartisan" FISA Amendments Act cramdown has finally resurfaced, true to form. Talk about a toxic personality.]

I don’t know if anyone’s noted this yet in the reporting today, but I answered one of my “unanswered questions” about the underhanded introduction of the White House-supported Lautenberg drug reimportation amendment – suddenly offered yesterday – a couple of hours ago while checking the Congressional Record.

From a part of the conversation between Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell at 7 p.m. Thursday on the Senate floor, which I was listening to and heard most of (though my C-SPAN feed was intermittently interrupted, including apparently just when the highlighted nugget below was revealed by Reid):

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, could I just say, at the risk of being redundant–and I do not want to get into a spirited debate with my friend and colleague over this–the facts are we were just handed a 100-page Lautenberg amendment about an hour ago. I have 39 Members here, all interested in that issue. It is simply impossible for me to clear voting on an amendment of 100 pages in duration that I just got an hour ago.

The reason I had suggested–and I was hopeful that maybe it would be a good way forward–we vote on the Crapo amendment, which everybody understands has been out there since Tuesday, and a sense-of-the-Senate resolution that is fairly brief, I assume–a very brief sense of the Senate that Senator Baucus was going to offer–is because both sides fully understand those two measures. They are not 100 pages long and enormously complicated. We did not just receive them.

So I do not want to get into an extensive back and forth with the majority leader, but I would say to him through the Chair, sincerely, it strikes me a good way to just get started would be to vote on these two issues, the Crapo motion and the Baucus amendment that both sides fully understand.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, this is no sucker punch the Democrats have just leveled to the Republicans. This amendment was previously offered by Senator Cochran, a Republican, that Senator Lautenberg is offering. This is something people have known about for a long time. So I understand people may have forgotten what was in that. They can have the evening to look it over. But I will renew my request tomorrow. We are ready to legislate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I guess I will have to prolong it just a little bit further.

I just learned something from the majority leader, that in fact this is an amendment that has been around before. We just learned that from his comments, having just received it a short time ago. Nevertheless, we will continue to talk and see if we cannot move forward and make progress and give both sides votes they are clearly interested in having.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I appreciate the attitude of the Republican leader. I think it is fair to have a chance to look at that amendment. We will be here in the morning and try to work through this.

So what was the original Cochran? I can’t find it/determine which it is at THOMAS.

drogan is standing up for REAL change. shame on the President and the democratic establishment for not standing up alongside senator Drogan

Appreciate your passion and welcome to the lake.

Fishin is purty good roun heah, but it’s been years since somebody hooked a bot.

Heard some stories awhile back, kos mos folks have too. Ain’t seen no bots though.

We tries to find a groove in da beat, keepin our sorry asses informed while we search for answers to shake dat thang we calls our guvmint.

Well, I’m working it under the rocks, lettin’ it bounce off the bottom a bit … givin’ it a little action. I’ll let you know if I get a hit.

Z

Great post. However, this “update” tagged on to the end of the latest Grim piece is worth mentioning:

UPDATE: “We’re not whipping against the Dorgan amendment. Those rumors just aren’t true,” says a White House aide in an e-mail. The aide says that the White House has taken no position on the amendment.

That could be for plausible deniability, but given the fact that Snowe is a co-sponsor of Dorgan and re-importation is broadly popular, the WH statements are also simply plausible. Certainly things are not quite clear yet and we’re still in the tea-leaf reading phase. To make things clearer, 2 things would have to be answered:

- Does the insistence of Dorgan and the fact that he may have 60 votes come as any surprise to the WH, or did they expect it all along to replace their deal, and do they have any problem with that?

- The one party that’s obviously doing everything they can to stop this is PhRMA with their donation-dangling lobbyists. If the WH really does want to stick to its deal – which I think is far from clear yet – was it put together in anticipation of the likelihood that when push comes to shove, many if not most Senators were going to give in to PhRMA anyway?

How would this so called debate be had there had been daily demonstrations in front of the WH and Congress demanding meaningful reform for the PEOPLE and not merely give aways to big insurance and pharma. I’m not talking about several dozens holding signs but tens of thousands. Obama and corrupt Dems think they can pass a piece of shit and shine it up a bit as a victory for the country and without a movement by the people they may well do it.

