HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Progressives Outraged Ove...

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:14 PM

Progressives Outraged Over Booker, Democrats Vote on Prescription Drugs From Canada - See more at:

Source: Rollcall.com

Progressives in the Democratic Party are outraged after 13 Democrats voted against an amendment that would have allowed Americans to buy cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, saying it’s a sign that Big Pharma has too much power in the party.

Read more: http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/pharma-booker-canada



We should be standing up to large pharmaceutical corporations, not standing for them.

196 replies, 19196 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 196 replies Author Time Post
Reply Progressives Outraged Over Booker, Democrats Vote on Prescription Drugs From Canada - See more at: (Original post)
kenfrequed Jan 2017 OP
Post removed Jan 2017 #1
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #5
FreakinDJ Jan 2017 #47
DK504 Jan 2017 #123
wordpix Jan 2017 #151
Blanks Jan 2017 #177
coco22 Jan 2017 #181
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #12
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #16
ehrnst Jan 2017 #21
LisaM Jan 2017 #24
FreakinDJ Jan 2017 #51
LisaM Jan 2017 #55
ehrnst Jan 2017 #62
grantcart Jan 2017 #78
FreakinDJ Jan 2017 #81
JHan Jan 2017 #95
wordpix Jan 2017 #152
hollowdweller Jan 2017 #57
ehrnst Jan 2017 #60
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #82
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #88
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #105
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #162
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #186
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #187
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #195
ehrnst Jan 2017 #161
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #164
ehrnst Jan 2017 #156
wordpix Jan 2017 #153
ehrnst Jan 2017 #157
QC Jan 2017 #129
still_one Jan 2017 #133
ehrnst Jan 2017 #58
murielm99 Jan 2017 #63
ehrnst Jan 2017 #67
ciaobaby Jan 2017 #85
murielm99 Jan 2017 #134
ciaobaby Jan 2017 #135
murielm99 Jan 2017 #136
ciaobaby Jan 2017 #137
stonecutter357 Jan 2017 #176
Grey Lemercier Jan 2017 #145
rpannier Jan 2017 #109
ehrnst Jan 2017 #166
Angry Dragon Jan 2017 #2
ehrnst Jan 2017 #3
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #6
ehrnst Jan 2017 #46
IronLionZion Jan 2017 #54
rpannier Jan 2017 #115
brer cat Jan 2017 #93
rpannier Jan 2017 #107
brer cat Jan 2017 #125
rpannier Jan 2017 #127
brer cat Jan 2017 #132
rpannier Jan 2017 #143
brer cat Jan 2017 #173
wordpix Jan 2017 #160
George II Jan 2017 #183
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #184
George II Jan 2017 #188
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #194
EarthFirst Jan 2017 #7
ehrnst Jan 2017 #49
wordpix Jan 2017 #163
George II Jan 2017 #196
wordpix Jan 2017 #171
EarthFirst Jan 2017 #172
Eleanors38 Jan 2017 #8
ehrnst Jan 2017 #53
Eleanors38 Jan 2017 #69
LisaM Jan 2017 #83
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #185
hollowdweller Jan 2017 #72
dionysus Jan 2017 #148
Post removed Jan 2017 #25
PatSeg Jan 2017 #27
juxtaposed Jan 2017 #31
ehrnst Jan 2017 #65
juxtaposed Jan 2017 #74
elmac Jan 2017 #40
hollowdweller Jan 2017 #68
SammyWinstonJack Jan 2017 #42
ehrnst Jan 2017 #71
humbled_opinion Jan 2017 #80
Alice11111 Jan 2017 #92
TrollBuster9090 Jan 2017 #118
wordpix Jan 2017 #155
wordpix Jan 2017 #154
harun Jan 2017 #182
Tiberius Adams Jan 2017 #4
DonCoquixote Jan 2017 #9
Hoyt Jan 2017 #10
ehrnst Jan 2017 #70
chwaliszewski Jan 2017 #142
ehrnst Jan 2017 #147
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #11
alarimer Jan 2017 #13
Yo_Mama Jan 2017 #103
wordpix Jan 2017 #158
theaocp Jan 2017 #14
elmac Jan 2017 #45
jalan48 Jan 2017 #15
BumRushDaShow Jan 2017 #86
agincourt Jan 2017 #17
Trust Buster Jan 2017 #18
hollowdweller Jan 2017 #76
Trust Buster Jan 2017 #110
wordpix Jan 2017 #159
Equinox Moon Jan 2017 #19
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #20
Equinox Moon Jan 2017 #23
elmac Jan 2017 #48
Arazi Jan 2017 #50
alarimer Jan 2017 #174
Equinox Moon Jan 2017 #175
Renew Deal Jan 2017 #91
DonCoquixote Jan 2017 #99
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #113
Alice11111 Jan 2017 #96
wordpix Jan 2017 #165
Eric J in MN Jan 2017 #39
OKNancy Jan 2017 #22
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #26
OKNancy Jan 2017 #28
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #30
bettyellen Jan 2017 #119
JCanete Jan 2017 #189
bettyellen Jan 2017 #191
JCanete Jan 2017 #192
elmac Jan 2017 #52
Uponthegears Jan 2017 #59
Feeling the Bern Jan 2017 #79
riderinthestorm Jan 2017 #121
NobodyHere Jan 2017 #35
ehrnst Jan 2017 #29
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #32
ehrnst Jan 2017 #56
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #75
JCanete Jan 2017 #190
ehrnst Jan 2017 #193
ananda Jan 2017 #33
George II Jan 2017 #61
OilemFirchen Jan 2017 #84
pennylane100 Jan 2017 #100
riderinthestorm Jan 2017 #120
wordpix Jan 2017 #167
Chakaconcarne Jan 2017 #34
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #37
ehrnst Jan 2017 #36
Eric J in MN Jan 2017 #41
ehrnst Jan 2017 #44
HoneyBadger Jan 2017 #104
riversedge Jan 2017 #38
Alice11111 Jan 2017 #108
4bucksagallon Jan 2017 #43
Buckeye_Democrat Jan 2017 #64
Guy Whitey Corngood Jan 2017 #66
azmom Jan 2017 #73
INdemo Jan 2017 #77
rladdi Jan 2017 #87
Post removed Jan 2017 #89
SaschaHM Jan 2017 #90
ciaobaby Jan 2017 #98
SaschaHM Jan 2017 #106
ciaobaby Jan 2017 #117
wordpix Jan 2017 #169
riderinthestorm Jan 2017 #122
SaschaHM Jan 2017 #126
JustinL Jan 2017 #131
wordpix Jan 2017 #168
Thekaspervote Jan 2017 #94
ciaobaby Jan 2017 #97
Yo_Mama Jan 2017 #101
Skeeter Barnes Jan 2017 #102
kenfrequed Jan 2017 #114
Eliot Rosewater Jan 2017 #111
shadowmayor Jan 2017 #112
ucrdem Jan 2017 #116
killbotfactory Jan 2017 #138
TomCADem Jan 2017 #140
killbotfactory Jan 2017 #149
Post removed Jan 2017 #124
riversedge Jan 2017 #128
DeminPennswoods Jan 2017 #130
TomCADem Jan 2017 #139
BainsBane Jan 2017 #141
Mister Midnight Jan 2017 #144
treestar Jan 2017 #146
George II Jan 2017 #150
ehrnst Jan 2017 #170
stonecutter357 Jan 2017 #178
bahrbearian Jan 2017 #179
NCDem777 Jan 2017 #180

Response to kenfrequed (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:23 PM

5. Total agreement!

This wasn't even all that radical a bill. 71% of the American people were in favor of it when polled. This could have been the sort of thing we rammed down don-don's throat and made him eat it or Berned him if he veto'ed. Instead a bunch of corporate Dems decided to placate their donors.

