Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Concerns arise over consumer nominee

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-09-07 09:20 AM
Original message
Concerns arise over consumer nominee
Honestly, who the hell is counseling the dim one? Could he pick a worse nominee?

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070509/1a_bottomstrip09.art.htm

Concerns arise over consumer nominee
As lobbyist, he tried to block law reducing risk of cigarette fires

By Peter Eisler
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — President Bush's choice to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission worked as a lobbyist to block state "fire safe" cigarette laws. He could be charged with setting similar rules nationwide if his nomination is confirmed.

Michael Baroody, head lobbyist at the National Association of Manufacturers, pressed then-Gov. George Pataki of New York in 2000 to veto a bill requiring that cigarettes sold in the state be fire-safe, meaning they self-extinguish if left unattended.

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-09-07 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
1. georgie probably COULD findsomebody worser, but
he is trying to be 'bi-partisan'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tejanocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-09-07 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. Baroody's National Association of Manufacturers loved the Senate's failure on drug importation:
Drug Imports: Senate Sides With Safety

Monday afternoon the Senate voted 49-40 for an amendment sponsored by Sen. Thad Cochran, R-MS, that preserves the safety and competitiveness of the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The amendment requires the administration to certify the safety of any imported prescription drugs; advocates of drug importation wanted to skip that critical safeguard.

The Washington Times had a straightforward lead:

The Senate yesterday derailed a move to allow consumers to buy prescription drugs from Canada and other countries by making them meet strict U.S. standards.

The bipartisan 49-40 vote for safety certification for imported drugs saved President Bush from having to veto the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorization bill, which he promised to do if it opened the door to potentially dangerous drug imports.

The AP story, meanwhile, offered the usual interpretation/analysis/dance of reporter subjectivity:

WASHINGTON - In a triumph for the pharmaceutical industry, the Senate on Monday killed a drive to allow consumers to buy prescription drugs from abroad at a significant savings over domestic prices.

How about this instead?

WASHINGTON - In a triumph for consumer health and continued pharmaceutical research that promises to save millions of lives, the Senate on Monday killed a drive to import foreign price controls by allowing consumers to buy prescription drugs from abroad.

As the late Milton Friedman wrote in 2004:

We are deeply concerned about proposed legislation to remove pharmaceutical companies’ ability to control the importation of their products. The goal of this legislation will be to reduce prices in the American market by imposing other nations’ price controls on us. If this attempt succeeds, American consumers would get the short-term windfall of lower prices, but they would end up unnecessarily suffering and living shorter lives--because promising new therapies would be delayed or not even developed. Even the threat of price controls reduces the incentive to develop new drugs.

A view that's shared across the political spectrum, or at least it was during the 2003 debate over the Medicaid prescription drug benefit. This from the Progressive Policy Institute, the research arm of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council.

Importing foreign price controls would deliver a severe blow to a robust pharmaceutical industry, which the U.S. dominates. Price controls would limit the financing and suppress incentives for pharmaceutical and biotech companies to be innovative. The basic problem is that public officials are likely to set prices wrong.

Supporters of foreign price controls promise to pursue the issue, over and over again, until they succeed. Funny how populists who rail against unfair foreign competition want to hand over our domestic drug pricing to foreign governments.

Seems inconsistent...and unsafe.
http://blog.nam.org/archives/2007/05/drug_imports_se.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tejanocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-09-07 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. Baroody sucks! As Executive VP for the National Association of Manufacturers (LOBBYISTS AGAINST SAFE
PRODUCTS), Baroody's agenda included

(1) fighting to allow tobacco billboards near schools,

(2) fighting to allow a higher level of arsenic in drinking water, and

(3) fighting to keep documents about dangerous products secret from the press and protected against disclosure to government regulatory agencies.

This man CANNOT BE TRUSTED!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC