Fw: Public Citizen press release

[Guest guest]

Not Good News for you Nevada Ladies!

MM

----- Original Message -----

From: " Bradbery " <ABRADBERY@...>

Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 3:10 PM

Subject: Public Citizen press release

Public Citizen issued the following two press releases today:

Feb. 15, 2002

Bush Poised to " Trash " Campaign Promise

on Nuclear Waste Dump

Vow to Base Decision on 'Sound Science' Rings Hollow

WASHINGTON, D.C. - President W. Bush will be flip-flopping on a

campaign promise and putting the public at risk if he accepts Energy

Secretary Spencer Abraham's recommendation to create a nuclear waste dump at

Yucca Mountain in Nevada, Public Citizen said today.

During his presidential campaign, then-candidate Bush vowed that any

decisions regarding the proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain would

be based not on politics but on " sound science. " Evidence indicates that

Abraham's recommendation is based on nothing of the sort. White House

sources have indicated Bush will accept Abraham's recommendation and forward

it to Congress. If he does, Bush -- whose presidential campaign received

nearly $300,000 from the nuclear power industry according to the Center for

Responsive Politics - will be putting politics first and turning his back on

a campaign promise made to Nevadans and the nation.

After spending years of study and billions of dollars, the U.S. Department

of Energy (DOE) has not been able to demonstrate that the proposed

repository could safely contain nuclear waste. The General Accounting

Office, the investigative arm of Congress, concluded just weeks ago that a

site recommendation at this time would be premature.

Abraham's recommendation to the White House shows blatant disrespect for

public health, instead currying the favor of an industry that simply wants

to get rid of its waste so it can make more of it. In his Feb. 14 letter to

the president, the energy secretary, who received more than $80,000 from the

nuclear industry in his unsuccessful bid for re-election to the Senate in

2000, says he is " convinced " that " sound science " supports his

determination. He even claims that the presidentially appointed Nuclear

Waste Technical Review Board supports his recommendation, although that same

review board in fact has characterized the DOE's scientific work at Yucca

Mountain as " weak. "

" If the president were to stick by the promise he made during the campaign

and base a decision on a thoughtful, deliberative consideration of the

scientific reviews, he would flatly reject Abraham's recommendation, " said

Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and

Environment Program. " If, as expected, the president embraces the

recommendation, it means that Bush's promise was as hollow as the tunnels

the government has been drilling in the Nevada mountainside. "

Abraham's recommendation also includes the absurd claim that putting

thousands of tons of deadly nuclear waste on trucks and trains and moving it

all over the country would enhance national security.

Even if the Yucca dump is opened, irradiated fuel has to " cool " for at least

five years before it can be transported. So as long as nuclear reactors are

operating, there will still be tons of nuclear waste at reactor sites.

Transporting waste doesn't reduce the number of potential radioactive

targets, but vastly increases it because each shipment becomes a target. The

waste would be transported through 44 states, putting millions of people at

risk.

" The residents of those communities have had no opportunity to tell the

president what they think of having the nation's most deadly radioactive

materials shipped through their neighborhoods or past their childrens'

schools, " Hauter said. " Once people realize waste is coming through their

town and start demanding answers about safety and security from the DOE,

they'll discover what Nevadans have known for years: You can't trust the DOE

to put people's safety over industy profits. "

Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn has announced his intention to veto the project, but

Congress could override Nevada's objection. A vote by Congress is expected

later this year.

" The driving force behind the Yucca Mountain project has never been sound

science, but nuclear industry profits, " Hauter said. " This administration's

energy policies already have been discredited by the secretive influence of

energy industry tycoons. Congress should reject the bought-and-paid-for

nuclear waste policy of the Bush administration, protect the integrity of

government processes - as well as public health and safety - and oppose the

Yucca Mountain project. "

###

Feb. 15, 2002

Public Citizen to Obtain Records of Enron Contacts with

Bush When He Was Texas Governor

Other Records Requests Are Pending;

Documents Relating to Global Warming to be Released Next Week

AUSTIN, Texas - Documents relating to contacts between Enron Corporation and

President Bush when he was governor of Texas will be released to Public

Citizen at 3 p.m. (EST) today. The 350 pages of documents that concern

contacts or communications between the governor's office and executives,

employees and officers of Enron will be made available three weeks after

Public Citizen requested them under the Texas Public Information Act.

The records have been stored in Bush's father's presidential library in

College Station, Texas. Bush had designated his father's library as the

repository for his gubernatorial records, creating uncertainty as to whether

they would be open to the public under federal law or the Texas open records

law. (The Texas law requires a response to requests within 10 days; the

archivist is proposing a 90-day response time as a general rule. Public

Citizen recently told the Texas attorney general that Bush's gubernatorial

records should fall under the state open records law.)

" The current investigation and legislative debate over reforms concerning

Enron show how important it is that these types of records be released

promptly, " said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook.

Added Tom " Smitty " , director of Public Citizen's Texas office,

" Disclosure delayed is disclosure denied. "

In the same request, Public Citizen asked for records relating to any

considerations of, or actions taken on, global warming by then-Gov. Bush.