Hell, we even had a few Republicans willing to go to bat for this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:20 PM

47. We need some new Dems

 

That's all there is to it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:12 PM

123. Just sent Booker a few tweets calling him out for his bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DK504 (Reply #123)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:09 AM

151. I'll send him one, too, but I'm not a constituent

NJ folks, let him know!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DK504 (Reply #123)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 11:00 AM

177. He was bragging on Facebook...

About grilling Sessions, and I was disappointed that nobody called him out on this vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DK504 (Reply #123)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 02:10 PM

181. I have never liked him no matter..

the issue he runs his ass up front trying to make the issue about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:30 PM

12. Will you now vote for Mike Lee since he voted for it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:32 PM

16. Why would I?

I'm a Democrat. I hold my own party to a higher standard than the theocratic madmen of the Republican party, besides I am pretty sure that Mike Lee isn't moving to New Jersey anytime soon.

Try a better argument than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #12)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:39 PM

21. It seems that Corey goes from saint to demon depending on how he aligns with Bernie

 

Sort of like what happened with Elizabeth Warren 5 minutes after she endorsed Hillary.

Woe be to those who dare to disagree with Bernie....for whatever reason.

Why days ago, Corey was not a traitor, but was bathed in the light that emanates from Bernie.

"Democratic Sen. Cory Booker is introducing a bill that would prevent President-elect Donald Trump from creating a Muslim registry. The bill, according to the Washington Post, is sponsored by several key Democrat senators including Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Jeff Merkley, to name a few. "


https://mic.com/articles/164598/sens-cory-booker-bernie-sanders-introduce-bill-to-block-donald-trump-s-muslim-registry#.bmenqcU9S

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #21)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:43 PM

24. I read a statement from Bob Casey on this (the only one I could find this a.m.)

I don't think this is as cut and dried as it appears. It seems that there were multiple amendments and they didn't (according to this) have adequate time to consider them. Anyway, here is the statement:

Last night, I voted for an amendment by Senator Wyden (188) that would lower drug prices through importation from Canada. I had some concerns about the separate Sanders amendment (178) linked above because of drug safety provisions. That issue couldn't be resolved in the ten minutes between votes. The concern was over provisions related to wholesalers and whether they would comply with safety laws. It's important to ensure the integrity of our drug supply chain.

There were three amendments votes on the topic of importation. The separate Wyden amendment (188) allowed for importation and addressed the safety concerns I had. I have a record of supporting the safe importation of drugs from Canada since 2007 & I will continue to support efforts to do so.


Anyway, I am not generally a knee-jerk reaction person. I like some of the Senators on this list and I'm going to go over all of this carefully, since two are my Senators.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #24)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:23 PM

51. Since a couple of those names are regular DINO voters - I would say No

 

There is nothing more to it then their Corp contributors

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #51)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:25 PM

55. You don't need to.

I just said I didn't want to have a knee jerk reaction. Also, Cantwell and Murray are not "regular DINO voters", they're my senators and we border Canada, so I'm just going to research this all the way through. We're talking votes on various amendments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:30 PM

62. +1000. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:52 PM

78. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:54 PM

81. Glad you named them

 

and I didn't have to

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #55)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:31 PM

95. ++++++++++

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #55)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:15 AM

152. let us know your research b/c I'm outraged at these votes

$40K PER ROUND for my conventional, decades-old chemo was the "provider charge" and $22K PER ROUND was the "allowed charge." This for an IV drip that was 2 hr. at the doc's and 2 days walking around with a porta-pack drip. Really? $22K or $40K for that, each round? (I needed 12).

And we can't afford subsidies of the ACA, according to some of the same people who voted against importation from Canada. These people need to be on the same health plan as the rest of us instead of their subsidized-by-taxpayers plan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #51)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:27 PM

57. Drug safety is always something they use to try to stop cheap drugs.

 


A lot of them are the very same drugs that are expensive now they just try to scare people to give them cover.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #57)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:30 PM

60. And to ensure that they are not coming from some guy working out of a garage in Canada

 

"Drug safety" is something that the GOP would like to get out of the way in the name of getting drugs to market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #60)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:58 PM

82. What?

So... The majority of Democratic senators were... Wrong In supporting this?

And the majority of Republicans who secretly like the idea of killing med safety voted against this... Even though you imply the bill was a danger to safety because your favorite Dem, who happens to take tons of cash from big pharma, bucked the party and voted with those same Repugniks?

Is there no level of contortion you won't subscribe to in order to protect the corporate wing of the party?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #82)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:18 PM

88. Have you read the bill?

Why do you support it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #88)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:47 PM

105. I have parents

They are on a fixed income and I think it is disgusting that they may have to choose between food and meds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #105)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:27 AM

162. So the answer is no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #162)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 04:06 PM

186. So the answer is you should change your name.

The amendment that was offered up by MY senator Amy Klobuchar and co-sponsored by Sanders, was a bare bones bill meant to start to allocate money to purchase medications at Canadian rates.

I have read the bill and it was just sort of a start up. It was killed without any real discussion or debate because those people against it didn't want debate, discussion, or changes made to that amendment. They wanted it dead.

Your positions tell me everything about where your loyalties are. Your words are making FDR spin at about 400 rpm in his grave.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #186)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 07:39 PM

187. What are my positions?

Other than hyperventilating about an imperfect amendment with malevolent supporters doesn't make sense?

The amendment would have put possibly unsafe drugs into the US market. It's no wonder Cruz and Lee supported it. If great FDR progressives like Cruz and Lee are for it, it's probably the wrong thing to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #187)

Mon Jan 16, 2017, 12:29 PM

195. What a load.

Seriously, those Democrats that voted against the bill were almost universally in the pockets of the pharmaceutical industry. I think I can infer your position on money in politics a lot easier than you can ascertain my current respiratory condition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #88)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:27 AM

161. Did I say anything about the bill? Really, has anyone here?

 

This post is all about demonizing Democrats - but Booker in particular - and the general freakout about an amendment that several articles have called "symbolic."

There is a lot wrong with the clickbait news stories - and red meat for some here.

A friend on the hill posted this:


The sites are also making it out like Booker voted against BS's big bill that is on his website. That is incorrect.

This was an amendment that was the subject of the vote and was attempting to encourage legislation allowing people to import prescription drugs from Canada. To give you some context, when the amendment was originally filed, it provided that people could import drugs from anywhere.

Later it was amended and refiled to be limited to Canada. Booker voted for a similar amendment that would allow the imports with a safety certification. I understand some folks think there should be no safety certificate, but also bear in mind that these budget votes are not actual legislation, they are something akin to guidance on what types of legislation members think should be supported (a bit of a gimmick frankly)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #161)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:29 AM

164. Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #82)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:22 AM

156. I'm pointing out the hyperbole going on here. I don't see anyone citing

 

the amendment, just assuming that any vote against it is "BIG PHARMA CORPORATE SHILLS" and that "safety concerns" are ALWAYS WHAT BIG PHARMA SAYS WHEN THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE MORE MONEY."

