NY Times: In a Shift, Bush Moves to Block Medical Suits

[kysrsoze]

ASHINGTON, July 24 — The Bush administration has been going to court to block lawsuits by consumers who say they have been injured by prescription drugs and medical devices.

The administration contends that consumers cannot recover damages for such injuries if the products have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. In court papers, the Justice Department acknowledges that this position reflects a "change in governmental policy," and it has persuaded some judges to accept its arguments, most recently scoring a victory in the federal appeals court in Philadelphia.

Allowing consumers to sue manufacturers would "undermine public health" and interfere with federal regulation of drugs and devices, by encouraging "lay judges and juries to second-guess" experts at the F.D.A., the government said in siding with the maker of a heart pump sued by the widow of a Pennsylvania man. Moreover, it said, if such lawsuits succeed, some good products may be removed from the market, depriving patients of beneficial treatments.

In 2002, at a legal symposium, the Bush administration outlined plans for "F.D.A. involvement in product liability lawsuits," and it has been methodically pursuing that strategy. The administration's participation in the cases is consistent with President Bush's position on "tort reform."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/politics/25DRUG.html?hp

Well, good to know Mr. Bush is doing such a good job of trying to protect us from those nasty medical suits against "good" drugs and devices. What's next? The auto industry?

[JerseygirlCT]

1. Wow. Because, you know, we can trust that the FDA is run by

scientists who have only the purest of scientific reasons for all they do... Of course, politics would never enter into it, right?

[Th1onein]

2. The problem is that the FDA is in the pay of the drug companies!

I hate Bush! He is so fucking EVIL!

[kysrsoze]

4. That was my reaction too

He and his whole administration are the most evil, uncaring MFs I've seen in my lifetime. The worst thing is how they spin such horrible things into some kind of imaginary benefit and the stupid portion of the general public just eats it up.

You guys hit the nail on the head.

[Joanne98]

3. He's making America safer

To be raped by Corporate America. When will the sheeple wake up.

[whosinpower]

5. Well, he is consistant after all

He will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS sides with Corporate America to the detriment of Joe Public.

Good lord please - get this guy out of office!!!!!!!!!! Here is a newsflash - if a person or group of persons sues a manufacturer for faulty or defective goods causing personal injury or death - THEN PERHAPS THE PRODUCT WAS NOT GOOD AT THE OUTSET!!!! I am thinking of silicone breast implants as a perfect example - and the outcome to those class action suits.

[k in IA]

6. So, if the FDA screws up, then what? or does the FDA never screw up?

They are now infallible, like the Pope.

[mulethree]

21. right, you get to sue the FDA instead of the drug companies

Legislature and lawsuits will push up the already lengthy and expensive cost of getting FDA approval. The drug companies are already complaining because the FDA approval time comes out of their patent duration and the cost is already like $100 Million plus to get a new drug approved.

Maybe this is intended to break the FDA process. You can have lawsuits OR the FDA but not both?

I wonder what it would do regarding FDA recognition of the approval processes in other countries? If you went through the process for swiss, japanese or european drug approval will the FDA accept some of that work or make you do it all over again since the FDA is now apparently responsible for most lawsuits regarding approved drugs?

[grytpype]

7. The War on Justice

The War on Truth, the War on Peace. He truly is a War President.

[fearnobush]

8. Children of Thalidomide.

May by Bush should take this drug now and often.

[rfkrocks]

9. Follow the money-straight to the best government you can buy

Lobby and pay off-the history of American politics in the last 30 years-free speech equates to the amount of money one can give to candidates-the drug companies own this presidency and it is as clear as the new "medicare" benefit law-the attack against tort cases is just a ruse to protect corporate benefactors-it is time to remove these ticks off the body politic-what would Franklin, Adams, Jefferson and Washington do?

[Green Lantern]

10. Rule of Law

In a twisted perversion of the basics of our society, it seems the Bushwa administration has struck again. It has reduced the supremacy of law in the US to a position subordinate to regulations developed by executive branch agencies. It has shifted the citizen from a position of supremacy to one of subordination.

One has to wonder how much longer this will last. Will the Kerry team repudiate this rubbish and turn back the thrusts for corporate supremacy? Or will they follow the DLC line in their money chase?

If Bushwa and co. steal control of the country again, I suspect that many, like myself, will find themselves "voting in the street" again after a 40 year layoff.

[stepnw1f]

12. I'm Afraid It Will Be Bad for generations

Who was it that said the US would be a 3rd World Country in 30 years or maybe sooner?

[Fovea]

18. Note my SIG line...

[FlaGranny]

11. I wonder if this means that all warnings will be

removed from packaging about the known dangers of certain drugs.

[w4rma]

13. They're totally psychopathic. (nt)

[KT2000]

14. Implications for dangerous chemicals

Wouldn't this create a precedent where chemicals approved by the EPA would also be held safe from toxic torts?

[WildClarySage]

15. How is this a shift??? Sounds more like a shaft, as in

giving Americans the shaft.

[snippy]

16. This is horrible policy and horrible politics.

The policy is horrible because of who has to bear the cost of an injury caused by a product. There are many good products that benefit thousands of people but inevitably injure a few. The costs of those injuries can be borne by society in general (the Government), or by the business making and selling the product, or by the injured people themselves. Logic and fairness dictate that the costs should be borne by those benifiting from the sales of the product. That means the business should be responsible for the costs of the injuries. Those costs either would be passed on to consumers who benefit from the product or absorbed by the business owners.

The politics is horrible because there are millions of republican voters who think this policy sucks. I have told three committed republicans about this story and they were outraged. Kerry should find a way to use this.

[Walt Starr]

17. What's even worse is that Bush is using consumer tax dollars

to pay for the royal screwing up the ass he's giving them because the pharmaceutical companies certainly don't pay any taxes.

So what if comes down to is he's using YOUR money to make sure HIS campaign donors don't have to pay YOU when they're fucked up poison kills or mames you.

[Fovea]

19. The president's position on tort reform

is that no reform is necessary once you do away with torts altogther. Next stop for this breathtaking concept, the EPA.

[relaf]

20. tort reform

This policy is heavy on assumptions often made by econ obssesed law professors. Basically, it assumes that the FDA appopriately weighs the risks of a product, and accordingly informs the consumer 100% about the pros/cons of a product.

Unfortunately, in the real world, this doesn't happen all the time and this model won't work. I do understand the concern about juries/judges redesigning or assessing the value of complex designs, however these can solved with more procedural devices that an outright ban.

Yeah, there are some product liability BS suits out there, like the guy who drunkenly dove off the roof into a vinyl pool and tried to claim that pools of that nature were unsafe as a product catergory. The good news was, the appeals courts rectified this problem.

The long term effects of this policy will be nil. The reality is Americans love to sue. Once enough people realize there access to the courts is being jeopardized, it will change. However in the interim, be careful about what drugs you are prescribed!

M

[Nancy Waterman]

22. Time for the Repukes in Congress

to pass a law not allowing the courts to review the constitutionality of this wonderful presidential edict. Government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations!!