Ermeds


DrugBuyers.com VIP Members get $20 off the consultation.

The doctor may qualify you for 120 count and up to two refills on your order. Join Now



Other Related Topics >> Laws, Regulations, and Enforcement

Pages: 1
Coyote123
Stranger


Reged: 01/06/02
Posts: 22
House Ok's Plan to Import Rx Drugs - July 2001
      #24443 - 08/08/02 10:14 PM

Where I got this says July 12, 2001 - Could it be 2002 ?
Originally in the LA TIMES
Titled: House Ok's Plan to Import Prescription Drugs



WASHINGTON -- The House voted Wednesday to make it legal for Americans to purchase prescription drugs from foreign countries by mail order, a step that will lead to significant savings for older Americans who use the most prescriptions.
Thousands of Americans from California and Arizona now travel to Mexico, while residents of some northern border states, including Minnesota and Vermont, go to Canada for medicine.
Many drugs sold in the United States are far less expensive in foreign countries where governments impose price restrictions.
The measure easily passed the House by a vote of 324-101. Republican Reps. Michael Bilirakis of Tarpon Springs and Ric Keller of Orlando were the only members of the Florida delegation to vote against the measure.
Passage of the House bill underscores the growing importance of prescription drug costs as a political issue.
President Bush will offer his proposals today for Medicare reform, highlighted by a call for Medicare's 35-million beneficiaries to participate in discount purchasing programs when they buy prescription drugs.
"The president is very troubled about the price of prescription drugs and the lack of access that senior citizens have to prescription drugs," Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, said Wednesday.
The White House hopes to create a clearinghouse that will enable seniors who do not have access to discount cards to enroll with companies -- called pharmacy benefit managers -- that buy prescription drugs on behalf of insurance companies and health plans.
Fleischer, at his daily White House briefing, said the president's discount-card proposal is "very important -- even before Medicare reform can be enacted -- to help senior citizens to get the best prices possible so that the cost of prescription drugs can be lowered."
The potential for even deeper savings for consumers could come from the House-approved measure allowing imports by mail.
Rep. Gil Gutknecht, R-Minn., sponsor of the measure, cited an example in which a constituent using a special ointment for a skin problem paid $130 for a tube in the United States but on a trip to Ireland bought the same medication for $46.
"The bottom line is if you are wealthy enough to travel to Europe twice a year, you can bring back all the drugs you need for the year," he said. "But if you are a senior living on a fixed income, you pay the full price.
Earlier, the House rejected an amendment by Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., that would have allowed companies -- distributors and marketers -- to import pharmaceuticals for sale to U.S. consumers. Sanders said he was pleased by the final approval of Gutknecht's measure, calling it a "solid victory" in the quest for lower pharmaceutical prices.
A second amendment, approved on a voice vote, would give the FDA $1-million to check patent claims by pharmaceutical companies trying to delay approval of generic versions of their drugs.
The drug reimportation amendment passed Wednesday applies only to individuals, allowing the freedom to order drugs.
- Information from the New York Times and Associated Press was included in this report.
"The House voted Wednesday to make it legal for Americans to purchase prescription drugs from foreign countries by mail order, a step that will lead to significant savings for older Americans who use the most prescriptions.



Edited by drugbuyers (01/28/03 05:42 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Trampy
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 04/02/02
Posts: 1239
Loc: Southwest U.S.
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Coyote123]
      #24451 - 08/08/02 11:30 PM

It was 2001. S1229 was sent off to committee in 2001 and nothing happened:
http://www.pillinternational.com/legal1.html

There's been no change in the law. The Senate never passed a bill like the one that passed in the House.

You've got the AARP and all the senior citzen interest groups lobbying for the bills, but the drug companies have their lobbyists and campaign contributions to fight them. The drug companies want to keep our drugs expensive.

--------------------
Your mileage may vary ...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Coyote123
Stranger


Reged: 01/06/02
Posts: 22
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Trampy]
      #24596 - 08/09/02 09:38 PM

I am not trying to start a argument or give out the wrong info here, Just trying to figure something out.

I recieve newsweek, And there was a newsweek, Last month or the month before that had a good write up about how it was now legal to import certain medications into the US for personal use.
Said something about they senate/house totally ignored the lobbyies and FDA problems with the safety of importing prescriptions from outside the us.
And went on to say something about how customs and FDA could no longer confiscate medications coming into the US.

I am not sure which issue it was in, The Newsweeks from the last 3 months got flooded with water after our water heater broke. But it did say that it was ok to do this now, At least untill they can decide on Medicare plan this would help curve the costs of people who need prescription drugs.

Now I am confused, I can not find this info anywhere on goverment sites, or on news sites, just remember reading it in newsweek. Maybe someone knows more that I do that could shed some light on this situation.

The bill, is S 215 IS and if you read the bill off the senate website it has this in ittalics.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled

Maybe no one want people to know, or maybe I am just too messed up on my Soma.

But I would like to find the truth behind this so I know.
My grandparents are in great need of being able to get their prescriptions at cheaper rates, Their pharmacy bills in a month totall over 1800.00.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Trampy
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 04/02/02
Posts: 1239
Loc: Southwest U.S.
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Coyote123]
      #24606 - 08/09/02 11:40 PM

Newsweek isn't as reliable a source as www.gpo.gov or http://thomas.loc.gov/ when it comes to finding out if something was passed and signed into law. They both have a time delay, but you can check the Congressional Record which is upated daily when Congress is in session.

--------------------
Your mileage may vary ...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeremiah
Agape GrandParent


Reged: 07/14/02
Posts: 705
Loc: U.S.A.
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Trampy]
      #25290 - 08/14/02 01:41 PM

Excellent links,Trampy. I bookmarked them both. Thanks!
J.
( I remember that House Bill,it was 2001)

--------------------
I can't see me lovin nobody but you,for all my life


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Coyote123
Stranger


Reged: 01/06/02
Posts: 22
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Jeremiah]
      #25539 - 08/15/02 03:04 PM

Hey thanks for the links, I will check it out. I guess I mis read it. Too bad my Grandparents really want to order from outside the US to help them out, But will not do it if they can't see it is legal by law to do so.
Ill have to book mark those sites.

I remember the bill in the house, But I was figuring this one was for the Senate But Guess I was wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Billyl
Board Addict


Reged: 06/14/02
Posts: 389
Loc: NorthEast
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Coyote123]
      #25562 - 08/15/02 04:39 PM

Here is a reprint about what happened with these initiatives. Take care. Billylll

December 27, 2000 In a Turnaround, White House Kills Drug-Import Plan
By ROBERT PEAR
Senator Byron L. Dorgan was an author of the drug-import plan.
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON, Dec. 26 ?

The Clinton administration today killed a program created by Congress to allow imports of low-cost prescription drugs. The administration said the import plan would not be safe and would not save money for consumers.

Donna E. Shalala, the secretary of health and human services, said the program, adopted by Congress with much fanfare, was severely flawed. "These flaws," Dr. Shalala said, "undermine the potential for cost savings associated with prescription drug reimportation and could pose unnecessary public health risks."

Even though President Clinton had previously questioned the feasibility of the program, expressing doubts even as he signed it into law, the timing of Dr. Shalala's finding was a surprise. The Clinton administration could easily have left the issue to President-elect George W. Bush, but instead invoked a provision of the law to abort the program.

At a presidential debate on Oct. 17, Mr. Bush said the drug-import program "makes sense" as a way to help people buy medicines at affordable prices. But advisers to Mr. Bush said today that he would also consider other ways to moderate spending on prescription drugs, which has grown rapidly in recent years.

The drug-import program was included in the annual spending bill for the Agriculture Department and the Food and Drug Administration. President Clinton supported a version of the drug-import program approved by the Senate on July 19 by a vote of 74 to 21. "I urge you to send me the Senate legislation," Mr. Clinton said in a letter to Congressional leaders in late September.

The bill was revised in negotiations between the House and the Senate. When Mr. Clinton signed it on Oct. 28, he said the program was "little more than a false promise," because of what he described as "loopholes." But Mr. Clinton gave no hint that his concerns were so deep that he would terminate the program before trying to carry it out.

In her letter today, Dr. Shalala said the drug-import law had at least three "flaws and loopholes":
? Federal laws requires government-approved labeling on any prescription drug sold in this country, and drug makers could block imports of medications by denying importers access to those labels.
? Authority for the import program would have expired after five years. Wholesalers would have been reluctant to buy the equipment needed to test and distribute imported drugs because they could not be sure of "long-term financial returns."
? Drug makers could have thwarted the intent of Congress by requiring drug distributors to sell imported drugs at high prices.

Under the law, drug makers could not completely block the sale or distribution of imported drugs in the United States. But, through contracts with drug distributors, they could have tried to limit the supply or set the price of such drugs.

House Republican leaders, taking political heat over the high cost of prescription drugs, embraced the import scheme six weeks before Election Day. But in subsequent negotiations, they opposed efforts by some Democrats to limit the prices that could be charged for imported drugs.

As a result, there was no guarantee that American consumers would receive the discounts available to consumers in other countries. The purpose of the measure was to help Americans gain access to prescription drugs at the lower prices charged in foreign countries that regulate drug prices.

The law allowed pharmacists and wholesalers to import prescription drugs that meet federal safety standards. After working out details of the legislation in October, Congress at the last minute added a proviso saying that it would take effect only if the secretary of health and human services demonstrated to Congress that it would "pose no additional risk to the public's health and safety" and would "result in a significant reduction in the cost of covered products to the American consumer."

In a letter today to Mr. Clinton, Dr. Shalala said she could not make either showing. Gail R. Wilensky, a health policy adviser to Mr. Bush, said, "That effectively kills the provision." The new administration and the new Congress, Ms. Wilensky said, will have to decide whether to try to perfect the program or to "pursue other strategies to slow the growth in spending on pharmaceuticals."

Such alternatives, she said, include changes in Medicare and in drug patent laws. Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota and an author of the legislation creating the drug- import program, said he was "deeply disappointed, puzzled and surprised" by Dr. Shalala's action. "I would have thought the administration would want to make this provision of the law work for the benefit of American consumers," said Mr. Dorgan, who has taken constituents to Canada to buy low-price prescription drugs. Mr. Dorgan said he would urge Mr. Bush to reverse Dr. Shalala's decision, but had little confidence that he would succeed. "The new administration will be more hospitable to the pharmaceutical industry than this one is," Mr. Dorgan said.

Drug companies lobbied against the drug-import legislation, saying it would expose American consumers to unsafe, impure and counterfeit drugs. Jackie Cottrell, a spokeswoman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said, "Secretary Shalala's findings today confirm all of our concerns." Ms. Cottrell said the trade association had not discussed the drug-import program with the administration since Mr. Clinton signed the bill.

Aides to Senator James M. Jeffords, Republican of Vermont, said he would try to persuade the new administration to reverse the decision. Joseph Karpinski, a spokesman for Mr. Jeffords, said: "Today's decision puts Democrats in a difficult political position. It's now the Democrats who are blocking access to affordable prescription drugs. If the new administration reverses the Shalala position, Republicans will be the heroes." Representative Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont, led efforts to allow more drug imports, saying they could reduce drug costs in the United States by 30 percent to 50 percent. But, Mr. Sanders said today that "given the loopholes that the Republican Congressional leadership placed in the bill at the request of the pharmaceutical industry, there are serious questions whether the law, as currently written, would have had an impact."

Individuals can still buy drugs from abroad. Scores of consumers cross the border and buy medications in Canada or Mexico. Also, growing numbers of consumers buy drugs from foreign countries over the Internet. Federal officials have expressed concerns about both types of purchases, but they say that they generally do not challenge consumers importing small quantities of prescription drugs for personal use.

Drug companies say they now have virtually complete control over the custody of prescription drugs, from the factory floor to the retail pharmacy. But after drugs leave the United States, they say, they cannot be sure of the conditions under which the drugs are stored and handled. In her letter, Dr. Shalala took a jab at Mr. Bush and Republicans in Congress.

Allowing drug imports, she said, can never be a substitute for providing drug benefits to the elderly as an integral part of Medicare, nor is the solution a prescription drug program run by the states to help people with low incomes.

Mr. Bush has proposed such a program, to provide "an immediate helping hand" to the elderly.
HOUSE VOTES TO PROTECTPERSONAL PRESCRIPTION MAIL ORDER
From Foreign Countries

What follows is part of an article published in 'The Washington Post',Tuesday, July 11, 2000.

"House Blocks Drug Import Curbs"

Amid growing public resentment of high prescription drug prices, the House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to prevent the government from discouraging the purchasing of drugs in Canada or other countries where the medicines are cheaper....The FDA sometimes sends warning letters to those caught doing it.

The [Food and Drug Admin] gives its employees discretion to permit import of drugs that violate its restrictions so long as they are intended for personal use.

The House approved 363 to 12, an amendment to an FDA appropriations bill that would prevent the agency from enforcing the importation ban.... A second amendment, approved 370 to 12, would bar the agency from sending warning letters."

When this is actually signed into law it may affect the way you do business as it effectively removes most import restrictions as long as the drugs are "intended for personal use."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Trampy
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 04/02/02
Posts: 1239
Loc: Southwest U.S.
Re: Are you aware ? [Re: Billyl]
      #25573 - 08/15/02 05:55 PM

Yeah, Donna Shallala blocked the law that was signed allowing reimportation as described in Billy's news article. Then the House voted to block the FDA from spending money enforcing its anti-import authority. Then I think the Senate passed that as an amendment to an appropriations bill. Does anyone know for sure if it made it through conference and was signed into the Public Laws? I'm talking about the provision that blocks FDA enforcement. Even if it did make it, the law said nothing about what Customs can do ... it merely limited the actions of FDA employees. Employees of Customs and DEA were not affected.

Even if *was* signed into law, almost all of the seizures are made by Customs acting on its own. They don't need an FDA agent there to seize a drug import package. All they were doing is playing politics. It really makes no difference whether or not it made it into law. If it was, all it means is that the letters have to go out on Customs or DEA letterhead, not FDA letterhead.

--------------------
Your mileage may vary ...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1



Extra information
1 registered and 0 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Heidi, Melody 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 882

Rate this topic

Jump to

Help & Contact Information | Privacy statement | Rules Free Members Area

*
UBB.threads™ 6.5
With Modifications from ThreadsDev.com by Joshua Pettit