Administration, Ridley-Thomas duel over drug safety

Tag : USA Distributors and WholeSalers


She pointed to administration support for AB 2911, a 2006 bill fromAssemblyman Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles, to establisha discount prescription drug program within the Department ofHealth Services. Schwarzenegger signed the bill, but its $6.5million in funding was cut by the legislature in the currentbudget, Cameron said.

In May and June, several large pharmaceutical makers weighed inagainst the bill. This included Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squib andTeva Pharmaceuticals USA, along with the drug store chain Rite-Aid.The warned of major costs passed on to consumers and urged that anylegislation focus on drugs that are of “high risk” ofbeing counterfeited.

Pfizer, Teva and Rite-Aid are also on the support list for anotherePedigree bill, SB 1270 by Senator Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles. Thisbill would establish a task force to study phasing in ePedigree. Anearlier version of Cedillo’s bill would have repealed most ofthe ePedigree requirements, limiting it to “dangerousdrugs” that were outside of the normal chain ofdistribution.” Cedillo’s office did not return a callseeking comment.

Some advocates of ePedigree were not impressed with Cedillo’slegislation.

“You spend enough time in Sacramento, as well as Washington,[you realize] when you establish a task force it means you have anexcuse to do nothing,” said Dr. Brian Liang, executivedirector of the Institute for Health Law Studies at the Universityof California at San Diego. “We’re not really for primetime yet, but I don’t think we can waste any time.”

The original ePedigree requirement came from a bill passed byformer Senator Liz Figueroa in 2004, also numbered SB 1307. In2006, Figueroa carried legislation the put the ePedigree deadlineoff from 2007 to 2009. The Board of Pharmacy decided earlier thisyear to put this off another two years.

Liang and others have characterized these changes as“delaying tactics” by drug companies who don’twant to spend the money needed to make ePedigree work.Pharmaceutical makers have said they needed more time forimplementation and to allow the technology to mature and to dealwith the complexity of implementing the systems needed.

Drug makers have also said they want to avoid a situation wheredifferent states impose different ePedigree standards. There arenumerous pieces of legislation currently alive at the federallevel. Probably the most important of these is HR 5839, theSafeguarding America’s Pharmaceuticals Act of 2008, whichwould establish “national standards” for the drugsupply chain.
Pharmaceutical makers have repeatedly said they support nationalstandards and hope to avoid a patchwork of state laws. Hurner saidthat the administration has been urging federal action.

“It’s a federal responsibility and the federalgovernment needs to act,” Hurner said. “If you design astate by state system, it will create difficulties inenforcement.”

However, Ridley-Thomas noted that his legislation contains languageit would cede to a federal standard as soon as one exists. While hesupports a federal solution, Ridley-Thomas said the changes could“take California out of a position of providingleadership.”