The presidential library archivist has told Public Citizen that those

records will be released next week. In addition, Public Citizen has filed a

request with the Texas Public Utility Commission seeking records of

communications between Enron and Commissioner Brett Perlman (who recently

revealed he is a former Enron consultant) or former Commissioner Max

Yzaguirre, who was an Enron executive and who resigned from the commission

after failing to disclose his conflict of interest. It is unclear when those

records will be released.

###

Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in

Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

NOTE: If you no longer wish to receive press releases from Public Citizen,

please send an email to the above address and type " unsubscribe " in the

subject field.

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " Bradbery " <ABRADBERY@...>

Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 4:46 PM

Subject: Public Citizen press release

Public Citizen issued the following two press releases today:

1) Do or DYE Time for Textile Trade Promises

2) Activists, Legislators Urge Congress to Reject Fatally Flawed Yucca

Mountain Nuclear Dump

May 7, 2002

Do or DYE Time for Textile Trade Promises

" Next " Trade Bill Comes to House Floor Wednesday Without Textile Language;

Will NC Reps. , Ballenger, Burr, Myrick, Etheridge Get What Was

Promised?

WASHINGTON, D.C. - With the first trade vote since Fast Track coming to the

U.S. House of Representatives as early as tomorrow, North Carolina Reps.

Robin , Cass Ballenger, Sue Myrick, Bob Etheridge and Burr will

be looking for promised language on textile trade. When these five textile

caucus members voted for Fast Track last December, they were promised by

House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) that a U.S. customs rule change

protecting U.S. textile manufacturing would be in the next piece of trade

legislation that was brought to the House floor. As of Tuesday morning,

Wednesday's expected resolution on steel tariffs fails to contain any

textile language.

" The very economic viability of textile communities is at stake with these

trade deals, " said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade

Watch. " Despite the damage these trade deals are causing textile districts,

these members switched from " No " to " Yes " on Fast Track to expand NAFTA

because they were promised there would be a textile fix on the very next

trade bill that came before the Congress. Well, the bill is here and the fix

is not. "

The trade vote scheduled for Wednesday, Louisiana Rep. Jefferson's

(D-La.) resolution H. J. Res. 88, concerns the impact that tariff changes

can have on local economies, namely port communities suffering sudden

decreases in the volume of steel imports being shipped through local ports.

The textile language Speaker Hastert promised would be fixed in the " next "

trade vote as would the changes and inconsistencies in the Customs Service

evaluation of apparel imports. Hastert promised to eliminate a unilateral

change the Customs Service imposed on apparel imports from Andean nations

and the Caribbean. The change would ensure that preferential import

treatment would only be granted to apparel made with fabric dyed and

finished in the United States.

" The North Carolina members who trusted the Speaker to address their

concerns at a later date knew that past promises to get textile votes for

NAFTA expansion were never kept, " Wallach said. " Now the time has come to

keep the latest Fast Track promise and - surprise, surprise - it is being

broken. "

Fast Track trade authority to expand NAFTA to 31 more nations passed the

House in December by one vote (215-214). Along with promising the changes in

customs rules, the House leadership and the president promised to refuse to

accelerate the phase-out of the MultiFibre Agreement, not to expand

Pakistani textile and apparel quotas and to increase funding for

country-of-origin inspections. These promises have been ignored as well: The

president authorized negotiations over apparel at the World Trade

Organization; Pakistani apparel quotas have risen by one third; and no new

inspectors were funded.

" The old adage says, 'Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me,'

but is unclear on the third and fourth foolings, " Wallach said. " How many

textile promises will be broken before North Carolina's representatives

stand up for their constituents, instead of party leaders, on trade? "

###

May 7, 2002

Activists, Legislators Urge Congress to Reject

Fatally Flawed Yucca Mountain Nuclear Dump

WASHINGTON, D.C. - National environmental, public interest, taxpayer and

consumer groups joined members of Congress at a press conference today to

discuss the importance of the upcoming vote on the proposed Yucca Mountain

nuclear waste repository and urge lawmakers to reject the dangerous plan.

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote Wednesday on the

repository (H.J. Res. 87).

" Stopping Yucca is a huge priority for the major national environmental,

consumer and safe energy organizations because of the grave threat to public

health and the environment that this project poses, " said Debbie Sease,

legislative director of the Sierra Club.

Added Jill Lancelot, legislative director at Taxpayers for Common Sense,

" The Yucca Mountain proposal is a bad solution to a very real problem.

Support of Yucca is a roadblock to finding a cost-effective solution to the

nation's nuclear waste problem. "

Speakers raised concerns about the safety of transporting nuclear waste

through 44 states and the District of Columbia to the Nevada facility.

" A crash involving just one of these deadly shipments could be

catastrophic, " said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical

Mass Energy and Environment Program. " This is an unnecessary risk that

should not be imposed on communities along the nation's roads and rails. "

Added K. Musil, Ph.D., P.H., executive director and CEO of Physicians

for Social Responsibility, " Even without an accident, transporting nuclear

waste poses health threats. Each transport is like a portable X-ray machine

that cannot be turned off. We are asking Congress to put the safety and

health of the American people ahead of the interests of the nuclear

industry. "

The groups also questioned the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site.

Environmental and public interest groups, as well as the state of Nevada,

have charged that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) illegally

manipulated standards for protecting groundwater around the site from

radioactive contamination. They want the EPA to rewrite the groundwater

standards it established specifically for Yucca Mountain.

" Everyone knows Yucca Mountain leaks like a sieve, " said Alys Campaigne,

legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. " EPA has

committed outright scientific fraud in constructing its drinking water

compliance boundary around the Yucca Mountain site. The agency's proposal

will permit a radioactive septic field in a region that relies solely on

groundwater for drinking water and irrigation. "

Added Deb Callahan, League of Conservation Voters president, " Storing

nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain is an issue that raises more questions than

answers, but two things are certain: It's neither smart policy nor smart

politics. Candidates in 350 congressional districts this fall will have to

tell voters whether they are willing to risk their communities by allowing

thousands of tons of dangerous nuclear waste on their highways and rail

lines. "

U.S. Reps. Berkley (D-Nev.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jim Gibbons

(R-Nev.), and Jim McDermott (D-Nev.) spoke at the press conference.

League of Conservation Voters, Public Citizen and U.S. PIRG track lawmakers'

voting records on environmental/public interest scorecards.

###

Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in

Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

NOTE: If you no longer wish to receive press releases from Public Citizen,

please send an email to the above address and type " unsubscribe " in the

subject field.

[Guest guest]

Interesting!

MM

Martha Murdock, Director

National Silicone Implant Foundation | Dallas Headquarters

" Supporting Survivors of Medical Implant Devices "

4416 Willow Lane

Dallas, TX 75244-7537

----- Original Message -----

From: " Little " <slittle@...>

Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 3:52 PM

Subject: Public Citizen Press Release

The following three press releases were issued Sept. 25. The fourth was

issued Sept. 24.

Five Percent of Doctors Responsible for Half of All Medical Malpractice,

Study Finds

Repeat Offender Doctors Would Get New Legal Protections for Negligence From

Anti-Patient Liability Bill Scheduled for U.S. House Floor Vote Thursday

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Just 5 percent of American doctors are responsible for

half the malpractice in the United States, according to a new analysis of

federal data by the consumer group Public Citizen. The analysis was released

as the U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to consider legislation

that would make it more difficult for injured patients to hold their doctors

accountable for negligence.

The bill, H.R. 4600, comes in the wake of incorrect assertions by doctors

and the business lobby that a recent spike in medical malpractice insurance

premiums was caused by " excessive lawsuits. " The bill would reduce doctors'

liability for catastrophic injuries and would provide immunity from punitive

damages for reckless conduct by HMOs, nursing homes, drug companies and

medical device manufacturers.

" The medical community alleges that medical liability litigation constitutes

a giant 'lottery,' in which lawsuits bear no relationship to the care given

by a physician, " said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook. " In reality,

a small percentage of doctors are responsible for the bulk of malpractice in

the United States, and only better oversight by state medical boards, not

draconian limits on patients' legal rights, can reduce the tens of thousands

of deaths and injuries they cause. "

Public Citizen analyzed a public use file from the National Practitioner

Data Bank, which includes information about malpractice judgments and

settlements since September 1990. The analysis found that 4.8 percent of

doctors in the United States (40,118) who have paid two or more malpractice

awards to patients are responsible for 51.1 percent of all the reports made

to the Data Bank. Those doctors have paid out nearly $21 billion in damages,

more than 53 percent of the total damages paid. The analysis also found that

1.7 percent of doctors (14,293) are responsible for 27.5 percent of all

malpractice awards; 14, 293 have made three or more payments, totaling $11

billion.

" Doctors are blaming lawyers and the legal system for high insurance rates, "

said Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch. " They

should stop pointing fingers and instead look in the mirror. To achieve

lower insurance premiums, they should clean up their own profession by

strongly disciplining the small percentage of doctors who cause the bulk of

medical negligence. "

According to National Practitioner Data Bank figures, even doctors who have

paid repeated malpractice claims are seldom disciplined. For instance, of

the 2,100 doctors who have paid four malpractice claims, only 314 - 15

percent - have been disciplined. A Vanderbilt University study found that

doctors with past records of malpractice claims can be expected to have

" appreciably worse claims experience " than other doctors in future years.

Public Citizen's examination of redacted records from the National

Practitioner Data Bank found numerous questionable doctors who have

inflicted repeated injuries on patients yet never been disciplined. Among

these doctors, who are identified only by randomly generated numbers:

§ Physician Number 94358, licensed in New Jersey, settled or lost 33 medical

malpractice suits involving improper diagnosis or treatment between 1988 and

1993, inflicting more than $400,000 in disability costs to his patients.

This doctor has not been disciplined by authorities in New Jersey.

§ Physician Number 64625, licensed in Pennsylvania, paid 24 medical

malpractice claims involving improper performance of surgery between 1989

and 2001. Damages to this doctor's patients exceeded $370,000. This doctor

has never been disciplined by Pennsylvania authorities.

§ Physician Number 125457, while licensed in Nevada, paid five malpractice

claims involving improper performance of surgery between 1995 and 1997 with

damages totaling $2.3 million. Recent news accounts have reported that

doctors are fleeing from Las Vegas to other states to avoid high malpractice

insurance premiums. Physician 125457 was ahead of the curve in moving his

practice to California. There he paid another eight malpractice claims with

damages exceeding $7.5 million. This doctor has never been disciplined by

authorities in either Nevada or California.

§ Physician Number 37949, licensed in Texas, settled or lost 13 medical

malpractice suits involving improper treatment or improper performance of

surgery between 1990 and 1997. Two of the suits involved the same

allegation: a foreign body left in the patient during surgery. Damages to

this doctor's patients exceeded $2 million. This doctor has never been

disciplined by authorities in Texas.

H.R. 4600 has the following significant problems: 1) It does not just let

doctors off the hook for negligence, it also insulates hospitals, HMOs,

nursing homes and pharmaceutical companies from some liability; 2) punitive

damages are prohibited even for the most reckless conduct; 3) a cap of

$250,000 is placed on non-economic damages (awards for injuries such as lost

child-bearing ability, disfigurement and paralysis), which compensate for

the human suffering caused by medical negligence and defective medical

products; 4) only the plaintiffs' attorneys fees are capped, which will

discourage many lawyers from taking high-risk medical malpractice cases,

thereby preventing many victims from obtaining legal counsel; 5) the

doctrine of " joint and several liability " is abolished, which could leave

injured patients with no recovery for the share of damages assigned to an

uninsured, underinsured or bankrupt defendant; and 6) a " periodic payment

rule " for future damages over $100,000 is established, which would allow

defendants and insurance companies to string out payments for future damages

over the life expectancy of the victim, rather than have to pay up front.

The complete analysis is available at

http://www.citizen.org/congress/civjus/medmal/articles.cfm?ID=8308.

***************************************************

World Bank Water Privatization Policies Benefit Corporations,

Not Developing Countries

Privatization Should Not Be a Condition of Loans, Report Says

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The World Bank has engaged in a multi-pronged effort to

promote a water policy that benefits large multinational corporations at the

expense of poor people in developing countries, according to a Public

Citizen report released today.

World Bank policies impose a " market price " for water in poor countries and

contribute to increasing rates of cholera and other waterborne diseases, the

report said. The World Bank claims that its goal is to alleviate poverty,

but its loan policies are at odds with this objective. The report

recommends that World Bank loans focus on increasing access to water and

sanitation services in low-income and underserved areas, rather than relying

on full cost recovery and water privatization.

Not only has the World Bank required countries to privatize water services

as a condition of receiving loans, but the Bank has engineered the creation

of public utility regulatory bodies that lend credibility to the Bank's

pro-corporate water policies. Further, the Bank has launched an orchestrated

public relations effort to promote the idea that water is a commodity, not a

human right. To this end, the Bank has joined water companies and government

development agencies to create a broad array of organizations that hold

conferences, have task forces, release vision statements and distribute

glossy publications. These groups often co-opt the social and environmental

principles espoused by non-governmental organizations about access to clean

and affordable water as a basic human right.

" As private companies started to view water as a lucrative natural resource,

much like oil or gold, the concept of commodifying water was born, " said

Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and

Environment Program. " In the past decade, we have seen the provision of

water services pushed into the hands of fewer and larger multinational

corporations. At the same time, poverty and disease levels have risen in

developing countries. "

The World Bank policies that are most harmful promote the privatization of

water utilities, which creates lucrative new business opportunities for

major global water corporations, and " full cost recovery, " which refers to

the collection of fees from consumers for the full cost of the operation and

maintenance of water utility services.

These are part of the World Bank's standard policy that promotes

privatization, deregulation, trade liberalization and fiscal austerity. It

was largely instituted in the past 20 years when the promotion of

privatization mirrored the global trend toward more market-oriented economic

policies. But critics say this market-oriented slant benefits major

corporations such as French-owned water giants Vivendi Universal and Suez,

and furthers inequality in the developing world. Indeed, prior to the 1980s,

World Bank economists and development experts maintained that investment in

public water utilities would trigger a development " take off. " However, the

scale shifted when investors began to realize the potential profit from

privatizing an increasingly scarce natural resource.

The World Bank now claims that the private sector, rather than publicly

owned water utilities, is best able to provide the financial resources and

expertise needed to address the growing problems in water service

management. Yet private sector companies are organized to make a profit,

not to fulfill socially responsible objectives such as achieving universal

access to water and sanitation services. In many developing countries, where

most citizens earn less than $2 a day, private sector companies are unable

to meet shareholder obligations to provide a market rate of return and also

implement universal coverage with acceptable quality and at affordable

prices. Water rates soar and large sectors of the low-income population

remain unserved.

" When water becomes more expensive, and therefore less accessible, it

creates a public health crisis, " said Sara Grusky, report author and

coordinator of the International Water Working Group. " If people cannot

afford clean water, they resort to using water from polluted streams and

rivers, which increases the risk of many waterborne diseases like cholera. "

For example, in Ghana in May 2001 after the International Monetary Fund

(IMF) and World Bank policies led to an increase in water fees, three

buckets of water cost a family almost 20 percent of the daily minimum wage.

In 2001, 50 percent of World Bank loans required countries to privatize

services and more than 80 percent of the loans contained cost recovery

requirements.

To quell the growing public concern about privatization, the World Bank

often calls its policies " public private partnerships. " Water companies

enter into a lease with a country under the most profitable conditions

possible, which often don't burden the company with the responsibility of

infrastructure investment costs.

" The shared agenda between the World Bank and the global water giants is

just one more example of corporate interests overriding basic human needs

and livelihoods, " said Hauter.

To view the report online, please go to

http://www.citizen.org/documents/ProfitStreams-World%20Bank.pdf

**********************************************************

GAO Report Backs Link Between Drug User Fees and Higher Rate of Drug

Withdrawals

Statement of Lurie, Deputy Director of Public Citizen's Health

Research Group

A new government report shows that since the Prescription Drug User Fee Act

(PDUFA) was implemented in 1992, a higher percentage of newly approved drugs

has been withdrawn because the drugs were found to be unsafe. These findings

echo criticisms we have had of the act for years. In 1998, Public Citizen

conducted a survey of the physicians who review New Drug Applications and

found that the reviewing physicians had opposed the approval of 27 drugs

approved in the previous three years. The General Accounting Office's (GAO)

conclusions confirm the major public health consequences of PDUFA, which

introduced private money, and therefore influence, into the drug approval

process, creating a massive conflict of interest. One result of PDUFA has

been the diversion of agency funds to the review process from other areas,

including postmarketing safety surveillance.

The GAO report also documents that staff turnover is higher among Food and

Drug Administration (FDA) scientists than among scientists in other

government agencies. Our 1998 report documented how physicians were

precluded from presenting data adverse to the drugs they were reviewing at

FDA Advisory Committee meetings.

Unwise drug approvals by the FDA, in part because of increased workloads due

to PDUFA, have led to unnecessary patient deaths and illnesses and poor

morale among drug reviewers. Congress should immediately conduct meaningful

oversight hearings on each of the drugs that has been withdrawn for safety

reasons. Drug makers have benefited from PDUFA, making millions in profits

off drugs that should never have been brought to the market. Congress must

adequately fund the FDA's drug approval activities and remove private

influence from the equation.

********************************************************************

Low Quality HMOs Hide Performance Data from Public, Says Journal of the

American Medical Association Study

Harvard/Public Citizen Study Finds Voluntary HMO Quality Monitoring System F

ailing

As many as one half of all HMOs that participate in the nation's principal

quality monitoring system stopped publicly disclosing their quality scores

from one year to the next, according to a study to be published in

Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association. The study,

conducted by researchers at Harvard Medical School and Public Citizen's

Health Research Group, found that poor quality HMOs were at least 3 times

more likely than the best plans to drop out of public disclosure of their

scores. " Many HMOs are manipulating the system. They're undermining

quality assessment and misleading the public into believing that HMO quality

is better than it is, " said Dr. Danny McCormick, a study author and

instructor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.

The study analyzed data from the National Committee for Quality Assurance's

(NCQA) HEDIS (Health Plan Employer Data Set) program, the most influential

HMO quality-monitoring program. Each year, HMOs voluntarily submit data on

their performance on a defined set of quality indicators such as the

percentage of women receiving a mammogram or children receiving

immunizations. The NCQA then publishes HEDIS scores of participating HMOs.

The authors examined whether HMOs' HEDIS scores in 1997 and 1998 predicted

the likelihood of HMOs withdrawing from public disclosure of scores one year

later.

" The selective withdrawal by lower scoring plans means that average

published scores could improve even if actual quality were stable or even

deteriorating, " said Dr. Himmelstein, a study co-author and associate

professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. " This means that the true

quality of HMO care in the U.S. is currently unknowable. "

The study also found large differences in quality among HMOs disclosing

data. For example, in 1997, patients enrolled in plans in the bottom

one-third were only half as likely to receive life saving beta-blocker drugs

after suffering a heart attack as patients enrolled in the top one-third of

HMOs (42% compared with 83%). " This underscores why patients need

information on the quality of their HMO if they are to make informed

choices, " said Dr. McCormick.

" No other industry with so much impact on the public's safety is so free of

public oversight, " said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, another co-author and

associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. " Airlines and

car manufacturers are required to disclose data on the safety of their

products. The HMO industry is showing that it too needs public oversight.

Voluntary participation does not seem to work. "

A full list of the 228 HMOs that withdrew from public disclosure of quality

scores in 1998 and 1999 is available on Public Citizen's Web site at

http://www.citizen.org/publications/release.cfm?ID=7204.

###

Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in

Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

If you would like to be removed from this list, please respond to this

e-mail with the word " Unsubscribe " in the subject line.

[Guest guest]

FYI! MM

Martha Murdock, Director

National Silicone Implant Foundation | Dallas Headquarters

" Supporting Survivors of Medical Implant Devices "

4416 Willow Lane

Dallas, TX 75244-7537

----- Original Message -----

From: " Bradbery " <ABRADBERY@...>

Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 3:31 PM

Subject: Public Citizen press release

Oct. 10, 2002

OSHA Denies Petition to Reduce Work Hours for Doctors-in-Training

Voluntary Approach Will Not Work, Public Citizen Says

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration

(OSHA) has rejected a petition to restrict medical resident work hours,

opting instead to rely on inadequate standards being adopted by the

Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), the private

trade association that represents and accredits residency programs.

Those standards are voluntary and contain loopholes that will not protect

medical residents - doctors-in-training who often work more than 100 hours

per week.

On April 30, 2001, Public Citizen, along with the American Medical Student

Association (AMSA) and the Committee of Interns and Residents (CIR), filed a

petition with OSHA requesting restrictions on resident work hours, based on

data linking long work hours to depression, adverse pregnancy outcomes and

motor vehicle crashes. The petition asked for mandatory 80-hour work weeks,

one day off per week and work shifts no longer than 24 hours.

Being awake for more than 24 hours produces cognitive deficits equivalent to

a 0.1 percent blood alcohol level, illegal in most states. Yet these

physicians continue to attempt to diagnose illnesses, perform surgery and

prescribe medication while under the influence of sleeplessness.

In a letter to Public Citizen, OSHA denied the petition, citing voluntary

standards being adopted by the ACGME. But those are inadequate, said

Lurie, MD, MPH, deputy director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group.

" For decades, the ACGME has done very little as residents were abused and

patients put at risk, " Lurie said. " Now OSHA is asking the public to trust

the very individuals who allowed this mess to continue. We don't. "

While there are superficial similarities between the ACGME proposal and the

position of the petitioners, closer examination reveals major differences

that will make true reform unlikely. For example, the ACGME permits a 10

percent increase in hours if a program can provide an ill-defined

" educational rationale. " The ACGME can exempt whole specialties -

throughout the country - if national representatives of those specialties

can show that the residents can't complete their educational activities

without working more hours.

" These and other loopholes are likely to make the ACGME proposal toothless,

while creating the appearance of real reform. Apparently it has already

deceived OSHA, " Lurie said.

The ACGME has never adequately enforced even its current weak guidelines on

work hours. Its new proposal makes no allowances for public disclosure of

violating residency programs, and there will be no civil penalties imposed

against violators, an option if OSHA were to regulate.

A table describing the various resident hours reform proposals can be found

at http://www.citizen.org/publications/release.cfm?ID=7191#table.

The petitioners have also introduced bills in the Congress (HR 3236 and S.

2614) with similar requirements to the petition. The House bill now has

more than 70 co-sponsors.

###

Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based

in Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

NOTE: If you no longer wish to receive press releases from Public Citizen,

please send an email to the above address and type " unsubscribe " in the

subject field.

[Guest guest]

FYI! MM

Martha Murdock, Director

National Silicone Implant Foundation | Dallas Headquarters

" Supporting Survivors of Medical Implant Devices "

4416 Willow Lane

Dallas, TX 75244-7537

----- Original Message -----

From: " Bradbery " <ABRADBERY@...>

Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:11 PM

Subject: Public Citizen press release

Public Citizen issued the following press releases today:

1) Top 527 Political Groups Collect Nearly $108 Million in Soft Money to

Influence Congressional Elections; Public Citizen Launches New Web Site to

Allow Press, Public to Track Donors to 527 Groups

2) Report Card Scores Texas Candidates On Environmental Positions and

Conduct

Oct. 24, 2002

Top 527 Political Groups Collect Nearly $108 Million in Soft Money to

Influence Congressional Elections

Public Citizen Launches New Web Site to Allow Press, Public to

Track Donors to 527 Groups

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Leading " 527 " political organizations seeking to

influence the November elections have raised nearly $108 million in soft

money during the 2002 election cycle so far, according to a new analysis by

Public Citizen. The money is being used to finance sham " issue ads, "

get-out-the-vote efforts and direct mail operations.

Public Citizen's study examined 527 groups' third quarter filings, which

cover July 1 to September 30. Public Citizen is tracking the activities of

170 of the largest 527 groups, but because third quarter reports are

available for only 74 organizations, actual totals for this reporting period

and the 2002 cycle will be considerably higher. The reports were collected

directly from 527 groups, as they are not currently available through the

online IRS disclosure system.

These recent filings - and all others since disclosure was first required in

July 2000 - are included in Public Citizen's 527 group donor database, which

is being launched today at

http://www.citizen.org/congress/forms/527search.cfm. This site allows users

to follow the money and can be searched by donors' names, industries,

recipients (the 527 group) and amounts contributed.

Searches can be refined to include the type of contributor (individual,

corporation, union, PAC or foundation) and type of 527 group (politician 527

or non-politician 527). The database comprises more than $155 million in

contributions. Public Citizen created it by obtaining reports from the IRS

and the groups, and entering information about contributors who gave more

than $5,000 to any of the 170 largest 527 groups active in federal

elections. Although the reports are posted on the IRS Web site, the site is

not similarly searchable.

The third quarter disclosure reports show large quantities of money raised

by 527 groups connected with members of Congress and a boost in activity by

both liberal and conservative interest groups. The reports reveal that the

25 largest groups active in federal elections collected $19.9 million during

this most recent reporting period. Named after the section of Internal

Revenue Code they are regulated by, 527 groups can accept unlimited soft

money contributions from corporations, unions and individuals.

" We are seeing 527 groups rushing to raise millions of dollars in soft money

as the election approaches, with the goal of influencing key races across

the country, " said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen. " With the

help of six-figure checks, these shadowy organizations are airing sham issue

ads, pumping out direct mail and staffing phone banks to influence the

upcoming elections. "

Findings from the report include:

§ The 170 leading 527 groups identified by Public Citizen have raised $107.7

million since January 2001. (There is no way to compare these figures to the

last election cycle because 527 groups were not required to disclose their

contributions and expenditures prior to July 2000.)

§ Twenty-five of the top 527 groups have raised a total of at least $76

million and spent $76.4 million during the 2002 election cycle. (Third

quarter reports are unavailable for six of these groups.) Included in the

list of the top 527 groups are 15 Democratic/liberal leaning and 10

Republican/conservative leaning organizations.

§ Since disclosure of 527 groups' finances was first required two years ago,

the largest groups active in federal elections that have been identified by

Public Citizen have taken in $187.8 million and spent $213.8 million.

§ The biggest donors during the third quarter include the Pharmaceutical

Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) ($315,000); Republican

Leadership Coalition ($300,000), which tries to bring Hispanic voters into

the GOP; Hollywood producer Steve Bing ($300,000); investor S. Levine

($250,000) Democratic National Committee ($200,000); philanthropist and

investor Hunting ($150,000); Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

($124,600); and financial holding company manager Ian M. Cumming ($105,000).

§ The brand-name drug industry, which fended off legislation requiring drug

coverage to be offered through Medicare and giving consumers quicker access

to lower-priced generic drugs, has given $2.6 million to 527 groups during

the 2002 cycle, $545,000 in this last quarter. (In comparison, the

brand-name drug industry has contributed $9.3 million in soft money to the

national parties during the 2002 cycle.) PhRMA, the drug industry's trade

association, gave $100,000 each to Sen. Rick Santorum's (R-Pa.) America's

Foundation and Sen. Don Nickles' (R-Okla.) Republican Majority Fund, both

527 groups. House Speaker Dennis Hastert's (R-Ill.) KOMPAC received $50,000

from PhRMA.

" These contributions are just the tip of the iceberg, " said Clemente,

director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch. " When soft money contributions

to political parties are banned after November's elections, donations to 527

groups will rapidly accelerate. It will be a whole new world for special

interests and the politicians they are aiding or attacking. "

The report is available at:

http://www.citizen.org/congress/articles.cfm?ID=8447.

###

Oct. 24, 2002

Report Card Scores Texas Candidates On Environmental Positions and Conduct

AUSTIN - Three public interest organizations released an environmental

report card today ranking candidates for four top offices on their stances

on environmental issues.

" This report is a tool citizens can use to make an educated decision on

whether a candidate will help to protect or endanger the environment, " said

Tom " Smitty " , director of Public Citizen's Texas office. " Citizens

have expressed their concern with protecting our air and water. The

questions is, 'how concerned are our politicians?' "

Public Citizen, Clean Water Action, and Sierra Club sent questionnaires to

candidates for U.S. Senate, governor, lieutenant governor and land

commissioner, seeking their positions and goals on a variety of

environmental matters. The organizations used the information to grade

candidates from A to F. The results reveal strong support from all

candidates for renewable energy but varied levels of commitment on other

environmental issues.

Because seven of the eight candidates reviewed have held or currently hold

elective office, the organizations also ranked candidates based on their

past performance in office. In this category, candidates received a rating

of E (excellent), S (satisfactory), or U (unsatisfactory).

" The records of candidates who have held office, give a good indication of

how they would approach environmental issues in the offices they are

seeking, " said Ken Kramer, director of the Texas Sierra Club. " There are

clear differences between candidates in particular races based on previous

track records. "

Texas' leaders are faced with growing concern over whether to allow drilling

on public lands. Similarly, candidates for the U.S. Senate will likely have

to deal with critical energy issues and the question of drilling in the

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

And Texans care about clearing their air. Nearly 73 percent of Texans

indicated that they would be more likely to vote for a candidate with a

strong air quality platform, according to a poll released in August by

Public Citizen's Texas office and the Sustainable Energy and Economic

Development (SEED) Coalition.

" This report card demonstrates that some of our Texas candidates studied

well in big business and need to study harder in natural science, " said

Dwayne " Sparky " , program director for Clean Water Action. " We need

leaders who are prepared to protect the environment this next session. This

report card makes it clear who has a passing grade and who will fail. "

The report card results include:

· Gubernatorial candidate Tony and Dewhurst, candidate for

lieutenant governor, both got " A's " for their promise to push for 10 percent

of the state's electricity to come from renewable resources by 2020.

· Gov. Rick and Sharp, candidate for lieutenant governor,

received " Bs " on renewable energy. Sharp stated that he would work to

increase our renewable energy use from 3 to 5 percent, while wants to

make Texas the nation's leading marketer of renewable energy.

· On air quality, got a " C " for merely saying he would fund the

existing clean air plan. , Dewhurst, and Bernsen earned " A's " for

having clear goals. Sharp on the other hand, earned a " B " .