Meanwhile, yesterday the House passed a $1.1 Trillion spending bill for the military and in Oslo Obama told the peace committee peace doesn’t work.

“we are officially there…

I think you sense that Joe Lieberman (I-AETNA) played his hand too soon?

There are so many things in the current proposal that are disgusting, a target rich environment for criticism.

Can we have any attribution for the Dem aide? Is this Rahm or_______?“Of course, with Dorgan, it’s all about Dorgan,” a senior Democratic aide told HuffPost,….

I thought that line could play for Lieberman, Nelson, Snowe, et al. There are less than 50 who are in this for other than ego.

Z, you are bringing nothing new to these threads. We’ve all said what you feel a long, long time ago, – so you just look to most of us like some twerpy ‘Johnny come lately’.

Suggest you chill your heals and measure the battlefield before jumping in like some fucking imbecile,- although you are evidently not one,- your actions belie your reasoning.

- The one party that’s obviously doing everything they can to stop this is PhRMA with their donation-dangling lobbyists. If the WH really does want to stick to its deal – which I think is far from clear yet – was it put together in anticipation of the likelihood that when push comes to shove, many if not most Senators were going to give in to PhRMA anyway?

You realize of course that what you’re saying is the WH is giving cover to Senate bribery.

Snowe and Dorgan’s states are low-population border states with Canada, so it seems their interests are narrower than, say, for the greater populace. It’s likely (?) that they get a lot of traffic that includes legal ‘importing’ of prescription meds. But it must be a huge burden on the US Customs folks there, and a much bigger nuisance to the state’s populace who regularly drive back and forth. It’s probably a trivial side-issue, but I think it’s more than a coincidence, especially if it augurs for a new and lucrative revenue stream for those two border states, which they’re entitled to have, and I hope it comes to pass.

Hey fuckno, I can care less what you think.

The stuff that has been said here time and time again … according to you … I had said a while back here and was told to fuck off becoz I was being too negative. Now there are assholes like you around telling me that what I’m saying is old …

So, I don’t care about your “suggestions” about “measuring the battlefield”. For what … for why? What exactly are you accomplishing here? And what “actions” belie my reasoning? I’m posting on a board for God’s sake …

Z

Don’t know yet, Kelly.

All hands on deck for the search:

http://thomas.loc.gov/r111/r111.html

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/bills_res.html

OT: Does anyone know much about the pay/czar, Fineberg, I think. He also did the payouts for 9/11…

Sort of, if that’s the scenario that’s playing out, but if they did anticipate the bribery, at least that got some deal to prevent total bribery ($80b better than nothing). And if that’s the case, it’s not the hardest thing in the world to do a new bill solely for reimportation in a few years. Still, I think it’s as likely that they prefer Dorgan beats Lautenberg.

Z, by all means knock yourself out! Hang around, scream at the walls, enjoy!

You too … I’m so glad to have your blessing …

Z

Which is what it does best, other than engage in its own bribery and epic confabulation.

I have a bad feeling about this.

I can’t find Cochran amendments to any of the 3 bills listed under healthcare reform here at the Senate Website.

But there are several Cochran amendments offered, but to HR 1 – the budget; however none of those are substantive, meaning they say their purpose will be revealed when taken under consideration.

reading the comment from the aide I am reminded of the craziness that passes for normalacy in DC…..just remarakable-

I believe this goes back to 2007 and it was used to defeat Dorgan before:
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?hint=3&DR_ID=44761
Obama by the statements where he questions the safety of imports has already telegraphed that he wants to play the Bush role and that this is literally right out of the Republican playbook…frankly it is amazing how brazen it is.

Byron Dorgan is my hero. And my Senator.

I found an apropos amendment from Cochran back in 2007 (which may be the same one that spanishinquisition is linking to a Kaiser report about @ 47), but it’s no 100-pager:

SA 1010. Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. Carper, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Burr, and Mr. Menendez) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 990 submitted by Mr. Dorgan (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Grassley, Mr. McCain, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mrs. McCaskill) to the bill S. 1082, to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to reauthorize and amend the prescription drug user fee provisions, and for other purposes; as follows:

At the end of the amendment, add the following:

SEC. __. PROTECTION OF HEALTH AND SAFETY.

