Eli Lilly Edits Disclosure Bill
Senators Grassley and Kohl have introduced legislation that would require disclosure of all gifts from pharmaceutical companies to doctors over $500. That sounds like good news, except, according to this report, Grassley's staff worked closely with Eli Lilly to re-write two aspects of the bill to gain Eli Lilly's support. Initially, the bill would apply to all gifts over $25. In addition, the Senators have added a pre-emption clause, so that this law will supersede all state laws, even those that are more strict. This bi-partisan effort to pass a bill and get industry "on board" does not portend well for post-2009 reforms: it sounds like the process that both Clinton and Obama are promising for their health care initiatives. For Eli Lilly, it's yes we can, indeed. But where does this leave patients?
The pre-emption clause is particularly disturbing. This "feel good" legislation overturns more consumer-protecting state rules. By working with a sponsor's staff in Washington, manufacturers are able not only to secure a more lax federal rule but also to undermine all state efforts to enforce more strict regimes.
Last I heard Eli Lilly was not a constituency but rather a very wealthy corporation. So why the hell would our politicians want to "get them on board" if not for the dollars lining their pockets. Representative democracy indeed!
May 14, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! At first I thought this was another
Bill Clinton hit piece!
May 14, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shades of Cheney and Big Oil. Actually, the $500 isn't as bad as it might sound. The biggest payoffs to docs have been in the form of "consultant" fees and speech honoraria that often start at a couple grand and can go as high as $10,000 (and I know that from personally knowing someone who has received such honoraria). Now, that said, I'm assuming that this $500 is per gift, which is how such requirements are generally stated. Which means they could give someone a whole lot of $499 gifts that would add up over time. The real issue, of course, is that Big Pharma had a hand in the legislation, which is a Bush administration hallmark.
May 14, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is why manufacturers should not be invited to "sit at the table" when making decisions about health care reform.
May 15, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is why manufacturers should not be invited to "sit at the table" when making decisions about health care reform.
May 15, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink