A day or so later, we hear that 53 senators have signed a petition against the importation of drugs. "Safety" was their concern. Evidently they did not believe that the FDA, which the bill expressly makes responsible for "safety," could provide it.
Or maybe they signed the petition because drug manufacturers told them "Sign, or else." Maybe they didn't actually say this. You know, money talks so well, those givng it do not really have to say anything at all.
Then again, maybe the senators did not need much of a push. Throughout the previous election campaign, both Democrats and Republicans promised, at every turn, to present senior citizens with a prescription "drug benefit." Now, after much wrangling, both the House and the Senate have produced bills. The legislation is now in conference, and legislators are building this legislation up as a response to promises made. Why destroy the value of this new "drug beneft" by allowing citizens to import cheaper drugs?
If the elderly could buy cheaper drugs from abroad, they may not need the "drug benefit," or at least, the "drug benefit" would not be as great.
If any citizen, not merely the elderly, could get cheaper drugs, the amount of money available to politicians may be reduced.
Who needs this? Senators are for "safety" and against the indiscriminate importation of drugs. Senators are for a good "drug benefit."
