Give Michigan Consumers a Voice: This Week Marks One Year of Inaction On Drug Immunity by Senate

by: Representative Barb Byrum

Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 10:42:38 AM EST

    February 22, 2008 marked the one year anniversary the House of Representatives voted to repeal the anti-consumer protections for big drug companies called FDA based immunity.  It has been a long year waiting for the State Senate to act on this common sense reform to protect Michigan citizens from drugs that kill or harm their friends and family.  While my House colleagues and I are still waiting for the Senate to take action, no one has waited longer, or suffered more for this change than Michigan residents like Leslie Richter.
    Leslie Richter lost her husband, Richard, in 2003. Richard was killed by a stroke after he took Vioxx, the painkiller that has been responsible for thousands of deaths and injuries across the country. In 2003 alone, Merck, the maker of Vioxx, raked in $2.5 billion in worldwide sales even as the drug was causing heart attacks and cardiac deaths in tens of thousands of Americans. Vioxx, a drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was only taken off the market in 2004 after public outcry and numerous outside studies proved that is was, in fact, harmful.
    After Richard passed away, Leslie was at an extreme disadvantage in finding a way to hold the big drug company that manufactured Vioxx accountable for causing her husband's death. Why? Because Leslie is a resident of Michigan, the only state in the nation that gives drug companies total immunity from legal recourse when their products harm or kill consumers.
    Those who are in favor of drug industry immunity argue that if drugs are approved by the FDA, big drug companies should not be held responsible if their products are later found to be dangerous. However, study after study has shown that we simply can't rely on the FDA to keep us safe. In 2005, one of the FDA's own scientists, Dr. David Graham, testified before the U.S. Senate that the agency’s drug approval process was “broken.” Even United States Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) railed against the FDA for being too cozy with drug companies, a sentiment echoed in a recent report on National Public Radio.
    Those who are in favor of drug industry immunity also claim that repealing Michigan's one-of-a-kind law will be a "job killer." Yet, since the law was signed in 1996, we have not seen an influx of pharmaceutical jobs in Michigan. In fact, as Pfizer recently demonstrated when it shifted more than 2,000 jobs to East Coast states that don't have drug immunity laws, we have seen the number of pharmaceutical jobs in Michigan evaporate.
    The bottom line is that big drug companies will stop at nothing to protect their massive profits, even if it means people like Richard Richter lose their lives. It is an outrage that such a profitable industry would be allowed to dispense any drug it can push through the FDA's flawed approval process and then escape responsibility when those drugs harm or kill our residents.
    It's time for the big drug companies' free ride in Michigan to end.  My House Colleagues and I have told Michigan's consumers that they deserve to have a voice when FDA approved drugs hurt or kill their friends and families. As we mark one year since the House voted to repeal this anti-consumer law, we should ask ourselves "What is the Senate saying?"

Show your support and help repeal the protection for big drug companies visit: 

www.housedems.com/petitions/end-rx-immunity