This title, and the amendments made by this title, shall become effective only if the Secretary of Health and Human Services certifies to Congress that the implementation of this title (and amendments) will–

(1) pose no additional risk to the public’s health and safety; and

(2) result in a significant reduction in the cost of covered products to the American consumer.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_record&page=S5512&position=all

This is the underlying bill [the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Revitalization/Amendments Act] to which SA 1010 was appended…:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01082:

…which passed the Senate and House in different forms, and (I believe I’m reading this right) were then merged and eventually became law in September, 2007 as H.R. 3580:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03580:

The Senate was working on its legislation in May, 2007, as this news compilation explains, revealing the same corporate-underwritten dispute that’s underway in the Senate today:

The Senate on Monday [in May, 2007] voted 49-40 to approve a second-degree amendment to a bill (S 1082) to reauthorize the Prescription Drug User Fee Act that would not allow prescription drug reimportation from other nations until the HHS secretary certifies that the practice would “pose no additional risk to the public’s health and safety” and would significantly reduce costs for consumers, the New York Times reports (Pear, New York Times, 5/8). In addition, the Senate later by voice vote approved an amendment proposed by Sens. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) that would allow reimportation (Bridges, AP/Houston Chronicle, 5/8). The amendment attaches to the reauthorization legislation a bill (S 242) introduced in January by Dorgan and Snowe that would allow consumers, pharmacies and wholesalers to purchase FDA-approved prescription drugs that are manufactured at FDA-inspected facilities in 19 industrialized nations.

Under the legislation, which would establish a regulatory framework for reimportation, FDA would regulate shipments of prescription drugs reimported into the U.S. for commercial or personal use. The bill also would require FDA to inspect Canadian prescription drug exporters 12 times annually (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 5/4).

However, the approval of the second-degree amendment, proposed by Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), effectively “neutralized” the Dorgan amendment, the AP/Chronicle reports (AP/Houston Chronicle, 5/8). According to The Hill, in “both the current and Clinton administrations, HHS refused to guarantee that it could certify the safety of drugs imported from other countries” (Young, The Hill, 5/7). Cochran said that “serious problems exist with products from other countries” and that “hundreds, if not thousands,” of consumers worldwide have experienced problems with counterfeit prescription drugs (Cox/Richmond Times-Dispatch, 5/8).

[...]

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who voted against the Cochran amendment, called the amendment a “poison pill” for legislation that would allow reimportation (AP/Houston Chronicle, 5/8). Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who also voted against the Cochran amendment, said, “Well, once again the big drug companies have proved that they are the most powerful and best-financed lobby in Washington” (Cohen, Newark Star-Ledger, 5/8).

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/70290.php

What do you expect from a man who took 80% of his contributions from the FIRE industries? Surely you weren’t expecting him to do anything for the people of this country? I would think his agenda was transparent to all by now.

The way that debate takes place in the Senate is pretty revealing. Even if the place was populated with true statesmen the current imperant rules would prevent anything from ever getting done.

What with filibustering and placing holds on nominees and amendments, these maneuvers even in the best of hands would be a recipe for gridlock. Now when not even a single statesman is present in the entire three branches of government, the carryings on in the Senate is a poor two bit play.

Only a handful of congressmen have good oratory skills with a good mind to match and fewer have anything worth listening to. Dick Durbin is one and he is able to get his points across clearly and for the most part conincingly and with sense.

With most of the others you just get the feeling they are trying to hussle you. You know they are lying and they know that too.

Good Lard, I bet you’ve found it. When Reid said “a long time ago” he really meant it. Foolish me to look only in this Congressional Session.

This is who voted for it on the Democrat side: Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Maria Cantwell, Thomas Carper, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Mary Landrieu, Frank Lautenberg, Blanche Lincoln, Robert Menéndez, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, Ben Nelson, Jay Rockefeller and Kenneth Salazar.

Obama and Biden didn’t vote.

White House, is strong-arming as many Democrats as possible into voting against reimportation, because it would blow up the Big PhRMa deal and risk blowing up the whole bill.

Oh, please, let’s blow up this damn thing!!!

The safety options?! Oh, good grief…

The could just show us all the dead and maimed Canadians! But they can’t can they?

Also… the only reward that Dorgan will be getting for his efforts is a lot of grief from his colleagues

…and if he succeeds the gratitude of all of their constituents.

Ya gotta love Byron. He also was a lonely figure speaking out against the repeal of Glass-Steagel.

Dorgan’s always had spine. His views are just very much his own. I’m glad he’s standing up for this important amendment. Maybe it will be catching, and force the Senate to do reconciliation or the nuclear option.

Fucking Barack Obama, the man has become everything i despise about our current political system. Who knew? who knew he would become such a complete disaster.

We can always scrap it and start over next year. After all, it’s obvious politicians haven’t yet sucked all the $$$$$ out of the medical industry yet. /s

At some point it would seem the medical industry would beg for them to get it done, so they could save themselves some money.

This bill is very complicated and getting 60 votes for cloture is apparently a real balancing act. How this proceeds ought to be an interesting story for history books on how law is made (or not).

One thing for sure, we ought to get a CBO-like comparison of the pure unadulterated reform plan and compare it to the final CBO of whatever passes. How much cost savings are cut out of the ideal to make it palatable enough to pass is the cost of our current mix of politicians. Somehow it feels like we’re losing a lot to this crew — and it’s not quite done yet. How they will justify that loss of savings (despite it mostly being so-called deficit hawks who require these modifications) is anybody’s guess.

Still, it also seems to me we’ll get a good final product (if we get anything passed) if anyone can read it and understand it. What’s it up to now, something like 2300 pages?

The final word I think is that if the Dems don’t all vote for the final product and make it law then all those who professed support for single-payer and then voted against this and all who professed support for ‘some kind of’ reform will have been shown to be the most crass kind of hypocrites and liars. That probably won’t bother the politicians, but it would hurt the Dem party (rightfully so). I hope they avoid that tragedy and pass a good bill for Americans.

Isn’t it the politicians who say they’re responding to the electorate in their own states, but who are actually going against the electorate (as polls show) who are doomed to lose their next election? Wish ‘em good luck, but if they destroy reform give campaign money to their opponents.

Trying to pierce the smooth-talking, well-heeled line of bull the Democratic leadership was peddling Friday [Schumer, Menendez & Whitehouse in this case], I got distracted and forgot to check yesterday’s Congressional Record for the Lautenberg amendment…

So, I apologize, everyone, for starting a bit of a goose chase on the historical Cochran research, though it does add some valuable perspective.

Here, basically right in front of us in the CR, is the new Lautenberg language of Amendment #3156:

SA 3156. Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. CARPER, and Mr. MENENDEZ) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed…[to the health care bill]; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end, add the following:

TITLE X–IMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

SEC. 10001. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the “Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug Safety Act of 2009″.

SEC. 10002. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that–

(1) Americans unjustly pay up to 5 times more to fill their prescriptions than consumers in other countries;

(2) the United States is the largest market for pharmaceuticals in the world, yet American consumers pay the highest prices for brand pharmaceuticals in the world;

(3) a prescription drug is neither safe nor effective to an individual who cannot afford it;

(4) allowing and structuring the importation of prescription drugs to ensure access to safe and affordable drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration will provide a level of safety to American consumers that they do not currently enjoy;

(5) American spend more than $200,000,000,000 on prescription drugs every year;

(6) the Congressional Budget Office has found that the cost of prescription drugs are between 35 to 55 percent less in other highly-developed countries than in the United States; and

(7) promoting competitive market pricing would both contribute to health care savings and allow greater access to therapy, improving health and saving lives.

SEC. 10003. REPEAL OF CERTAIN SECTION REGARDING IMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

Chapter VIII of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 381 et seq.) is amended by striking section 804.

SEC. 10004. IMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS; WAIVER OF CERTAIN IMPORT RESTRICTIONS.

(a) In General.–Chapter VIII of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 381 et seq.), as amended by section 10003, is further amended by inserting after section 803 the following:

“SEC. 804. COMMERCIAL AND PERSONAL IMPORTATION OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

“(a) Importation of Prescription Drugs.–

“(1) IN GENERAL.–In the case of qualifying drugs imported or offered for import into the United States from registered exporters or by registered importers–

“(A) the limitation on importation that is established in section 801(d)(1) is waived; and

“(B) the standards referred to in section 801(a) regarding admission of the drugs are subject to subsection (g) of this section (including with respect to qualifying drugs to which section 801(d)(1) does not apply).

“(2) IMPORTERS.–A qualifying drug may not be imported under paragraph (1) unless–

“(A) the drug is imported by a pharmacy, group of pharmacies, or a wholesaler that is a registered importer; or

“(B) the drug is imported by an individual for personal use or for the use of a family member of the individual (not for resale) from a registered exporter.

“(3) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.–This section shall apply only with respect to a drug that is imported or offered for import into the United States–

“(A) by a registered importer; or

“(B) from a registered exporter to an individual.

“(4) DEFINITIONS.–

[Etc., for 100 pages]

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2009_record&page=S12948&position=all

Thursday, December 10, 2009, in the Senate:

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I have said, for the last 2 days, I was going to speak on the Dorgan amendment, a bipartisan amendment to allow the importation of drugs into the United States. I haven’t done it until now, so I am glad to rise in support of this bipartisan amendment to add provisions of the Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug Safety Act to this bill. That legislation is the result of a collaborative effort by Senators Dorgan, Snowe, McCain, and this Senator to finally make drug importation legal.

I have, for a long time, been a proponent of drug reimportation. In 2000, 2002, and 2003, I supported an amendment permitting the importation of prescription drugs into the United States from one country, Canada. This amendment is much broader than only Canada.

In 2004, the late Senator Kennedy and I worked together on a bill that would authorize drug importation, but it did not survive the partisan politics of this Chamber. I then introduced my own comprehensive drug importation bill in 2004. That was S. 2307, the Reliable Entry for Medicines at Everyday Discounts Through the Importation with Effective Safeguards Act. The REMEDIES Act is what the acronym finally spells out. In 2005, I combined my bill with a proposal sponsored by Senators Dorgan and Snowe. In 2007, we reintroduced a version of that legislation with the hope that our combined efforts would finally lower the cost of prescription drugs for all Americans. That is what we are still working together to do this very day. I thank Senator Dorgan for his leadership.

This time around, I should be confident that this effort will finally pass. Historically, Democrats claim to be champions of holding the big pharmaceutical companies accountable. Now we have a Democratic supermajority in the Congress and a Democratic President who has supported drug importation in the past. I am not as confident as maybe I should be. That is because the White House has participated in some back-room negotiations since the last time this legislation was brought before the Senate and then-Senator Obama supported it. Behind closed doors, the Democratic White House found new friends in the pharmaceutical industry. Last summer, the head of the pharmaceutical lobbying group bragged that drug manufacturers had negotiated a “rock-solid deal”–those are their words–with the present administration.

An article in the New York Times detailed the administration’s deal with big drug companies. This quote comes from the New York Times:

Foreseeing new profits from the expansion of health coverage, big drug companies are spending as much as $150 million on advertisements to support the President’s plan.

But in 2008, when President Obama was campaigning for the position he now holds, he promised that:

We’ll take on drug and insurance companies, hold them responsible for the prices they charge and the harm they cause.

Certainly, the President knows that a great way to hold drug companies accountable is to allow drug importation. In fact, in 2004, when he was a candidate to be a Member of this Chamber, he challenged his opponents to support drug importation. He said at that time:

I urge [my opponent] to stop siding with the drug manufacturers and put aside his opposition to the re-importation of lower-priced prescription drugs. …..

But, unfortunately, it has been reported that during backroom negotiations at the White House, the big pharmaceutical companies have convinced the President to drop his strong support for drug importation.

The New York Times reports that:

On July 7–

Meaning this year–

Rahm Emanuel, [President] Obama’s chief of staff ….. assured at least five pharmaceutical companies during a White House meeting that there would be no provision in the final health care package to allow the reimportation of cheaper drugs. …..

I thought we were going to hold drug companies accountable. I thought health care reform was supposed to drive down the cost of health care, including the cost of prescription drugs for all Americans. The Dorgan amendment is a commonsense, bipartisan approach to achieve both of these goals. Drug importation achieves these goals without imposing arbitrary fees, and without flexing the muscles of the Federal Government.

[...]

It is true that pharmaceutical companies do not like the idea of opening up America to the global marketplace. They want to keep the United States closed to other markets in order to charge higher prices here.

