<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Speshul Elekshun</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:49:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bren</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4988</link>
		<dc:creator>Bren</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:19:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4988</guid>
		<description>Matt-

I appreciate you taking a look and respect the reasons behind your vote.  I do wish that people would not base their vote soley on the proposition&#039;s supporters and vote on the basis of the propositions themselves- but as I said I do understand where you come from.

It&#039;s great to see another people out there as passionate as I am about these issues, no matter what side you&#039;re on.  May the best proposition win! (78!!)  :)

-Bren</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt-</p>
<p>I appreciate you taking a look and respect the reasons behind your vote.  I do wish that people would not base their vote soley on the proposition&#8217;s supporters and vote on the basis of the propositions themselves- but as I said I do understand where you come from.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s great to see another people out there as passionate as I am about these issues, no matter what side you&#8217;re on.  May the best proposition win! (78!!)  :)</p>
<p>-Bren</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4987</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:24:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4987</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the link.  I guess what it comes down to for me is that I can not in good conscience support anything that the drug companies are behind.  They bought influence, suppressed evidence, used fear and intimidation, stifled competition and now are inserting themselves directly into the process via 78.  Stopping them on something trumps the fear of litigation for me.  But what do I know, I&#039;m among the 40 million americans who don&#039;t even have health insurance...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the link.  I guess what it comes down to for me is that I can not in good conscience support anything that the drug companies are behind.  They bought influence, suppressed evidence, used fear and intimidation, stifled competition and now are inserting themselves directly into the process via 78.  Stopping them on something trumps the fear of litigation for me.  But what do I know, I&#8217;m among the 40 million americans who don&#8217;t even have health insurance&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bren</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4986</link>
		<dc:creator>Bren</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:01:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4986</guid>
		<description>Matt,

Again, I encourage you to look at how the similar program is working in Ohio and how the program similar to 79 worked in Maine.  Maine&#039;s program was tied up in courts for years, while Ohio went into effect without a hitch.

My point is also not that there will be one lawsuit for every patient-  there doesn&#039;t have to be, with a pool of 200+ million to pick from, 10% would mean millions.  Also as I said, with trail lawyer not even needing a patient to sue companies, this will be a virtual free-for-all.

Here&#039;s a link you might find interesting...

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/elections/initiatives/article_739768.php 

(might require registration but you can get a sign in name from bugmenot.com)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt,</p>
<p>Again, I encourage you to look at how the similar program is working in Ohio and how the program similar to 79 worked in Maine.  Maine&#8217;s program was tied up in courts for years, while Ohio went into effect without a hitch.</p>
<p>My point is also not that there will be one lawsuit for every patient-  there doesn&#8217;t have to be, with a pool of 200+ million to pick from, 10% would mean millions.  Also as I said, with trail lawyer not even needing a patient to sue companies, this will be a virtual free-for-all.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a link you might find interesting&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/elections/initiatives/article_739768.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/elections/initiatives/article_739768.php</a> </p>
<p>(might require registration but you can get a sign in name from bugmenot.com)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4985</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4985</guid>
		<description>The drug companies don&#039;t just support 78, they put it on the ballot.

I don&#039;t imagine there will be one lawsuit for every patient, and obviously the legislature will have to step in and do their job.

I think that either way there will be a court fight, and 79 was the better choice in this election only because the higher vote total prop passes.  78 and its &quot;voluntary participation&quot; was simply unacceptable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The drug companies don&#8217;t just support 78, they put it on the ballot.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t imagine there will be one lawsuit for every patient, and obviously the legislature will have to step in and do their job.</p>
<p>I think that either way there will be a court fight, and 79 was the better choice in this election only because the higher vote total prop passes.  78 and its &#8220;voluntary participation&#8221; was simply unacceptable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bren</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4984</link>
		<dc:creator>Bren</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 16:58:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4984</guid>
		<description>Matt,

I understand where you come from, as a lot of people are weary of the drug company&#039;s motives for such strong support behind 78.  But, you cannot honestly believe that if trail attorneys are allowed to sue drug company&#039;s because they believe drug costs are too high (even if they do not have a client - the attorney can simply sue on their own), that they would not take full advantage of that fact.

I would think this was one of the main motivations behind the drug companys&#039; support.  Millions of frivilous lawsuits will create higher perscription drug prices, and defeat the purpose the plan altogether.

All of this arguement is also assuming that 79 even goes into effect if it were to win the vote.  I highly doubt that 79 will even have a chance of passing through all the litigative hoops in light of the fact that it must be approved by the government before anyone sees a dime of discounts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt,</p>
<p>I understand where you come from, as a lot of people are weary of the drug company&#8217;s motives for such strong support behind 78.  But, you cannot honestly believe that if trail attorneys are allowed to sue drug company&#8217;s because they believe drug costs are too high (even if they do not have a client &#8211; the attorney can simply sue on their own), that they would not take full advantage of that fact.</p>
<p>I would think this was one of the main motivations behind the drug companys&#8217; support.  Millions of frivilous lawsuits will create higher perscription drug prices, and defeat the purpose the plan altogether.</p>
<p>All of this arguement is also assuming that 79 even goes into effect if it were to win the vote.  I highly doubt that 79 will even have a chance of passing through all the litigative hoops in light of the fact that it must be approved by the government before anyone sees a dime of discounts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4971</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:16:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4971</guid>
		<description>&gt;â€œThe industry fears this provision could lead to a flood of frivolous lawsuits.

Exactly.  Which is their stated reason for opposing 79 and getting 78 placed on the ballot.  This is the same industry that opposes reimportation from Canada on fears of poisoning.  They will say or do anything to protect their profits, which is of course their right.  But it&#039;s not a good idea for their consumers to aid them in that quest.


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pharma4nov04,0,3284896.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Drug Firms Gave Money to Some Who Endorsed Proposition 78
By Dan Morain, Times Staff Writer

SACRAMENTO â€” The nation&#039;s drug makers have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to political leaders and civil rights groups that have endorsed the industry&#039;s initiative on the Nov. 8 ballot.

The measure, Proposition 78, would avert state caps on the price of prescription drugs. Those embracing it while taking the industry&#039;s money include the conservative Traditional Values Coalition, an emergency-room physician in Los Angeles, the California arm of the NAACP and the Mexican American Political Assn.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;â€œThe industry fears this provision could lead to a flood of frivolous lawsuits.</p>
<p>Exactly.  Which is their stated reason for opposing 79 and getting 78 placed on the ballot.  This is the same industry that opposes reimportation from Canada on fears of poisoning.  They will say or do anything to protect their profits, which is of course their right.  But it&#8217;s not a good idea for their consumers to aid them in that quest.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pharma4nov04,0,3284896.story?coll=la-home-headlines" rel="nofollow">http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pharma4nov04,0,3284896.story?coll=la-home-headlines</a></p>
<p>Drug Firms Gave Money to Some Who Endorsed Proposition 78<br />
By Dan Morain, Times Staff Writer</p>
<p>SACRAMENTO â€” The nation&#8217;s drug makers have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to political leaders and civil rights groups that have endorsed the industry&#8217;s initiative on the Nov. 8 ballot.</p>
<p>The measure, Proposition 78, would avert state caps on the price of prescription drugs. Those embracing it while taking the industry&#8217;s money include the conservative Traditional Values Coalition, an emergency-room physician in Los Angeles, the California arm of the NAACP and the Mexican American Political Assn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sammy</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4970</link>
		<dc:creator>Sammy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:07:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4970</guid>
		<description>I apologize...here is the link to the article.  Found in the Contra Costa Times

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/12971681.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I apologize&#8230;here is the link to the article.  Found in the Contra Costa Times</p>
<p><a href="http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/12971681.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp" rel="nofollow">http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/12971681.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sammy</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4969</link>
		<dc:creator>Sammy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:06:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4969</guid>
		<description>matt-

Here is the article I read with the stat about the millions of potential lawsuits.

&quot;The industry fears this provision could lead to a flood of frivolous lawsuits.

&quot;Profiteering is not defined,&quot; Davis said, &quot;so any one of the 210 million prescriptions that are filled could be subject to a lawsuit.&quot;&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>matt-</p>
<p>Here is the article I read with the stat about the millions of potential lawsuits.</p>
<p>&#8220;The industry fears this provision could lead to a flood of frivolous lawsuits.</p>
<p>&#8220;Profiteering is not defined,&#8221; Davis said, &#8220;so any one of the 210 million prescriptions that are filled could be subject to a lawsuit.&#8221;"</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4955</link>
		<dc:creator>matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2005 19:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4955</guid>
		<description>So right now, 25% opt out of dues, yet if 75 passes, many more are likely to do the same?  Won&#039;t more union workers then be subject to thuggery?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So right now, 25% opt out of dues, yet if 75 passes, many more are likely to do the same?  Won&#8217;t more union workers then be subject to thuggery?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gatrios</title>
		<link>http://www.1115.org/2005/11/01/speshul-elekshun/comment-page-1/#comment-4954</link>
		<dc:creator>Gatrios</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2005 18:44:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.1115.org/?p=2118#comment-4954</guid>
		<description>&gt;If you had read the post, you would know that there is already a mechanism that address this. union members can opt-out with no penalty.

Union members who choose to opt out are usually threatened by union goons with violence to them and their families. YES on 75, it will stop the blatant thuggery of nazi like union stooges. Unions keep their members in line with force and coercion. If you enter a profession wher by state law you have to join a union, vote YES on 75 to preserve your civil rights. Don;t let the unions silence YOUR voice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;If you had read the post, you would know that there is already a mechanism that address this. union members can opt-out with no penalty.</p>
<p>Union members who choose to opt out are usually threatened by union goons with violence to them and their families. YES on 75, it will stop the blatant thuggery of nazi like union stooges. Unions keep their members in line with force and coercion. If you enter a profession wher by state law you have to join a union, vote YES on 75 to preserve your civil rights. Don;t let the unions silence YOUR voice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

