Meds-for-meth bill drew record lobbying expenses, not even including radio and newspaper ad campaigns

Makers of over-the-counter drugs spent more than any lobbying interest ever had during a single Kentucky legislative session in their effort to defeat a bill requiring prescriptions for the key ingredient in methamphetamine, Bill Estep reports for the Lexington Herald-Leader.

"The Consumer Healthcare Products Association spent $457,053 on lobbying activities in the first three months of this year's legislative session, according to reports filed with the state Legislative Ethics Commission," Estep writes. "The group's lobbying effort was so dominant that it spent more than the next five groups combined in that period, January through March, according to spending reports."

And the figure doesn't even included hundreds of thousands of dollars that the trade group spent on radio and newspaper campaigns, because the lobby-reporting requirements do not apply to messages aimed only at the general public. The group did report spending on "a phone-bank operation to put people in contact with legislators to voice concerns about legislation to require a prescription for medicine containing pseudoephedrine, which is now available over the counter," Estep writes.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/04/30/2170495/makers-of-cold-medicines-set-new.html#storylink=cpy

The efforts, dating back to 2010, were partly successful. The legislature passed a bill "that will require a doctor's prescription for pseudoephedrine, but only after someone has bought 24 grams of the medicine a year," Estep notes. "A 48-count box of the generic medicine with 30-milligram pills contains 1.44 grams of pseudoephedrine. The bill excludes limits on gel caps and liquid pseudoephedrine." (Read more)

The lobbying effort wasn't only about Kentucky. The makers of Sudafed and other pseudoephedrine preparations are trying to stave off similar efforts in other states, and viewed Kentucky as a sort of firewall after seeing prescription-only laws pass in Oregon and Mississippi.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/04/30/2170495/makers-of-cold-medicines-set-new.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/04/30/2170495/makers-of-cold-medicines-set-new.html#storylink=cpy

'Meds for meth' bill is about to become law despite heavy lobbying campaign by pharmaceutical companies

The bill to limit purchases of a popular cold medicine used to make methamphetamine passed the General Assembly today and Gov. Steve Beshear said he would sign it.

The Senate voted 29-8 to approve changes the House made in Senate Bill 3, sponsored by Senate Majority Floor Leader Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, left. The bill would require a prescription to buy more than 7.2 grams of pseudoephedrine in a month and 24 grams in a year. "A generic box of pseudoephedrine with 48 pills, each with a 30-milligram dosage, contains 1.44 grams of the medicine," Jack Brammer of the Lexington Herald-Leader reports. ""Gel caps and liquid pseudoephedrine would be excluded from the limits in SB 3 because making meth from those forms is considered more difficult."

The bill’s sponsors had wanted lower limits, an initially a prescription for any amount, "but they compromised with opponents who worried about inconveniencing cold and allergy sufferers," Brammer notes. "The pharmaceutical industry has lobbied aggressively against the state requiring prescriptions for pseudoephedrine at any level," ranking first in reported lobbying expenses without even counting its extensive advertising campaign. The industry apparently viewed Kentucky as a sort of firewall, the absence of which could make passage of similar "meds for meth" bills in other states. Only Oregon and Mississippi now have such legislation.

Makers of Sudafed, similar cold medicines again lead in legislative lobbying expenses, and that doesn't count their radio ad campaign

The Consumer Healthcare Products Association, which is fighting legislation that would limit the amount of pseudoephedrine that could be bought without a prescription, remained the leading spender among lobbying interests at the General Assembly in February, the state Legislative Ethics Commission said in its monthly newsletter.

CHPA, which represents manufacturers and distributors of over-the-counter medicines, spent $192,985 on lobbying in February, and a total of $388,000 for the first two months of the session. Those amounts do not include an extensive radio advertising campaign, which from all indications has cost more than the spending that had to be reported.

Other health-care interests were among the top spenders in February. Ranking second through 11th were the Kentucky Hospital Association ($38,422, for a two-month total of $74,543); the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce ($30,056, two-month total $63,404); Altria (Philip Morris) Client Services ($28,129, two-month $50,434); the Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation ($24,805, total $38,655); AT&T ($24,199, total $47,432); the Kentucky Medical Association ($21,958, total $42,731); the Kentucky Education Association ($21,629, total $45,249); the Kentucky Retail Federation ($21,191, total $45,452), which also opposes the meds-for-meth bill; Kentuckians for the Commonwealth ($18,317, total $34,188) and the Kentucky Optometric Association ($18,227, total unavailable).

Meds-for-meth, pain-pill bills each clear a second chamber; both probably headed to conference committee(s)

"State lawmakers gave new life Wednesday to two bills designed to tackle Kentucky's problems with methamphetamine labs and prescription drug abuse," John Cheves and Jack Brammer report for the Lexington Herald-Leader.

"On a 60-36 vote, the House approved Senate Bill 3, which would further limit the amount of cold medicines containing pseudoephedrine that consumers could buy without a prescription. Pseudoephedrine is a key ingredient used in making meth. Meanwhile, the Senate approved House Bill 4, which transfers from the state Cabinet for Health and Family Services to the attorney general's office an electronic monitoring system that keeps track of prescriptions for pain pills. The vote was 26-9. Both bills are likely to go to conference committees made up of representatives from both chambers, who will try to negotiate a compromise on differences in the House and Senate versions of the bills." (Read more)

House panel OKs "meds for meth" bill; chair predicts passage

The bill to limit purchases of the cold medicine used to make methamphetamine cleared another legislative hurdle Monday, and the chairman of the committee that approved it predicted that it will become law despite a heavy lobbying effort by over-the-counter drug makers.

By a 10-4 vote, the House Judiciary Committee approved a version of Senate Bill 3 that differs slightly from the version passed by the Senate. Rep. John Tilley, a Hopkinsville Democrat and the committee’s chairman, predicted the revised SB 3 will pass on the House floor. "Tilley said Senate leaders have signed off on the changes the House committee made," Jack Brammer reports for the Lexington Herald-Leader. The House version clarifies "language regarding prescriptions" and would ban "criminals convicted of meth-related offenses from purchasing pseudoephedrine for a five-year period," Mike Wynn of The Courier-Journal reports.

The core of the bill would allow consumers without meth records to buy 7.2 grams of medicines with pseudoephedrine each month, approximately a two-week dose, and up to 24 grams per year, without a prescription. Another 7.5 grams a month or 90 grams a year could be available with a prescription. "Experts have testified that those amounts are adequate for most cold and allergy sufferers, and more than 90 percent of all purchasers use dosages that fall below the proposed thresholds," Wynn reports. "State law already limits purchases to 9 grams per month, with a yearly cap of 108 grams, and purchasers are required to present a photo ID and sign a log at the point of sale."

The bill would not apply to gelcaps, which are more difficult to use for meth, or liquids, which are used for children. (Read more)

Senate committee narrowly passes meds-for-meth bill as advocates start their own radio advertising campaign

In the face of a strong lobbying effort by makers of over-the-counter cold medicines, a state Senate committee narrowly approved a bill today that would require a prescription for most products containing pseudoephedrine, a key ingredient used to make methamphetamine.

Senate Bill 50, approved 6-5 by the Judiciary Committee, is sponsored by Senate Majority Floor Leader Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, left, but he said he isn't sure of its chances in the full Senate, reports Jack Brammer of the Lexington Herald-Leader. A similar bill got out of committee last year but never came to a vote on the Senate floor because it lacked the votes to pass. This year's bill would not apply to gelcaps, which are more difficult to use in meth making.

The Kentucky State Police recorded about 1,200 meth labs last year, and former meth addict Melanda Adams, from Stivers' home Clay County, told the committee she believed the bill would "cut the burgeoning number of dangerous home-made meth labs in the state." The Consumer Healthcare Products Association, a non-profit that represents the over-the-counter medicine industry, argues that requiring a prescription would "create a hardship for legitimate consumers," reports Jessie Halladay of The Courier-Journal.

Only Oregon and Mississippi have passed such laws, so Kentucky has become a firewall for the drug makers' lobby, which has bought many radio commercials urging people to contact senators in opposition to the bill, contending it would "punish Kentucky families" and pushing an alternative measure that would bar people convicted of meth making from buying the medicines. Opponents of that bill say meth makers would continue to use surrogates to buy the medicines for them. Sen. Ray Jones, D-Pikeville, who voted for SB 50, called the radio ads "scare tactics." UPDATE: For more on the lawmakers' complaints about the ads, from cn|2 Politics, click here.

As of Feb. 3, the group had spent more than $82,000 running ads on Louisville, Lexington and Somerset radio stations owned by Clear Channel Communications Inc., the nation's largest radio operator, according to public-inspection files at those stations. In 2011, CHPA paid the Kentucky Association of Radio and Television more than $93,000 to run ads, according to public-inspection files from Cummulus Broadcasting, another major owner of stations in Kentucky.

UPDATE, Feb. 17: The drug makers have a 60-second ad from Pat Davis, who identifies herself as "a Kentucky resident for over 20 years" and the mother of six children who all "battle allergies." She is not identified as the wife of 4th District U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis, who is not seeking re-election. She testified against last year's bill. Here is the ad, via Page One Kentucky, a popular blog that has been critical of the legislation.

The drug makers' ads have been running uncontested for two months, but this week a group headed by Knox and Laurel County's Commonwealth's Attorney Jackie Steele, Real Facts About Meth, offered a counter-ad, describing the impact of meth on communities. The group does not appear to be well funded; its website solicits contributions.

Conway supports, P'Pool opposes meds-for-meth law; Conway defends decsion not to join lawsuits about federal health reform

In a debate where most of the sparks flew over often-specious questions about conflicts of interest, one of the biggest substantive disagreements between the candidates for attorney general Monday night was about whether to require a prescription for the cold medicine used to make methamphetamine. They also debated President Obama's health-care reform law.

Democratic Attorney General Jack Conway. left, said he supports such a law, which failed in this year's General Assembly, while Hopkins County Attorney Todd P'Pool, right, said he opposes it. The candidates were interviewed by Bill Goodman on KET's "Kentucky Tonight" as part of a series of debates between statewide candidates in the Nov. 8 election.

Republican P'Pool, the first to respond to Goodman's question, said he opposes making pseudoephedrine a scheduled drug because "I think it creates a burden for law-abiding citizens. . . . Let's don’t put a burden on soccer moms." He said he would support "a lifetime ban," which he did not explain, "for anyone convicted of a meth crime."

Conway said his position in favor of scheduling "is not the most politically popular position," but said he responded to a plea from "my friend Hal Rogers," the Republican congressman from Somerset who is a leading advocate. "I know it's not popular with some soccer moms," Conway said, and "I know it's inconvenient" to require a prescription, "but when you see a kid in a burn unit that’s gone through a meth lab it tears your heart." He said children at present at 80 percent of meth labs.

Conway said he is open to changing his position if opponents can show him how to prevent "smurfing," the use of surrogates to avoid the recordkeeping of pseudoephedrine purchases. He said many drug stories do not use the online recordkeeping system. He added that Oregon and Mississippi had "dramatic declines" in the number of meth labs after they scheduled pseudoephedrine.

P'Pool began the debate by sharply criticizing Conway's decision not to join lawsuits by Republican attorneys general challenging the constitutionality of the federal health-reform law: "He's absent form the fight against Obamacare … because he supports Barack Obama and his re-election." Conway replied, "I'm not gonna take some of the valuable resourecs of the office of the attorney general and put 'em on a lawsuit on health care when it’s an issue that’s gonna get decided anyway." He said some attorneys general are supporting the law in court, and "I didn’t join them either because I wanted to focus on Kentucky first."

As Goodman pressed the point, P'Pool said, "It’s really not about health care; it's about the proper role of the federal government." He said Kentucky could join the case with the stroke of a pen, but "My opponent has not been bashful in his support of Barack Obama and that’s why he’s on the sidelines."

Conway replied that the lawsuit "might undo some of the underpinning" of Social Security and Medicare laws. "This is not a perfect bill; some things need to be fixed in health-care reform," he said, but he implicitly defended the bill's requirement to buy health insurance: "It costs Americans on average $46 billion a year to cover the uninsured," he said. "They’re going to the emergency room to get their care … They’re already in the market. This is about being more efficient."

Click here for a story on the debate by Deborah Yetter of The Courier-Journal. Video of the debate is posted online here.