Pages

Friday, March 26, 2010

Senate Decides Health Reform Isn't The Time To Have The Viagra Talk

Senate Republicans this week made a vigorous, though as expected unsuccessful, last ditch bid to stall the health care reform package, offering a slew of amendments of the final budget reconciliation piece of the package.

But amidst all the sweeping soliloquies about how health reform will inflict significant damage to the health care system, rest assured that one man, Sen. Tom Coburn, is keeping watch as well on some of the most arcane details.

The Oklahoma Republican offered an amendment March 25 that would restrict sex offenders' access to erectile dysfunction drugs like Viagra. It was one of 40-plus amendments were crafted specifically to make it difficult for Democrats to vote "No."

IN VIVO Blog readers may recall this is not the first time that Coburn has lobbed up an amendment to ward off misspending of health care dollars. When the Senate Health Committee was debate health reform last June, he unveiled a proposal to prevent HHS from using federal funds to sponsor fashion shows intended to raise awareness of health issues.

Now his fiscal conservatism has gone a little more hard core. Coburn's "No Erectile Dysfunction Drugs To Sex Offenders" (Amendment 3556) would prohibit federal payment for Pfizer's Viagra and other ED medications like Lilly's Cialis and Bayer's Levitra for convicted child molesters, rapists, and sex offenders. It also would prohibit coverage of abortion drugs and enact Government Accountability Office recommendations to prevent fraud via insurance claims for prescriptions written by providers who are actually dead or provided to dead patients.

It's hard to argue that sex offenders or dead people need access to ED drugs, but Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., called the amendment a "crass political stunt aimed at making 30-second commercials." Health reform "is a serious bill," Baucus said. "This is a serious debate. The amendment offered by the senator from Oklahoma makes a mockery of the Senate, the debate and the American people." The amendment was defeated 57-42.

ED drugs recurringly draw the ire of legislators, who have often prodded the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to limit federal payments for such products. Since 2007, for example, CMS has instructed that such drugs are not covered by Medicare Part D for the treatment of sexual or erectile dysfunction (Pfizer markets Viagra's active ingredient sildenafil under the trade name Revatio for pulmonary arterial hypertension; that type of use is covered).
Part of the problem may be that legislators don't like ED advertisements and often try to curb them. (Alas, no fond memories of Bob Dole's time in office?) Last year, for example, House Democrat Jim Moran introduced legislation that directs the Federal Communications Commission to consider any advertisement for ED treatment or male enhancement as indecent for purposes of broadcasting between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. Pfizer's current TV ads ask "Isn't it time you had the Viagra talk?

Despite such diversions, the Senate cleared the reconciliation bill later the same day. (For a recap of key pharma provisions, see last week's issue of "The Pink Sheet".) A couple minor education-related provisions were deleted, so the measure will need one final House vote. Meanwhile, we are eager to see what sizzling issues Coburn may similarly detect in upcoming legislative initiatives like financial reform.

- By Lauren Smith

2 comments:

Keith Richard Radford Jr said...

They don't focus on sex offenders they target them. Look at the websites logo and see if it’s not true and the abuse is staggering like cruel kids with magnifying glasses. Keep this law and watch how people will feel about proponents of this law. You know the books are changing in the schools and the old out dated lies will not be there to teach anymore. The sex offender next door could be you best choice for watching your kid but would they? Hell no! Duping a nation into believing what we think we know through leaders with agendas while all the time feeding into design by who? Don't say there were no warnings from day one. My movie will come out. It will be like any other movie where the writer/editor will tell you what they think you need to know. Unfortunately some have tried to do that for years only to be ignored, called tin foil headed lunatics or just drowned out by the ones getting those nine hundred thousand dollar yearly pay checks. Now the ramification of the actions will not be ignored and, not being allowed to target people will make everyone safer unless it’s to target the source not the distraction from the real problem, but then where would religion be? Dump the law and the proponents of it now. Running far to many years’ have been the old Lunsford tapes or Couey smears/fears tactics from yester years won’t cut it anymore when every one can see your bulbous heads. See how many parents and neighbors run over children with their cars killing them apposed to the touch of a parent changing a dipper, or kissing their kid. Can you say involuntary man slaughter!; Slaughter house rules need new rules now! The people pushing these laws are taking over your wallet and your country and selling a mix bag of B**lS**t laced with larceny and their not even in this country. Look at Jane Harmon and her involvement with who? As the world turns so does the tide when its black/red and full of poison like these laws are when everyone knows already you don’t care about laws just your worthless agenda to kill people you don’t like, [see (a serious man the movie)].

Keith Richard Radford Jr said...

They don't focus on sex offenders they target them. Look at the websites logo and see if it’s not true and the abuse is staggering like cruel kids with magnifying glasses. Keep this law and watch how people will feel about proponents of this law. You know the books are changing in the schools and the old out dated lies will not be there to teach anymore. The sex offender next door could be you best choice for watching your kid but would they? Hell no! Duping a nation into believing what we think we know through leaders with agendas while all the time feeding into design by who? Don't say there were no warnings from day one. My movie will come out. It will be like any other movie where the writer/editor will tell you what they think you need to know. Unfortunately some have tried to do that for years only to be ignored, called tin foil headed lunatics or just drowned out by the ones getting those nine hundred thousand dollar yearly pay checks. Now the ramification of the actions will not be ignored and, not being allowed to target people will make everyone safer unless it’s to target the source not the distraction from the real problem, but then where would religion be? Dump the law and the proponents of it now. Running far to many years’ have been the old Lunsford tapes or Couey smears/fears tactics from yester years won’t cut it anymore when every one can see your bulbous heads. See how many parents and neighbors run over children with their cars killing them apposed to the touch of a parent changing a dipper, or kissing their kid. Can you say involuntary man slaughter!; Slaughter house rules need new rules now! The people pushing these laws are taking over your wallet and your country and selling a mix bag of B**lS**t laced with larceny and their not even in this country. Look at Jane Harmon and her involvement with who? As the world turns so does the tide when its black/red and full of poison like these laws are when everyone knows already you don’t care about laws just your worthless agenda to kill people you don’t like, [see (a serious man the movie)].