Let’s see, for four years the Bush administration has gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent the reimportation of prescription medication for Americans. With just three months before Election Day, Bush now decides he thinks reimportation “makes sense” and wants to see if he can make it work.
Can you say grade-A, major-league, jaw-dropping flip-flop?
In Wisconsin yesterday, Bush was asked about the cost of medication. He indicated he’s interested in following the lead set by congressional Democrats, who’ve been working on this issue for years.
“I’m looking at this. There is a lot of pressure in Congress for importation. So I think it makes sense for us to make sure that we can do so in a safe way. If it’s safe, then it makes sense.”
Don’t get me wrong; I’m delighted to see Bush acknowledge the obvious. But the president’s comments lead to two simple questions: 1) If reimportation makes sense, what is the White House prepared to do about it? and 2) Why has the White House fought tooth and nail against this sensible idea for three-and-a-half years?
Let’s not forget, just last week, the Bush administration’s anti-reimportation arguments took a turn to the absurd when it argued that the policy could leave Americans vulnerable to a terrorist attack. Even the Department of Homeland Security quickly came forward to say it has received “no specific information” of such a threat.
And it was also the Bush administration that sent federal agents to harass and intimidate a busload of low-income seniors who had traveled to Canada to fill prescriptions of medication they couldn’t afford to buy in the United States.
Bush emphasized yesterday that “safety” has to be the top priority in any reimportation plan. That sounds reasonable. What he didn’t say is that his own FDA chairman announced three years ago that it would cost just $58 million a year to establish a safe reimportation system that would then save seniors billions a year on medicine. (Not bad for a policy that could save American families billions of dollars a year.) And yet, despite this relatively low cost and the fact that reimportantion “makes sense,” Bush has chosen to oppose every plan in this area.
It’s gotten to the point in which even Republican governors, anxious to lower drug costs, have decided to take the Bush administration to court in order to challenge its obstinacy.
Vermont, which borders Canada and is the second-smallest state, with about 616,000 residents, said it learned Monday that the FDA had turned down its request for a pilot drug-import program. That prompted Governor Jim Douglas, a 53-year-old Republican who is seeking reelection this November, on Tuesday to say the state will fight the FDA decision in court.
”Vermont presented a legal and responsible plan to import prescription drugs,” Douglas said in a statement. ”The claims on which they’ve based this denial are, in our view, unsubstantiated and we have no choice but to pursue any and all legal remedies.”
Republicans on the Hill have distanced themselves from Bush’s position as well.
Thank goodness for Sen. Trent Lott’s mother. Lott recently announced that he has reversed his position on reimportation of prescription drugs because he could no longer defend the policy to his elderly mother.
Lott’s change of heart, coupled with that of Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, gives new life to the movement to allow Americans to buy cheaper drugs from Canada.
So, why do you suppose Bush has fought against reimportation so vehemently? Maybe — just a guess here — it has something to do with the fact that the three main corporate opponents of reimportation — Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and GlaxoSmithKline — are all very generous campaign contributors to Bush and the GOP.
Pfizer’s CEO is a Bush Pioneer (someone who has raised over $100,000), Pfizer executives have given the Bush campaign more than $110,000, and the company has given the RNC more than $2.5 million in soft money since 2000. Eli Lilly executives have given the Bush campaign more than $53,000, and the company has given the RNC more than $1.4 million in soft money since 2000. And Glaxo executives have given the Bush campaign more than $23,000, while the company has given the RNC more than $1.4 million in soft money since 2000.
And if it’s not the campaign contributions, why else would Bush fight so vehemently against a plan that is overwhelmingly popular with the public and enjoys bi-partisan support on the Hill?