I think the contortions are on the part of the knee jerk reaction against a man that was considered a saint a few hours ago.

If I was to say that when Bernie voted against the Brady Bill when he was taking money from the NRA, I would get a flurry of posts that talked about how Bernie was actually voting against certain aspects of the bill, not against gun safety.

Is that clearer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #60)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:16 AM

153. is that the same 400 lb. guy hacking from his bedroom?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #153)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:23 AM

157. Non-sequitur?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #57)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:45 PM

129. As if Canada is some sort of primitive hellhole

with no safety laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #57)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 10:23 PM

133. Look for the Canadian International Pharmacy Assiciation, CIPA, seal. Utilize PharmacyChecker.com,

find a Find a VIPPS-Accredited Pharmacy

Reviews, Canadian Better Business Bureau, and recommendations from people you know

Safety should not be a concern with due dilligence

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #24)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:29 PM

58. Thank you. There is some thought and some actual concern about what is in the bill and amendment.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #21)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:31 PM

63. You are correct.

And who the fuck is defining the term "progressive?" I am a progressive, and I would not vote for Bernie or support him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to murielm99 (Reply #63)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:35 PM

67. Thank you. Apparently the term progressive has been coopted to mean

 

that you do not disagree in any way with Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #67)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:06 PM

85. The term progressive means not a corporate dem. IMO

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ciaobaby (Reply #85)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:16 PM

134. You do not get to define things

according to your preference. Go get a dictionary. Go take a political science class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to murielm99 (Reply #134)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:25 PM

135. and yet I just did define things.

 

but per your instructions.... I did get a dictionary:
Progressive : engaging in or constituting forward motion.
Corporate: A corporate company or group.

So "Corporate" dems are those who support the corporate company - i.e. The Pharmaceutical Companies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ciaobaby (Reply #135)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:27 PM

136. Bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to murielm99 (Reply #136)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:29 PM

137. kiss kiss

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ciaobaby (Reply #85)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 10:58 AM

176. and with bernie it means not a dem at all .

Last edited Fri Jan 13, 2017, 11:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to murielm99 (Reply #63)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 05:13 AM

145. this!!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #21)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:54 PM

109. So are you saying that any criticism of Booker is unwarranted

That when he votes for a bill or against a bill he should be given a pass?
And since this is a bill, not associated with a Muslim Registry prevention bill the two have zero in common with each other
You're deflecting from the issue. The issue is this bill.
Apparently with you, woe be it to anyone who disagrees with Sen Booker or their favorite Senator is Sen Sanders

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rpannier (Reply #109)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:30 AM

166. Straw man much? (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:20 PM

2. not good

at least my Senators voted for it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:21 PM

3. Corey Booker via Twitter

 

"I unequivocally support drug imports to lower cost but plan must include protections so foreign drugs meet safety standards."


"“I support the importation of prescription drugs as a key part of a strategy to help control the skyrocketing cost of medications. Any plan to allow the importation of prescription medications should also include consumer protections that ensure foreign drugs meet American safety standards. I opposed an amendment put forward last night that didn’t meet this test. The rising cost of medications is a life-and-death issue for millions of Americans, which is why I also voted for amendments last night that bring drug prices down and protect Medicare’s prescription drug benefit. I’m committed to finding solutions that allow for prescription drug importation with adequate safety standards.”

- See more at: http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/pharma-booker-canada#sthash.aqhOljhj.dpuf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:24 PM

6. From Canada?

Gods what a ridiculous statement. Canada has regulations that are as tough as ours or tougher on medications.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:19 PM

46. Such as requiring that it came from an actual Canadian pharmacy, and not some guy

 

working out of a garage importing knockoffs from the Phillipines?

I thought the GOP was the one who thought safety regulations were bad things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #46)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:25 PM

54. FDA is actually very strict and a common GOP complaint

watch the new congress and president completely gut their funding and weaken their oversight of drugs and food and everything else

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #46)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:03 PM

115. A few points you should consider

1. If you order from a pharmacy that has a pharmacy license number on their website then they to submit to the same drug regulation that pharmaceuticals undergo in the U.S. (I checked with Health Canada. It wasn't difficult.)
2. Canada doesn't seem to have a thriving garage pharmaceutical creating industry importing from the Philippines.
Though CanadaDrugs is problematic and some places that provide fake Viagra as well
3. I would point out that many pharmaceuticals are made in India and China. Most aspirin comes from China. Most omeprazole and simvastatin often come from Puerto Rico and India.
But, they are inspected, both in Canada and the USA when they arrive

Not sure why letting people buy from companies out of Canada that have a pharmacy license number or letting people go to Canada and buy from a pharmacy that has a license number is an issue

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:26 PM

93. Many drugs ordered from Canadian pharmacies

are manufactured by and shipped from different countries. Do those regulations apply for drugs ordered from USA and shipped from outside Canada? Asking, because I don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #93)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:49 PM

107. I checked with various Canadian Governmental agencies like Health Canada

If you order from a pharmacy that has a pharmacy license number on their website then they to submit to the same drug regulation that pharmaceuticals undergo in the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rpannier (Reply #107)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:30 PM

125. It's odd how some drugs are labeled.

I used to order from a Canadian pharmacy, and one of the drugs that was manufactured in GB was labeled "For sale in India and Nepal only." One that was manufactured in India was totally ineffective although when I used a US generic it was very effective. I never received an order that was actually from Canada; most were filled in India.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #125)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:37 PM

127. Something I learned from reading articles on this topic

Many pharmaceuticals are made in India and China. Most aspirin comes from China. Most omeprazole and simvastatin often come from Puerto Rico and India.
But, they are inspected, both in Canada and the USA when they arrive

It's from this article. The article shares some of the concerns about prescription drugs
It was one of the first I found and thought it was interesting
It lead me to find other sites as well

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3470633/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rpannier (Reply #127)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 10:11 PM

132. Not really.

When I ordered a drug from Canada and it was shipped directly to me from India, it was not inspected by either country when it arrived. I went on faith that the Canadian pharmacy was sending my order to a another pharmacy meeting the same standards and regulations. I am very uneasy that so many of our drugs come from China, especially since the tainted heparin lead to many deaths. Obviously we don't always get to choose which manufacturers we use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #132)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 02:16 AM

143. Can you provide links and sources to this being a larger problem

According to the sources I went to, which is National Health board in Canada and others, most is inspected
You have given me your experience without providing evidence that it happens in large numbers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rpannier (Reply #143)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 10:10 AM

173. The government agencies in Canada and US as well as other countries

regulate the importation of drugs for redistribution within their countries. If you look at a bottle of pills at the drug store, you will likely find the wording "manufactured for..." "distributed by..."; in other words, purchased wholesale for redistribution domestically. These drugs are subject to regulation.

Do you honestly believe that US Citizen, not-quite-legally, going online to order drugs is afforded the same or any protection? Is there someone sitting in USPS or customs checking our packages to see if one is coming from a manufacturer that failed an inspection?

"Buyer beware" is operative here. Obviously before I purchased from a Canadian pharmacy I did some research to determine if it was a legitimate, government-approved pharmacy. However, anyone using the internet knows what you think you see may not be what you get.

My point is that if Congress is going to allow us to legally import drugs, they also need to put protections in place. The author of the article you cite certainly didn't come away with confidence in that process.

How do these inspections work? What do we do when the plants fail the inspections? How often have we halted importation due to substandard drug manufacturing?

It seems we won’t get these answers from Health Canada because that information is proprietary and only shared with the companies and regulatory partners (I asked).

This situation doesn’t leave me with the warm fuzzies. Especially when we’re dealing with — how can I say this nicely — a federal agency that refuses to even enforce the laws against illegal drug advertising on a bus shelter at the end of my street?

Am I being overly alarmed when an agency whose job it is to keep unsafe products from consumers can’t even tell us which overseas manufacturers have failed inspections and why they failed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rpannier (Reply #107)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:26 AM

160. thanks and that blows Booker/Casey/Murray's arguments out of the water

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 02:41 PM

183. No they're not....

And the US government has no control over any changes to Canada's laws, should there be any.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #183)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 03:59 PM

184. So...

You are saying that Canadian laws are weaker on medications?

You are aware that the medications that people buy there are made by the same corporations and manufactured in the same countries, often even having been labeled in the same factories as their counterparts and just happen to be sold in a different country.

This defense of pharmaceutical company price gouging is unbelievable here.

Is it just because Saint Booker is one of the thirteen Democrats, or are there really that many corporate friendly democrats lingering here these days?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #184)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 08:08 PM

188. Controls are different, inspection methods are different, overall laws are different.

Some may be weaker, some may be stronger.

The fact is that the amendment didn't include inspection or certification that the drugs coming into the United States meet our standards.

So you've denigrated Booker, denigrated 12 other Democrats, and taken a shot at members of DU who you feel are "lingering here".

Anything else?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #188)

Mon Jan 16, 2017, 12:25 PM

194. I'm standing on principle

I believe in principle and policy.

I also happen to stand with 71% of the American people and the majority of the Democrats in the Senate.

You are apparently going with a collection of Democrats, and the majority of the Republican party who seem to have been influenced by campaign contributions.

Are you planning to do the same thing for the Democrats that received money from big oil?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:25 PM

7. Translation: You haven't paid your way into the way things work here... (yet) n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:20 PM

49. Or there was no way to ensure that some guy in a garage in Canada making knock offs isn't

 

the source. Like requiring them to come from a licensed pharmacist.

Didn't see that in the amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #49)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:28 AM

163. you vote for the importation and then add safety amendment or direct FDA to come up with regs

what's so fucking hard for these asshats?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #163)

Mon Jan 16, 2017, 12:35 PM

196. If it was a good amendment that would have been included. As written it was vague and had...

...holes in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #49)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:52 AM

171. vote for importation and then add a safety amendment or tell FDA to put it in regs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #171)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:54 AM

172. Pretty simple, really! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:25 PM

8. "protections..." The sorry-assed reason used for YEARS by Big Pharma.

 

Even with trump barking away, some Democrats cannot be persuaded to go against their corporate backers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:24 PM

53. So anyone concerned about protections is in "big pharma's" pocket?

 

That sounds a lot like the GOP, except they would say that anyone concerned with "protections" is trying to thwart the market.

Unless it's Bernie, of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #53)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:35 PM

69. After years of that "protections" crap, I think "anyone" is north of the border...

 

since U.S. standards could have easily been lowered and aligned with Canada's.



You got Sanders on your mind? No one mentioned Sanders, just a dozen or so Democrats and the usual Republicans as per the post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #69)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:58 PM

83. Because it's a Sanders amendment.

There are multiple amendments. I don't really have all the details. The Senators on the list didn't reject all the amendments, either. In at least one case, they preferred to have more than ten minutes to review it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaM (Reply #83)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 04:03 PM

185. Actually...

Amy Klobuchar is the primary sponsor and Sanders only agreed to co-sponsor.

This was a bare bones proposal just to start the conversation about this amendment but it was voted down before people could even go to work on it.

Really, we need to stop making excuses for corporatism run amuck and actually hold our representatives to a real standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #53)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:41 PM

72. Get over the Bernie hate. Has nothing to do with him.

 

This is an issue I can remember being discussed as far back as 2004 election. The party has had the majority and the presidency in that time and nothing was done.
A lot of us thought it would finally be fixed in the ACA but it wasn't.

ANY senator afraid of unsafe drugs could have crafted whatever they felt would eliminate that worry. However I'm not hearing anybody being upset because what they introduced with safety provisions was defeated. They are complaining because of the money they are receiving to complain from those against the idea at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #53)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 07:31 AM

148. Gah, you're ovsessed with bernie, while also defending corporocrats. Yuck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:47 PM

27. That is the same argument that republicans

have used for years.

I am terribly disappointed in Corey Booker. People are dying because of inflated drug prices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:56 PM

31. our drugs are now made all over the world, try again booker

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to juxtaposed (Reply #31)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:32 PM

65. And there are regs to ensure that they are what they say on the label - for SAFETY

 

And we need regs to ensure that drugs are indeed what they say they are.

Even from Canada.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #65)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:44 PM

74. and they are

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:13 PM

40. Oh you betcha Corey

 

lets protect ameriKans from dangerous Canadian products. Another nail in the Democratic Party coffin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elmac (Reply #40)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:35 PM

68. So he felt strongly enough to testify against Sessions

 

Which I'm all for him doing, but which really has to do with a segment of the electorate that he feels Sessions would hurt. I agree.

But he opposes something that would not only be popular with the same segment, but with a broad cross section of all voters. Not that he tried to introduce his own with protections in it mind you.

Why the democratic party is LOSING too much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:14 PM

42. Weak!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SammyWinstonJack (Reply #42)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:39 PM

71. Because he thinks differently from Bernie? (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:53 PM

80. Hiding behind a faux safety standards net

Is not something I would expect from a Progressive. This would help average and lower income Americans did we learn nothing at all from this election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:24 PM

92. Corey, that's not how you do legislation. First, you pass it,

then, you perfect it. You are trying to perfect it, then pass it...never happens that way. Waiting for perfection, come on! Look at what the Repubs did last night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:16 PM

118. I was about to say that this was ridiculous, given that Canada gets its drugs FROM

Canada gets its drugs FROM U.S. pharmaceutical companies....but that's NOT TRUE anymore. The last time I checked, SEVEN of the ten largest pharmaceutical companies were in Europe. And that number has probably gone up by now.

I checked into that number just before the ACA was passed, because rubes, shills, and paid trolls were flooding the internet with B.S. about how 'socialized medicine' kills medical research and medical innovation. I would then whip out my list, showing that 7 of the 10 largest pharmaceutical companies are located IN countries that have socialized medicine.

1) Yes, Booker is a sellout.

2) Yes, the pharma industry has too much influence in the Democratic Party.

3) Yes, the Democratic Party has to start doing a MUCH better job on picking its friends and allies, but...

4) I'm not going to condemn Booker or any of the others, (with the possible exception of Manchin, who is unrecognizable as a Democrat) because the Party has to start showing solidarity in the face of the worst Republican government since Hoover. This is no time to start with the circular firing squad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrollBuster9090 (Reply #118)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:21 AM

155. no solidarity for people charging $40K per round of conventional chemo

THAT was my "provider charge" and I had 12 rounds. These people are bankrupting the ACA, Medicare and Medicaid. I don't care if they bankrupt the insurance industry, which Big Pharma/Industry would never allow anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:19 AM

154. if he unequivocally supports imports he should have voted for them - my CT senators did

and I trust they would not allow junk instead of safe drugs into US

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #3)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 02:35 PM

182. Anytime you see that safety standards BS it's because they are owned by big Pharam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:23 PM

4. Congress Gets the Best Pays for Nothing

 

My family healthcare went up around $150 a month, not to mention the increase in co-pay and deductibles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:26 PM

9. even ted Cruz and Rand Paul

voted YES!

Rand Paul and ted Cruz voted YES! D's voted NO!

Cory Booker, you are a prime example of the sort of person that botched getting Hillary into the white house!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:29 PM

10. Maybe Trump will live up to his promise to negotiate drug prices through Medicare.

 

Could Booker and the other Dems voted that way because of Drug Company contributions? Sure. But they might also have been convinced that with no oversight over drugs from Canada or another foreign country, it would be too easy for counterfeit drugs to be supplied from rogue pharmacies, even from Russia.

I tried to buy some drugs from Canada once and found that many of the websites were suspect.
Maybe there could have been some compromise, a big warning and patient has to sign a waiver or something.


Below are just a couple of paragraphs from Consumer Reports.

"It’s not terribly risky to order a toaster online, but it is when you fill prescriptions through Internet pharmacies. Cyberspace is rife with sellers peddling illegal and even toxic products, often through websites that appear to be authentic.

“"The vast majority of websites selling prescription drugs are not legitimate,” says Carmen Catizone, D.Ph., executive director of the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP). Last June, for example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) took action against more than 1,050 sites, seizing products being sold fraudulently as FDA-approved prescription drugs and medical devices. And Catizone points out that of the almost 11,000 online drug outlets that NABP recently reviewed, only about 4 percent were operating according to U.S. laws and standards."

Article went on to say:

"Internet pharmacies claiming to be Canadian usually aren’t. “Most are fake storefronts selling low-quality products from Third World countries,” explains Carmen Catizone of the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy."

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/08/is-it-ok-to-buy-medicine-online/index.htm


Of course, the quotes above could include a lot of "protecting their turf and profits." Heck, it could have been written by Martin Shkreli.


In any event, I hope Congress comes around to doing something with drugs where people don't have to take chances to stay alive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:37 PM

70. Are you saying that when someone says "safety concerns" that they mean safety concerns?

 

Even when they disagree with Bernie?

Clearly you are NOT a progressive....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #70)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 01:37 AM

142. Is it at all possible for you...

to reply to someone without mentioning Bernie's name? Seriously, start losing the hate already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chwaliszewski (Reply #142)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 07:11 AM

147. The OP is about Bernie's amendment. If you don't believe me - look up.

 

I have to wonder if it is possible to think that any Democrat that disagrees with him should get all the bile and "vote them out" and "Corporate SHILL!!" reactions, as though he is the only arbiter of good and true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:29 PM

11. Mike Lee voted for it

Why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:30 PM

13. And we wonder why Democrats can't seem to connect with people.

Because, for too many of them, whoever pays the bills has more pull with elected officials than the people do.

You expect this kind of behavior from Republicans. They are bought and paid for, but they don't usually pretend otherwise. Whereas Democrats talks a good game (and Booker certainly is capable of that, but it is probably just grandstanding), but in the end so many time they stab us in the back.

I'm a cynic. Stuff like this beats the idealism right out of me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:43 PM

103. We need to put the pressure on. We really need to do this.

Just having the option will drop US pricing for drugs quite a bit, and the people being bled to death here need the break.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #103)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:23 AM

158. US taxpayers should realize they are paying fantasy prices for drugs and bankrupting ACA, Medicare

and Medicaid in the process

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:31 PM

14. They are Democrats and therefore

must be supported. Unless you are a constituent, in which case, you have some semblance of interest. They are Democrats. Unlike Bernie. So, listen to them. I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #14)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:18 PM

45. Only Democrats by name

 

and will only be supported if they do the peoples bidding, not corporate shills.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:31 PM

15. Booker wants to be President. I guess he's showing us who he supports early on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:09 PM

86. He's always been like that

He comes from the DLC side of the party. This is why I have been besides myself watching so many DU posters apparently not realizing this and associating him with Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Basically DLCers go with liberals/progressives probably 75% - 80+% of the time. It's that other 20% - 25% when they suddenly veer off in the other direction. His good points include his younger age, experience, and more grass-rootsy/hands-on style of engagement.

Edit to add - take note of the big pharma in NJ, although there has been an exodus of late.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:33 PM

17. More bullets in the foot

just what they need, cater to the donors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:33 PM

18. A couple points to consider;

 

1 - Most of these drugs were made possible as a result of base research conducted by the taxpayer-funded National Institute of Health (NIH). And we, the taxpayer, are required to pay a higher price than every non-taxpayer in the world. TOTAL FRAUD.

2 - Senator Booker used the same excuse, product safety, that was used by George W. Bush when he originally shut the door on Canada. Problem being, these same labels in the U.S. and Canada are manufactured in the same facilities.

3 - While Bush and Booker look after our safety, many drugs have had to be pulled from the U.S. market for causing strokes and heart attacks. Investigations showed that the producers of these drugs hid their research on these side effects. They were found guilty and ordered to pay a few days of their revenue in fines. SAFETY MY ASS !!!!!!!! WE ARE SLAVES OF THE OLIGARCHY !!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #18)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:47 PM

76. Thank you for posting that.

 

Well said!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #76)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:54 PM

110. You're welcome

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #18)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:25 AM

159. "slaves of the oligarchy"---you got it and Booker et. al. appear to be slavemasters

doing the dirty work for the masters over them.

Booker, you can let me know I'm wrong but that's how you're looking right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:35 PM

19. How can I see who voted and how?

Thanks.

The link provided does not open up for me. It is not a secure website is what it says.
Suggestions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Equinox Moon (Reply #19)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:38 PM

20. Here is the list of Democrats anyhow. Almost All of the Republicans voted No

The Democrats could have passed Bernie's amendment but chose not to. 12 Republicans, including Ted Cruz and Rand Paul voted with Bernie. We had the votes.
Here is the list of Democrats who voted "Nay" (Feinstein didn't vote she just had surgery):
Bennet (D-CO) - 2022 https://ballotpedia.org/Michael_Bennet
Booker (D-NJ) - 2020 https://ballotpedia.org/Cory_Booker
Cantwell (D-WA) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Maria_Cantwell
Carper (D-DE) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Thomas_R._Carper
Casey (D-PA) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Bob_Casey,_Jr.
Coons (D-DE) - 2020 https://ballotpedia.org/Chris_Coons
Donnelly (D-IN) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Joe_Donnelly
Heinrich (D-NM) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Martin_Heinrich
Heitkamp (D-ND) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Heidi_Heitkamp
Menendez (D-NJ) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Robert_Menendez
Murray (D-WA) - 2022 https://ballotpedia.org/Patty_Murray
Tester (D-MT) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Jon_Tester
Warner (D-VA) - 2020 https://ballotpedia.org/Mark_Warner

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:42 PM

23. Thank you so much for this!

Why in the world did these Dems vote No? This is a huge problem if Dems are not on the side of helping people get by. WOW!

So disappointing. They all need to be contacted and questioned. I will make calls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Equinox Moon (Reply #23)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:20 PM

48. We need to weed out the corporate shills in the party

 

and that will be done in the next election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Equinox Moon (Reply #23)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:23 PM

50. Big Pharma $$$$$

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Equinox Moon (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 10:38 AM

174. Getting corporate money out of politics would help a lot.

That way, no one would have to vote against their constituents' best interests because they got money from corporations.

Of course, they still might do that anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #174)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 10:52 AM

175. They voted just like a republican.

Corporate Democrats are harmful to the party and society. That is not an anti-democrat statement. That is pro: We The People, which is what a democrat stands for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:21 PM

91. Doesn't it ring alarm bells for you that Cruz, Lee, and Paul supported it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #91)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:41 PM

99. 2 plus 2 4

If cruz, lee and paul were to suddenly support drinking water, would you be against it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #91)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:00 PM

113. Their motives are opaque

Paul believes religiously in the free market and wants the prices to compete with Canada.

Cruz is a petty bitch and wants to ram the bill down Don-don's throat.

And Lee is from Utah and has to pretend to care about the elderly for both the aging population there and to placate the Mormon vote.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:33 PM

96. Thank you! I just called my Senator Heinrich, who voted no


and I gave an earful on his voice mail. Cruz is standing with us...why weren't you? The false, wait until everything is perfect bs, safety

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:30 AM

165. arm yourselves with drug info and meetup with these would-be oligarchs if they represent you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:41 PM

22. roll call is a right wing site that is shit stirring

The right is starting early to sow discontent and to smear Booker
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10028464217

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:47 PM

26. Nancy, it is how they voted

My Senator Amy Klobuchar and Senator Sanders sponsored this bill.

Are you going to tell me that I shouldn't believe my lying eyes next?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #26)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:50 PM

28. it was never going to pass and was grandstanding by Sanders

I think his explanation is fine. It's silly to make a fuss about this.
You are repeating the same mistakes you did with Clinton.
I'm not even on a Booker bandwagon, but I see what is going on here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #28)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:54 PM

30. Oh gods what-ever

Booker receives a hell of a lot of Wallstreet money for a Democrat. I am not surprised at all that someone was going to jump up heroically to his defense.

Maybe you are making all the same mistakes this time around. Supporting a candidate that is clearly in the hock to the financial industry and the pharmaceutical industry. I am sorry but my mother and my father and my stepfather all need medications and I actually worry about how they are going to pay for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #30)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:38 PM

119. Finance companies make up about half of the GDP in NJ and NY, employing thousands of good people....

 

And the highest executive levels is the only place you find that is heavily GOP. Most are more liberal than most parts of the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #119)

Sun Jan 15, 2017, 02:51 AM

189. Can you explain to me what this means to you? I don't get what you're saying. That if you support

 

Democrats with big money because you want votes to go a certain way then you are behaving as a liberal?

Is it always just coincidental that the votes follow the money when we're talking about Democrats?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCanete (Reply #189)

Sun Jan 15, 2017, 03:19 AM

191. I mean that you really have to look deeper and consider their votes and who they represent as well..

 

I haven't seen anyone show a pattern of Booker shilling for big pharma- only this one vote. And I'd heard it undos part of ACA provisions and complicates things?
I'm hearing these sweeping broad brush "throw the bum out" shouts and very people seem to know his overall record.
I think we need to more measured than that. I'm not talking about making the guy president, I am not sure however they NJ has better candidates at the moment.
As liberal as it it, the voters there are pretty pro-business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #191)

Sun Jan 15, 2017, 03:33 AM

192. I agree that we should be measured. By the way though, I don't accept a vote that helps people in

 

your state or district or maintains a status quo that helps people in your state or district, if it sickens the country for the privilege. I do understand not being able to stop something and taking a piece of it for your state, even if I don't like that so much...for instance Sanders when it comes to the f-35 program, but Corey could have been among the Senators to adopt this amendment into the greater bill.

I grant, sometimes we have principled standouts on measures. I don't actually expect our officials to vote in lock step and I'm not always in agreement with the party line. But when things look on the surface like a conflict of interest, I think its incumbent upon our incumbents to have a very good explanation for their vote, so we should demand that. Throwing people out does not do us that much good. Putting a lot of scrutiny and pressure on our own politicians is a must, however, so that they can do the hard thing already, whether they want to or not.

As to his record, he has always struck me from my previous introductions to him as a fairly pro-corporate Democrat. That could entirely be on principle, and the money would follow either way, but it's not overly convincing to me that he should be serving if we have better options. As to him being a good man, wasn't he the guy who went into a burning building and pulled somebody out of it? I would never want to suggest that people aren't complicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #28)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:24 PM

52. Whats going on here is

 

corporate money poisoning our own party. At least Bernie is trying to do something for the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #28)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:29 PM

59. Let's go with that

 

If it was never going to pass, if it was just grandstanding, if it was just symbolic,

WHY WOULD THESE DEMOCRATS VOTE AGAINST IT?

Every time a Democrat votes for big business, a segment of this board starts accusing anyone who criticizes them of being ideological purists or some such ad hominem as if that makes their vote acceptable.

While such a response might tell us what you think about liberals, it doesn't tell us why you think the vote was okay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Uponthegears (Reply #59)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:53 PM

79. Don't you liberals just understand your job is to just shut up and vote for the Democrats no matter

 

how they vote? After all, are you liberals going to vote Republican? You liberals just be quiet. We conservadems know what we're doing.

Party over principle. Oh, and let's not forget the professional DU-Bernie hate. No even Ralph Nader was hated on this board as much as Bernie is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Uponthegears (Reply #59)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:48 PM

121. Thank you. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:03 PM

35. So article aside. why is it ok that Booker voted no?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:53 PM

29. Of course, anyone who differs from Bernie is CORRUPT! That's the new definition, right?

 

Bernie is absolutely above doing anything that serves his own purposes, and is TOTALLY known for listening to anyone who disagrees with him in any way, because they are always wrong.

There is right and there is wrong, and Bernie is the way you can tell which is which.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #29)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 05:56 PM

32. Sarcasm... without content

I don't think that trying to convince people to move their expectations down actually is a good strategy.

Maybe we should focus on the substance of the bill?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Reply #32)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:27 PM

56. That seems to be the last thing going on here - no one seems to care what was in the amendment

 

or the substance of the bill.

Just BIG PHARMA!! VOTE THEM OUT!!!! THEY VOTED DOWN BERNIE!!!

Again - Replace BIG PHARMA!!! with BIG GOVERNMENT!!! and you have the GOP argument against safety regulations on anything.

Just saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #56)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:46 PM

75. Absurd

That has to be about the most ridiculous analogy I have for the day.

So to you denouncing a corporation or lobbying is somehow the equivalent of the tea party going all anti government.

Ridiculous doesn't cover it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #56)

Sun Jan 15, 2017, 02:55 AM

190. why don't you tell us then? Why don't you explain why only 13 dems, some of which take a lot of

 


money from that industry, voted the way they did? I'm willing to be shown the light. Seem is not always the reality. All somebody needs to do is to clear the air here, and you are pretty confident that this hand wringing is for nothing. Do you have the information and interpretation that will calm our reactive minds down?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCanete (Reply #190)

Sun Jan 15, 2017, 07:45 PM

193. Perhaps the answer lies in the "symbolic" nature of the amendment.

 

Much like when your constituency opposes waiting periods on gun purchases, and you vote against the Brady Bill five times, and yet you are not called "paid for" by the NRA, even though you get money from them.

Perhaps you should ask the Senator from Vermont why he is exempt from the standards to which he holds everyone else, especially when he is seeking the spotlight for a new career direction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #29)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:03 PM

33. QFT

"Bernie is absolutely above doing anything that serves his own purposes, and is TOTALLY known for listening to anyone who disagrees with him in any way, because they are always wrong.

There is right and there is wrong, and Bernie is the way you can tell which is which."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #33)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:30 PM

61. Really? Well Booker and the other Democrats can always fall back on the Bernie "excuse".....

...which he's used a number of times over the years for questionable votes by him, "well, it would have failed anyway".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #61)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:01 PM

84. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #29)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:41 PM

100. If your strange dislike of Bernie could be put on hold for a moment,

have you even given a single thought about what the Bill sought to accomplish.

People with limited means would have been able to purchase drugs at a lower cost. You do not have to like Bernie to want a Bill that would allowed people a chance to obtain life saving drugs. It is hard to imagine how a true democrat that would not support the choice of achieving that goal over an opportunity of to air their dislike of the person promoting it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pennylane100 (Reply #100)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:46 PM

120. +1000 Eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:31 AM

167. way to win your argument---not! We're talking about the content of his bill and not your

absurd take on it that adds nothing to the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:03 PM

34. Just taking care of business before Trump socks it to big pharma

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chakaconcarne (Reply #34)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:08 PM

37. Uh... What?!

Uh... Trump and the Repukes are likely to be even more generous to big pharma given the chance.

And those 12 Democrats are the ones most likely to go along with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:06 PM

36. Does anyone have the actual language of the Bill and the amendment?

 

Before freaking out, that would be helpful.

Previous safeguards included in bills that wanted to make importation of drugs from Canada easier have included this language:

"In order to ensure the safety of participating individuals, the regulations would require that HHS approve the Canadian pharmacy, that the dispensing pharmacist be licensed in Canada, and that a licensed U.S. physician issue the prescription being filled."

That was language in a bill from 2015 that was co-authored by Amy Klobuchar, so we can be assure that the whiff of big pharma brimstone was not part of that....

http://drugtopics.modernmedicine.com/drug-topics/news/us-senators-want-drugs-imported-canada

And neither was Bernie, for that matter.

Just saying that the freak outs might be premature, and foaming at the mouth might not be called for simply because people didn't agree with Sanders.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #36)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:14 PM

41. This was a procedural amendment to start writing a bill

...and so there wasn't a long list of safeguards. But it says that a prescription from a US doctor is needed.


SA 178. Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Mr. Sanders) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by her to the concurrent resolution
S. Con. Res. 3, setting forth the congressional budget for the United
States Government for fiscal year 2017 and setting forth the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2018 through 2026; as
follows:

At the end of title III, add the following:

SEC. 3___. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND RELATING TO LOWERING
PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES FOR AMERICANS BY
IMPORTING DRUGS FROM CANADA.

The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate
may revise the allocations of a committee or committees,
aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution
for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments,
amendments between the Houses, motions, or conference reports
relating to lowering prescription drug prices, including
through the importation of safe and affordable prescription
drugs from Canada by American pharmacists, wholesalers, and
individuals with a valid prescription from a provider
licensed to practice in the United States, by the amounts
provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided
that such legislation would not increase the deficit over
either the period of the total of fiscal years 2017 through
2021 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2017 through
2026.

https://www.congress.gov/amendment/115th-congress/senate-amendment/178/text

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #41)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:17 PM

44. A Dr's prescription would be the minimum for getting an Rx anywhere

 

That's not a safeguard that would ensure that the source in Canada wasn't someone working out of their garage importing from the Phillipines, whereas requiring a Canadian pharmacist on the other end would.

We can't go down the road that the GOP does and throw good regs out with the bathwater....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #44)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:45 PM

104. We would be free to choose where we got our drugs from

 

Just like we choose if we want generic or not. A lot of people do not trust generic, like some here do not trust Canada.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to riversedge (Reply #38)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:51 PM

108. Thank you! I called mine..Notice: NO 4Heinrich and PMurray

Udall to say thank you and Heinrich, who voted no, to give him some lip.

I noticed Murray of Washington voted no.
New Sen replacing H Reid, for whom i raised money, voted YES! I'll send her an email. We have to let them know we are paying attention!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:15 PM

43. Booker and some of the Democratic senators who voted against the amendment were among the top.....

recipients of money from the pharmaceutical industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:31 PM

64. Booker has been too cozy with big money donors.

He won't get my support if he ever runs for President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:32 PM

66. Sounds like a winning strategy! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:42 PM

73. This would have helped so many people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 06:47 PM

77. so another prime example why we didnt need the same Ol party favorites to

serve in Democratic Leadership.....I've mentioned this several times that Republicans ran over us during this election and committed to be a perfectly planned election fraud/theft with the help of Russian and our FBI's Comey.
So with these corporate mafia Democrats still in Congress does anyone really expect anything different in midterms?....

The Republicans have more of a majority than it seems.
One could bet if Congressional members had to pay for their prescriptions or the same co-pay we have to than this bill would have gotten more Democratic votes.

13 Democrats? so that gives Republicans a 65-35 in the Senate Majority...Right?

We need Term Limits

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:10 PM

87. I was pleased that Booker took a stand, maybe the failing

Democratic party politicians need to take the stronger stand. When they have power they do NOTHING, unlike the Republicans. The Democrats need to clean out the party of the stale old politicians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:19 PM

90. So does anyone actually know the content of the Amendment?

Or is it just a bad thing to vote down because Bernie wrote it? How did it stack up to the other amendments offered on the scenario? How did Booker vote on the others?

And if we're talking about BigPharma, we're talking about NJ and Booker's constituents. Yes, he's going to be concerned given how a giant industry that employs a portion of his state is affected by a bill. That's the purpose of electing a Senator.

I'm not going to get outraged or start throwing around the term "shill" until we actually have some details on his objections to this bill and his view on the others. Feels like this is shaping up to be the CO single payer thing all over again when Dems who came out against it for various reasons were tarred and feathers by folks that just say "single payer" and didn't even pay attention to the context of the bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaschaHM (Reply #90)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:40 PM

98. from the Sanders Bill

 

The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate
may revise the allocations of a committee or committees,
aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution
for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments,
amendments between the Houses, motions, or conference reports
relating to lowering prescription drug prices, including
through the importation of safe and affordable prescription
drugs from Canada by American pharmacists, wholesalers, and
individuals with a valid prescription from a provider
licensed to practice in the United States, by the amounts
provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided
that such legislation would not increase the deficit over
either the period of the total of fiscal years 2017 through
2021 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2017 through
2026.

Note the reference to the "importation of safe and affordable:.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ciaobaby (Reply #98)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:48 PM

106. "safe and affordable" means nothing without a guideline deeming the standards that something has to

meet to be considered as such. Without it, it's just legislative fluff. The Wyden amendment, which Booker voted for, actually required a safety certification on imported drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaschaHM (Reply #106)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:15 PM

117. if you have handy ----

 

Could you attach the language in the Wyden amendment.
I have been told it does not mention Canada and does not require any action - in other words - useless....... thus the need for Sander's bill.

Also, if your accepting money from pharmaceutical sorts, to the extent the Dems who voted "no" are, you have no credibility whatsoever.

Booker = $ 267,338
Murray = $ 254,649
Bennett = $ 222,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ciaobaby (Reply #117)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:35 AM

169. are these Pharma donations to D traitors for one year or several?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaschaHM (Reply #106)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:53 PM

122. OMG, that's a RW trope. Canada gets its drugs from the same US suppliers

 

Don't fall for RW bullshit. Please

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #122)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:34 PM

126. Oh lord. The good 'ole. You don't agree with me so that's a RW trope.

Sure. ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #122)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 10:06 PM

131. Can you explain why the Republicans unanimously voted against the Wyden Amendment...

if it's "right-wing bullshit"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaschaHM (Reply #106)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:34 AM

168. all of that usually comes with regulations from an agency, FDA or HHS in this case

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:27 PM

94. This retired registered nurse buys drugs from Canada ALL the time!!

And have for years. Yes, there are those, very few that are not safe. They are usually the exact same drug, same manufacturer you get here in the states. Work with a dr that will help you find safe pharmacies in Canada, or do your own research.

You have fallen for the ruse. They want you to think it's unsafe!! The horror stories I could tell about drugs released right here with the blessing of the FDA.... it's a book.... no its a trilogy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:37 PM

97. Yes, we should all be standing up to most corporations.

 

This is not business as usual. All dems should vote together, even if they can find a reason not to (valid or not).
All dems should be bold enough to join Barbara Lee and boycott the inauguration.
If not, this party is destined to keep on losing.
If you support these turncoat democrats voting no on a reasoned bill to provided affordable drugs from Canada, I suggest you check your voter registration, perhaps you checked the wrong box. The republicans would be happy to have you !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:42 PM

101. It's money. And this must pass. We should keep the pressure on.

Like a whole bunch of Canadians are dropping dead because of bad drugs!!!! Any drug legal to be sold to Canadians should be safe for Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:42 PM

102. What are we always told on here, don't let perfect be the enemy of the good?

Somebody neeeds to tell that to these 13 CorpoDems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skeeter Barnes (Reply #102)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:02 PM

114. Oh... That?

Pragmatism is only an acceptable argument when you are arguing against progressive policy or hippie punching.

I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:56 PM

111. The constituents of those 13 members need to make their concerns known, and make it clear

they will be primaried if they dont get in line and do the people's business, not Wall street's.

But, one thing at a time, the GOP is actively trying to destroy America and maybe the world, so we must pick our battles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 07:56 PM

112. Like US standards are so great

The FDA relies on cryptic big pharma studies with paid doctors conducting the "double blind" tests. Sometimes this actually works, other times, not so much. How's that Vioxx working out for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 08:10 PM

116. Are these the same progressives who hate NAFTA? Our free trade agreement with Canada?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #116)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:35 PM

138. Most progressives would be in favor of free trade with Canada

People in Canada get benefits and have sane working conditions, and moving factories out of the US and into Canada would only make sense in fringe cases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to killbotfactory (Reply #138)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:55 PM

140. Because Canadians Are Not So Brown?

Sort of like Trump supporters are okay with Melania cheating to stay in the U.S., because she isn't what they have in mind when they are referring to illegal immigrants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomCADem (Reply #140)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 07:58 AM

149. Because Canada has labor and environmental standards.

It's hard to compete with nations that have less worker and environmental protections in a free trade environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:41 PM

128. Here is the U.S. Senate rollcall ..........

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00020#position


XML U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 115th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Klobuchar Amdt. No. 178 )
Vote Number: 20 Vote Date: January 11, 2017, 11:06 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 178 to S.Con.Res. 3 (No short title on file)
Statement of Purpose: To establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to lower prescription drug prices for Americans by importing drugs from Canada.
Vote Counts: YEAs 46
NAYs 52
Not Voting 2
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Alphabetical by Senator Name
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Baldwin (D-WI), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Bennet (D-CO), Nay
Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea
Blunt (R-MO), Nay
Booker (D-NJ), Nay
Boozman (R-AR), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Capito (R-WV), Nay
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Cassidy (R-LA), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Coons (D-DE), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Cortez Masto (D-NV), Yea
Cotton (R-AR), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Cruz (R-TX), Yea
Daines (R-MT), Nay
Donnelly (D-IN), Nay
Duckworth (D-IL), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Ernst (R-IA), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Not Voting
Fischer (R-NE), Nay
Flake (R-AZ), Yea
Franken (D-MN), Yea
Gardner (R-CO), Nay
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Harris (D-CA), Yea
Hassan (D-NH), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Heinrich (D-NM), Nay
Heitkamp (D-ND), Nay
Heller (R-NV), Yea
Hirono (D-HI), Yea
Hoeven (R-ND), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johnson (R-WI), Nay
Kaine (D-VA), Yea
Kennedy (R-LA), Yea
King (I-ME), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Lankford (R-OK), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Lee (R-UT), Yea
Manchin (D-WV), Yea
Markey (D-MA), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Moran (R-KS), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murphy (D-CT), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Paul (R-KY), Yea
Perdue (R-GA), Nay
Peters (D-MI), Yea
Portman (R-OH), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rounds (R-SD), Nay
Rubio (R-FL), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Sasse (R-NE), Nay
Schatz (D-HI), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Scott (R-SC), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Not Voting
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Sullivan (R-AK), Nay
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tillis (R-NC), Nay
Toomey (R-PA), Nay
Udall (D-NM), Yea
Van Hollen (D-MD), Yea
Warner (D-VA), Nay
Warren (D-MA), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Young (R-IN), Nay

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 09:57 PM

130. Keep these votes in context

This amendment was part of the overnight vote-a-rama. Dems had them all designed to get Rs on the record opposing the most popular parts of the ACA, Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, etc. The Rs should have just reflexively voted nay and killed the amendment, but maybe a few of them heard Trump's presser where he supported negotiating prices and voted aye instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Thu Jan 12, 2017, 11:37 PM

139. Thought Dems Were Opposed to Cheap Imports?

No on TPP because cheap imports kill American jobs. Yes, to cheap imported drugs from Canada?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 01:20 AM

141. Can someone explain the purpose of proposing the admendment?

The article says it was to show Democratic support for lower prescription drug prices. If that's it, then the ones who voted for were able to show that. Still, I am not sure if legislation that everyone knows can't pass reveals much. I really don't get the point of vanity legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 03:57 AM

144. Eunuchs

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 05:48 AM

146. What is his reasoning?

I see no reason to judge him without hearing his side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 08:43 AM

150. Did you read the amendment and Booker's comments about why he voted against it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #150)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 09:44 AM

170. Here is the text of the amendment itself:

 


SEC. 3___. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND RELATING TO LOWERING
PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES FOR AMERICANS BY
IMPORTING DRUGS FROM CANADA.

The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate
may revise the allocations of a committee or committees,
aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution
for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments,
amendments between the Houses, motions, or conference reports
relating to lowering prescription drug prices, including
through the importation of safe and affordable prescription
drugs from Canada by American pharmacists, wholesalers, and
individuals with a valid prescription from a provider
licensed to practice in the United States, by the amounts
provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided
that such legislation would not increase the deficit over
either the period of the total of fiscal years 2017 through
2021 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2017 through
2026.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 11:02 AM

178. Progressives Outraged when are they not Outraged !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 11:28 AM

179. rec

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenfrequed (Original post)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 02:08 PM

180. This right here

 

is why progressives sit out elections and why so many people think "both parties are the same."

Republican voters get Senators who vote their way 100% of the time. Granted their way is racist and sociopathic but still.

We have to hope and pray that our representatives vote with us. That's kind of a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread