SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Transparency Fight Over CVS Caremark Contracting Practices Escalates With Lawsuit for Release of Univ. Drug Benefit Contract
Change to Win, Public Citizen Seek Records From Michigan School to Shine Light On Prescription Drug Costs, Increase Transparency in Government Spending
WASHINGTON
Change to Win today sued Ferris State University, seeking the
release of a government contract between the university and CVS
Caremark, a pharmacy benefit management (PBM) company, among other
documents. Change to Win is represented by Margaret Kwoka, an attorney
at Public Citizen, a nonprofit organization with a history of fighting
for government transparency, and by attorney Ted Iorio of the Michigan
firm Kalniz, Iorio & Feldstein. The case was brought under the
Michigan Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in Mecosta County Circuit
Court.
"CVS Caremark's lack of transparency is driving up prescription
drug costs for consumers and health plans alike," said Chris Chafe,
executive director of Change to Win. "Michigan law protects the
people's right to know, in this case, what CVS Caremark is charging the
university for prescription drug benefits, but also what compensation
CVS Caremark may be receiving in the form of undisclosed agreements
with drug manufacturers and pharmacies at taxpayers' expense."
Change to Win filed the suit after Ferris State University, a public
college based in Big Rapids, Mich., partially denied a request for a
copy of the CVS Caremark contract. The school released part of the
contract but refused to release key portions such as pricing
information. Public Citizen and Change to Win assert that the redacted
information, such as prices, should also be disclosed. Change to Win is
engaged in an effort to increase the public accountability and
transparency of drug middlemen, such as CVS Caremark, to allow for
public scrutiny of drug benefits and drug pricing practices.
CVS Caremark Resists Transparency
CVS Caremark is enormously resistant to transparency. The company
has taken extraordinary measures to prevent greater disclosure of its
practices, including allegedly interfering with audits by its clients,
opting out of contract opportunities to avoid greater disclosure and
vigorously opposing legislative and other measures to increase
transparency in the PBM industry. Last year, CVS Caremark sued the
Texas Attorney General to prevent disclosure of a public contract in
Texas but dropped its suit on the day of trial last September. The
contract has since been made public. A recent study by the Texas State
Auditor's Office found that CVS Caremark's prices were significantly
higher than some competing PBMs, and called on Texas agencies to
educate themselves about PBM contracting practices before entering into
drug benefit contracts.
"Ferris State University is unlawfully withholding information about
its contract with CVS Caremark," said Kwoka. "Under Michigan law, the
full contract, including the prices, should have been released to our
client. Michigan FOIA law does not allow the university to withhold
information such as prices that are a necessary part of the terms of a
government contract. This suit will ensure that Michigan FOIA laws
serve the purposes they were meant to, permitting public scrutiny of
government practices such as contracting."
Right to Know in Michigan
Under well-established Michigan law, the people have a right to know
how government spends tax dollars through government contracts. The
Michigan FOIA provides that information submitted to gain a government
contract or other governmental benefit must be released upon public
request. The law reflects the public interest in the public
availability of basic information that allows for citizen debate and
oversight regarding the expenditure of government funds.
CVS Caremark is the country's second-largest PBM and has contracts
with many state entities across the country, including several in
Michigan. In 2005, the University of Michigan stopped contracting with
Caremark, citing concerns that its pricing practices were not
transparent. Many PBM contracts with government agencies, including
several Caremark contracts, have been made public in Michigan and other
states under Freedom of Information laws.
Public Citizen is representing Change to Win as part of its Public Interest FOIA Clinic,
which was launched last year and is designed to give comprehensive
assistance to other nonprofit organizations seeking government-held
information. Through the clinic, Public Citizen provides direct FOIA
litigation assistance to public interest organizations. Public Citizen
lawyers also collect and analyze information about recent FOIA
litigation conducted by public interest organizations to identify and
address common FOIA problems.
For backgroundand more information, visit: www.AlarmedAboutCVSCaremark.org.
To read the lawsuit, go to: https://www.citizen.org/documents/ferrisstatefoiacomplaint.pdf
Alarmed About CVS Caremark is a Change to Win initiative to
educate health plan managers and trustees as well as consumers about
the newly merged CVS Caremark, now the country's second largest
pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) and largest retail pharmacy chain.
Change to Win represents workers in CVS Caremark plans that cover more
than 10 million people. On behalf of these health plan members, the
initiative seeks reform of the PBM industry to protect plan members'
health and privacy.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
Boeing Union Wins 25% Raise in Tentative Contract, But Possible Strike Still Looms
Unionized machinists are set to vote on the contract on Thursday.
Sep 08, 2024
A tentative deal made early Sunday morning between aerospace giant Boeing and the union that represents more than 33,000 of its workers was a testament to the "collective voice" of the employees, said the union's bargaining committee—but members signaled they may reject the offer and vote to strike.
The company and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) District 751 reached an agreement that if approved by members in a scheduled Thursday vote, would narrowly avoid a strike that was widely expected just day ago, when Boeing and the bargaining committee were still far apart in talks over wages, health coverage, and other crucial issues for unionized workers.
The negotiations went on for six months and resulted on Sunday in an agreement on 25% general wage increases over the tentative contract's four years, a reduction in healthcare costs for workers, an increase in the amount Boeing would contribute to retirement plans, and a commitment to building the company's next aircraft in Washington state. The union had come to the table with a demand for a 40% raise over the life of the contract.
"Members will now have only one set of progression steps in a career, and vacation will be available for use as you earn it," negotiating team leaders Jon Holden and Brandon Bryant told members. "We were able to secure upgrades for certain job codes and improved overtime limits, and we now have a seat at the table regarding the safety and quality of the production system."
Jordan Zakarin of the pro-labor media organization More Perfect Union reported that feedback he'd received from members indicated "a strike may still be on the cards," and hundreds of members of the IAM District 751 Facebook group replied, "Strike!" on a post regarding the tentative deal.
The potential contract comes as Boeing faces federal investigations, including a criminal probe by the Department of Justice, into a blowout of a portion of the fuselage on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 jetliner that took place when the plane was mid-flight in January.
The Federal Aviation Administration has placed a limit on the number of 737 MAX planes Boeing can produce until it meets certain safety and manufacturing standards.
As The Seattle Timesreported on Friday, while Boeing has claimed it is slowing down production and emphasizing safety inspections in order to ensure quality, mechanics at the company's plant in Everett, Washington have observed a "chaotic workplace" ahead of the potential strike, with managers "pushing partially assembled 777 jets through the assembly line, leaving tens of thousands of unfinished jobs due to defects and parts shortages to be completed out of sequence on each airplane."
Holden and Bryant said Sunday that "the company finds itself in a tough position due to many self-inflicted missteps."
"It is IAM members who will bring this company back on track," they said. "As has been said many times, there is no Boeing without the IAM."
Without 33,000 IAM members to assemble and inspect planes, a strike would put Boeing in an even worse position as it works to meet manufacturing benchmarks.
On Thursday, members will vote on whether or not to accept Boeing's offer and on reaffirming a nearly unanimous strike vote that happened over the summer.
If a majority of members reject the deal and at least two-thirds reaffirm the strike vote, a strike would be called.
If approved, the new deal would be the first entirely new contract for Boeing workers since 2008. Boeing negotiated with the IAM over the last contract twice in 2011 and 2013, in talks that resulted in higher healthcare costs for employees and an end to their traditional pension program.
Keep ReadingShow Less
100,000+ People Across France March to Decry Macron's 'Denial of Democracy'
"Expressing one's vote will be useless as long as Macron is in power," said one demonstrator.
Sep 08, 2024
In cities and towns across France on Saturday, more than 100,000 people answered the call from the left-wing political party La France Insoumise for mass protests against President Emmanuel Macron's selection of a right-wing prime minister.
The demonstrations came two months after the left coalition won more seats than Macron's centrist coalition or the far-right Rassemblement National (RN) in the National Assembly and two days after the president announced that Michel Barnier, the right-wing former Brexit negotiator for the European Union, would lead the government.
The selection was made after negotiations between Macron and RN leader Marine Le Pen, leading protesters on Saturday to accuse the president of a "denial of democracy."
"Expressing one's vote will be useless as long as Macron is in power," a protester named Manon Bonijol toldAl Jazeera.
A poll released on Friday by Elabe showed that 74% of French people believed Macron had disregarded the results of July's snap parliamentary elections, and 55% said the election had been "stolen."
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of La France Insoumise (LFI), or France Unbowed, also accused Macron of "stealing the election" in a speech at the demonstration in Paris on Saturday.
"Democracy is not just the art of accepting you have won but the humility to accept you have lost," Mélenchon told protesters. "I call you for what will be a long battle."
He added that "the French people are in rebellion. They have entered into revolution."
Macron's centrist coalition won about 160 assembly seats out of 577 in July, compared to the left coalition's 180. The RN won about 140.
Barnier's Les Républicains (LR) party won fewer than 50 parliamentary seats. French presidents have generally named prime ministers, who oversee domestic policy, from the party with the most seats in the National Assembly.
Barnier signaled on Friday that he would largely defend Macron's pro-business policies and could unveil stricter anti-immigration reforms. Macron has enraged French workers and the left with policies including a retirement age hike last year.
Protests also took place in cities including Nantes, Nice, Montpellier, Marseilles, and Strasbourg.
All four left-wing parties within the Nouveau Front Populaire (NFP) coalition have announced plans to vote for a motion of no confidence against Barnier.
The RN has not committed to backing Barnier's government yet and leaders have said they are waiting to see what policies he presents to the National Assembly before deciding how to proceed in a no confidence vote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Profound Injustice': Missouri Judge Rules Abortion Rights Amendment Invalid
"Our fight to ensure that voters—not politicians—have the final say is far from over," said one organizer.
Sep 07, 2024
Campaigners who last month celebrated the success of their effort to place an abortion rights referendum on November ballots in Missouri faced uncertainty about the ballot initiative Friday night, after a judge ruled that organizers had made an error on their petitions that rendered the measure invalid.
Judge Christopher Limbaugh of Cole County Circuit Court sided with pro-forced pregnancy lawmakers and activists who had argued that Missourians for Constitutional Freedom had not sufficiently explained the ramifications of the Right to Reproductive Freedom initiative, or Amendment 3, which would overturn the state's near-total abortion ban.
The state constitution has a requirement that initiative petitions include "an enacting clause and the full text of the measure," and clarify the laws or sections of the constitution that would be repealed if the amendment were passed.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom included the full text of the measure on their petitions, which were signed by more than 380,000 residents—more than twice the number of signatures needed to place the question on ballots.
Opponents claimed, though, that organizers did not explain to signatories the meaning of "a person's fundamental right to reproductive freedom."
Limbaugh accused the group of a "blatant violation" of the constitution.
Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for the group, said it "remains unwavering in [its] mission to ensure Missourians have the right to vote on reproductive freedom on November 5."
"The court's decision to block Amendment 3 from appearing on the ballot is a profound injustice to the initiative petition process and undermines the rights of the... 380,000 Missourians who signed our petition," said Sweet. "Our fight to ensure that voters—not politicians—have the final say is far from over."
Limbaugh said he would wait until Tuesday, when the state is set to print ballots, to formally issue an injunction instructing the secretary of state to remove the question.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom said it plans to appeal to a higher court, but if the court declines to act, the question would be struck from ballots.
As the case plays out in the coming days, said Missouri state Rep. Eric Woods (D-18), "it's a good time for a reminder that Missouri's current extreme abortion ban has ZERO exceptions for rape or incest. And Missouri Republicans are hell bent on keeping it that way."
The ruling came weeks after the Arkansas Supreme Court disqualified an abortion rights amendment from appearing on November ballots, saying organizers had failed to correctly submit paperwork verifying that paid canvassers had been properly trained.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular