Two Oregon SEIU locals join fight to deflate Rx prices

Two Service Employees International Union (SEIU) locals from Oregon have joined the Prescription Access Litigation (PAL) project, a national organization that is fighting drug companies in court for what they maintain have illegally inflated the price of prescription medicines.

PAL currently is engaged in 14 class action lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies, including the fight against anti-anxiety drug BuSpar, in which Oregon is a lead plaintiff.

At an Oct. 23 press conference at Local 49's hall in southeast Portland, local union officials were joined by Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers and PAL Director Kim Shellenberger to highlight patterns of illegal activity among drug companies and the steps that are being taken to protect consumers.

Shellenberger, SEIU Local 49 President Alice Dale, and SEIU Local 503, Oregon Public Employees Union member-leader Michael Simpson emphasized that high costs of prescription drugs affect more than seniors and poor people -they hurt family budgets as well. In addition, many of SEIU's members work in health care, and see the effects of high prescription drug costs in their work.

High costs of prescription drugs help drive up the overall cost of health care, and organized labor sees that happening every time members negotiate a new contract.

"Our members have had to give up wage increases and other benefits in order to maintain their health care coverage," said Simpson. "We are thrilled to be joining with our sister Local 49 and other groups across the country to level the playing field with the pharmaceutical companies.

(But) our members are furious over Congress' failure to pass a prescription drug benefit for seniors, and double-digit prescription drug price increases that are putting pressure on family budgets. Within the sectors that SEIU employees work, pharmaceutical costs are growing at an annual clip of 15 percent, on average, and those costs are driving up employee and employer premiums and out-of-pocket expenses."

Myers punctuated the issue of high prescription drug costs as the "first priority" of attorneys general across the country. "There's quite a lot of fire power available to pursue these forms of (pharmaceutical) wrongdoing on the part of both the state and the federal government," said Myers. "I think it's fair to state that in terms of state attorneys general the pricing of pharmaceuticals has become a truly first priority item, and will continue to be so for some time to come."

In highlighting the importance of the fight for lower-cost prescription drugs, Myers acknowledged the "good work" being done by Boston-based class-action pharmaceutical foes.

"Bristol Myers Squibb filed a false secondary patent to extend their monopoly," Shellenberger said. "In November 2000, the day before the regular patent was scheduled to expire - a generic company literally had their trucks loaded and ready to ship (their version) - Bristol Myers Squibb filed an additional patent with the FDA (Food and Drug Administration). This patent didn't cover the drug. It covered a metabolite - the molecule left in your body after the drug has been taken.

An analogy has been made that it's like McDonald's patenting the burp that comes after eating a Big Mac."

Both PAL and Myers have pursued litigation against Bristol Myers Squibb to break the monopoly on BuSpar and seek damages owed to providers and individuals who have overpaid for the prescription drug. In addition to BuSpar, Shellenberger highlighted a case against Astra Zeneca over the company's monopoly on tamoxifen, the most widely prescribed breast cancer drug in the country.

Local 49 member Marsha Taylor, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 1982, spoke of the devastating effect the high cost of tamoxifen has had on her own fight against cancer. "In 1984, through loss of insurance, I was forced to choose between (paying for) drugs and food.

I chose food," said Taylor. "At this time the medicine was over $100 for a month's supply. Within a few months (after going off tamoxifen), I had developed another tumor. It was caught early enough that it was removed surgically. Then in 1987, I didn't have prescription drug coverage, and didn't have the money to cover the drug. I developed another tumor, and the surgeon said if I didn't keep taking (tamoxifen) I would continue to have tumors. After recovering from surgery, I returned to purchasing the drug myself. It was very expensive and I had to do without other necessities to afford it."

"Tamoxifen is crucial to breast cancer recovery, but it's very expensive, in part because there's no generic on the market," said Shellenberger. "Last year PAL filed several lawsuits against Astra-Zeneca and Barr Labs over their collusion to keep the price of tamoxifen artificially high." As Shellenberger explained, Astra-Zeneca and Barr Labs, rather than fighting over patent rights in court, allegedly agreed to terms in which both manufacturers would sell Astra-Zeneca tamoxifen, one as the prescription, the other as a generic-priced at only 5 percent less than the prescription version (typical generics are discounted up to 80 percent). PAL's lawsuit alleges that Astra-Zeneca paid Barr $21 million to drop its suit, thus keeping an illegal patent in place and preventing other generic manufacturers from entering the market. PAL's lawsuit is currently in federal court in New York.

Home | About