MN Congressman Erik Paulsen Follows the Money

Erik Paulsen pushes medical device tax repealwhile getting megabucks from medical industry

By Aaron Rupar Fri., Feb. 8 2013 at 1:42 PM  FiDA highlight

On Wednesday, Republican U.S. Rep. Erik Paulsen introduced a bill to repeal the medical device tax included in Obamacare. In 2012, by a wide margin, Paulsen led the House in money received from medical supply companies.

Following the money suggests there's more to Paulsen's medical device tax view than a concern about stifling economic activity.

Seems like there's probably a connection between those two things, right? But Paulsen denies it.

Asked today by the Star Tribune whether the $110,100 he received from the medical supply industry last year plays a role in his interest in the medical device tax, Paulsen said: "No, none whatsoever." It's unclear whether his nose grew as he uttered those words.

Paulsen's push to repeal the tax is also supported by Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken, and guess what? Last year, Klobuchar received the third most money from medical supply companies of any Senator ($90,025); Franken clocked in at 12th ($30,349).

Of course, we're not exactly breaking news by suggesting financial contributions play a role what legislation various elected officials support. To take just one additional example, around this time last year, Klobuchar and Franken both supported anti-piracy legislation that would've benefited big media. And as we reported, both senators received hundreds of thousands of dollars from big media companies in the preceding years.

Last  year, Paulsen wanted to make up for the $29 billion that would be lost if the device tax were repealed by reducing health care subsidies for the poor. But as you'd imagine, that proposal wasn't popular with Democrats, and this year's bill doesn't specify what would make up for the lost revenue.

 Read my blog:  Failed Implant Device Alliance.  It records all the reasons why the public is now paying for the 'innovation' failures of the medical device industry.  Rep. Erik Paulsen ignores patient harm caused by medical products and thereby puts patients and medical device industry jobs in conflict.  Follow the money:  it is definitely corrupting our healthcare system. Secure Minnesota jobs are dependent upon creating value, not aggressively pursuing profit at all costs to ethics and morality.  Patient safety must be the first consideration and our government leaders pledge to put citizens rights before business interests.

021013 

Citizen claims right to safer implant devices.

LINK

 Medical devices need impartial oversight

JUNE, 27 2012

MARY BOLAND

POST INDEPENDENT

GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO COLORADO (FiDA blog bold)

My husband has a full hip joint replacement, the kind where they lop off the bone and replace it with a metal rod and ball. Fortunately an easier procedure is now available where they just recoat the ball in the hip joint. But we thank our lucky stars that his metal hip joint is, so far, not causing any problems that we know of.

Many people who underwent the same procedure as my husband have had major problems, requiring repeated surgeries and causing long periods of, if not permanent, immobility.

And that is why I was particularly interested to read an article In “Public Citizen Health Letter” about the $350 billion medical device industry's “massive lobbying campaign to weaken the already lax oversight of medical devices and to accelerate the already too-quick review of high-risk medical products.”

The law setting the Federal Drug Administration's user fees and regulation requirements for both new medical device applications and ongoing oversight is up for renewal this year. And already the members of Congress who have received the most campaign finance help from the industry have introduced 14 bills aimed at easing regulation and weakening measures intended to ensure patient safety.

That patient safety measures need to be strengthened, not weakened, may be inferred from the substantial increase in recalls in recent years. Recalls of devices posing high risk to patients have doubled between 2007 and 2011, and recalls of devices posing moderate risk have increased sevenfold.

And the growth of recalls cannot be explained by any increase in the number of new medical devices, whose number has been stable or declining in recent years.

Among recently recalled devices are:

• Faulty implanted heart defibrillators that incorrectly deliver dangerous electrical jolts to the heart.

• Surgical clips that pop off, causing patients to bleed to death internally.

• Artificial hips that shed metal fragments into the bone and surrounding tissue, causing extreme pain and restricting mobility.

• Infusion pumps that shut down unexpectedly or dispense incorrect intravenous medicine doses.

In the face of this record, the medical device industry spent $33.3 million on lobbying in 2007. In the third and fourth quarters of 2011 there were at least 225 of these lobbyists hard at work, including 107 who had previously worked for the federal government.

Interestingly, one of the bills introduced in Congress would weaken the financial conflict of interest prohibition against individuals with industry interests serving on the FDA advisory committee overseeing medical device approvals.

Members of a key House health subcommittee with jurisdiction over medical devices have received campaign contributions from the industry double those of the average House member. And actual sponsors of the House bills seeking to weaken regulation and oversight have received about three times more.

Public Citizen asserts that in addition to allowing far too many dangerous devices to reach the market, the FDA has inadequate post-market surveillance for adverse advents. The FDA primarily depends on manufacturers and hospitals to report incidents of serious injuries or deaths related to these devices. It is not in the manufacturers' or hospitals' interest to do so.

Furthermore, Public Citizen points out, the Republican-dominated Supreme Court held in 2008 that manufacturers of FDA approved devices cannot be held liable for harms. Congress should restore patients' rights to sue in such cases.

Public Citizen calls on Congress to replace the current weak medical device regulatory regime with a process that requires the same scrutiny as that given to new drugs, particularly for moderate and high-risk devices that are permanently implanted in the body.

The whole situation is just one more sad example of our desperate need to amend the Constitution to overturn the Supreme Court's disastrous Citizens United ruling that corporations are people and the Constitution's free speech guarantee protects their right to spend all the money they want to influence Congress.

Only then can we revamp our election process to get campaign contributions out of the picture. And only after that is done, could legislation possibly be enacted to end the “revolving door” between industry regulators and lobbyists.

For further details, go online to www.citizen.org/hrg. And write your representatives and senators.

— “What Do We Really Want?” appears on the second and fourth Thursdays of the month. Mary Boland is a retired teacher and journalist, a proud grandmother, and a longtime resident of Carbondale. Follow her on twitter@grannyboland.