Based on the reports I just read, it seems that the White House has already sided with the drug manufacturers and promised them the ability to continue to gouge American consumers, otherwise known as the status quo.

The debate is not over. With the Dorgan amendment, prescription drug companies will be forced to be competitive and establish fair prices in America. The drug companies will try to find loopholes in order to protect their bottom line.

The Dorgan amendment would make such action illegal. It would not allow manufacturers to discriminate against registered exporters or importers. It would prohibit drug companies from engaging in any actions to restrict, prohibit, or delay the importation of a qualifying drug.

The Dorgan amendment would give the Federal Trade Commission the authority to prevent this kind of abuse. It develops an effective and safe system that gives Americans access to lower prices. Our effort goes to great lengths to ensure the safety of imported drugs. The Dorgan amendment requires that all imported drugs be approved by the FDA. It puts in place a stringent set of safety requirements that must be met before Americans can import drugs from that country.

The amendment requires all exporting pharmacies and importing wholesalers to be registered with the FDA and inspected. It gives the authority for the FDA to inspect the entire distribution chain for imported drugs. It sets very stringent penalties for violations of the safety requirements in this bill, including criminal penalties and up to 10 years imprisonment.

We need to make sure Americans have even greater, more affordable access to innovative drugs by further opening the doors to competition in the global pharmaceutical industry.

If my colleagues on both sides of the aisle are serious about bending down the cost curve of health care inflation–and doing it in that direction, the right direction–then they will support the Dorgan amendment, a bipartisan amendment.

I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized.

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. President.

I echo the comments of the senior Senator from Iowa. He is exactly right about the Dorgan amendment. There are a lot of reasons, as he pointed out, why the Dorgan amendment makes sense for the American people.

[...]

I was part of these discussions in the House where we had the same amendment. We would pass it, and then it would die in the Senate, or things would happen in the conference committees or whatever, where the drug companies really did exert their influence over the Congress and with the President during the Bush years.

But one of the arguments they always make is to question the safety of these drugs, that these drugs coming from Canada or these drugs coming from France are not safe, as if they did not have a food and drug administration as efficient and effective as ours in terms of protecting the public.

But what sort of shoots a hole in that argument is how many American drug companies–over and over and over, and in increasing numbers–how many American drug companies are importing ingredients especially from China.

[...]

The American drug companies–whether it is Pfizer or another drug company–when they outsource their production to China, may know where the plant is that puts all these ingredients together, but they cannot trace back–or at least they will not tell us or cannot tell us–all their ingredients. So they may get this ingredient from Wuhan, and this ingredient from Shanghai, and that ingredient from a rural outpost in Hebei or Henan Province, but they cannot tell us exactly where they come from. So no wonder these drugs are not as safe as they should be.

[...]

It is all about protecting their profits. There is simply no doubt about that. Their profits get to be bigger because they make some of these drugs in China.

So let’s not have it both ways. Let’s not say we cannot import drugs safely into this country–when they are exporting jobs, as so many other industries are doing, to China, exporting jobs to little villages where they manufacture these ingredients. They end up in America’s medicine cabinets. Let’s not talk out of both sides of our mouths, as the drug industry is doing.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2009_record&page=S12871&position=all

After reading through all of these, yours made the most sense. 58,000 died in Vietnam, we stopped that by rioting in the streets. Martin Luther King got civil rights through civil disobedience. Indeed as we look back through history, anything for the people had to be fought for. We cannot compete with their money through puny $5 donations. We will not accomplish anything sitting on our asses. We must take to the streets.

Also including a pay increase for federal workers. We have a true unemployment rate of close to 25%, not even close to anything called healthcare reform, yet they get a fucking pay increase? WTF for?

Byron Dorgan is a confusing man. He says one thing in Washington and comes back to North Dakota and says something else. He’s lost a lot of support in North Dakota because a. People have figured out he doesn’t actually live here and b. He is all over the map on his votes. For the first time in my life I’m voting for a Republican. Paul Sorum of Fargo is running for the Republicans and he makes sense on the economy, health care, and education. I’m towing the party line. I want someone from my state who seems honest. Dorgan had his day, but I’m done with the lies. I’m voting for Paul Sorum.

Bingo.