· There is strong support among the candidates for increasing the use of

renewable energy. , Dewhurst and Bernsen all have a goal of 10

percent or more of energy coming from renewables, while , Sharp, land

commissioner candidate Jerry and Kirk all favor increasing the use

of these zero polluting sources of energy.

· U.S. Senate candidate Ron Kirk received a " D " for his position on nuclear

waste, while opponent Cornyn got a " D " on his position on global

warming. Cornyn received an " F " for expressing support for President Bush's

" Clean Skies " proposal, which would significantly increase pollution over

Texas cities.

· received an unsatisfactory rating for his past performance because

he killed the inventory of global warming gasses and failed to have a plan

to pay for cleaning up the air. Also, as agriculture commissioner, he sought

federal approval of the use of a dangerous toxic substance for predator

control, and he championed efforts to weaken environmental regulations on

the pretext of protecting private property rights. 's past record is

not as clear. During his term as a member of the Texas Parks & Wildlife

Commission, he spearheaded the effort to create a new state park in South

Texas, but questions have been raised about whether he used his time on the

commission to win approval of an oil drilling operation in another state

park after he left the commission.

· Most candidates think we ought to take action to combat global warming but

vary in their responses on how to deal with it.

· Sharp received an " E " in part for his role as a state senator in the 1980s

pushing for protections for freshwater inflows to bays and estuaries while

land commissioner candidate Bernsen received an " E " for his strong

leadership to end the grandfather loophole for dirty old industrial air

polluters.

· Dewhurst received an unsatisfactory rating for his overall indifference to

the environment while serving as land commissioner and his failure to reach

out to environmentalists, although he deserves credit for his support of

" greenbuilding " efforts in his role on the Veterans Land Board.

The report card is available at www.citizen.org/texas.

###

Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in

Washington, D.C.

For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

NOTE: If you no longer wish to receive press releases from Public Citizen,

please send an email to the above address and type " unsubscribe " in the

subject field.

[Guest guest]

FYI!

Martha Murdock, Director

National Silicone Implant Foundation | Dallas Headquarters

" Supporting Survivors of Medical Implant Devices "

4416 Willow Lane

Dallas, TX 75244-7537

----- Original Message -----

From: " Bradbery " <ABRADBERY@...>

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 5:22 PM

Subject: Public Citizen press release

Nov. 7, 2002

Public Citizen's Post-Election Analysis:

Handful of Senate Moderates Now Hold Key to

Protecting Consumer Interests

Tuesday's congressional election was a big win for corporate America, which

poured hundreds of millions of dollars in campaigns, and a major challenge

for the public interest. President Bush and the Republican leaders in the

Senate and House have shown a strong allegiance to the wishes of CEOs and

corporate lobbyists and a disdain for the interests of average Americans.

Public Citizen prides itself on being a non-partisan organization fighting

for the interests of consumers and has worked over many years with

bipartisan coalitions on a wide range of issues, such as campaign finance

reform, auto safety, patients' rights, access to generic drugs, fair trade

and opposition to corporate welfare. We look forward to continuing to work

in a bipartisan manner.

However, we believe that decades of pro-consumer achievements are now at

risk with the presidency and both houses of Congress controlled by very

conservative leaders. A full agenda of affirmative measures needed to

enhance public safety and improve people's lives is likely to be shelved for

the next two years. In addition, it is likely that the president and

Republican leaders in Congress will seek to reward their big business

campaign contributors by pursuing corporate America's radical, anti-consumer

agenda: fewer consumer remedies, less regulation of business, more

pollution, more corporate subsidies, privatization of Social Security and

Medicare, and lower taxes for corporations and the rich.

Our only hope for defeating this misguided agenda now lies with the U.S.

Senate, which requires 60 votes to overcome a threatened filibuster. Strong

Democrats need to act like their forebears and stand up for people against

the greed of powerful special interests. Moderate-to-conservative Democrats

and moderate Republicans in the Senate now hold the balance of power and

must wield that influence to prevent the further erosion of public interest

safeguards and fight for new consumer and investor reforms in the wake of

the repeated corporate scandals of the past year.

The following are key issues on which Public Citizen is working and on which

these swing members of the Senate can make a huge difference:

· Tax cuts: Making permanent the Bush tax cut and adding the numerous

business tax breaks sought by Bush's benefactors will only deepen our fiscal

problems and limit the government's ability to initiate new domestic

spending initiatives in the future.

· Prescription drugs: The push to privatize the Medicare program will be

front and center. The first step will be giving subsidies to HMOs and

insurance companies to provide inadequate drug coverage, rather than have a

less expensive, more reliable program delivered through Medicare. One

possible bright spot: Bipartisan generic drug legislation, which passed the

Senate 78-21 in July, could be enacted if Congress can resist the brand-name

drug industry's army of lobbyists.

· Tort law changes: Legislation to limit the ability of consumers to bring

class actions and to restrict jury awards for medical negligence will be a

top priority for the business lobby. Class action legislation is a major

goal of the auto companies, the insurance industry, tobacco companies,

banks, HMOs and drug companies. Medical malpractice legislation is a top

priority of doctors and hospitals but will also let nursing homes, HMOs and

the drug industry off the hook for harm to patients. A bill to limit the

liability of the asbestos industry will also be a top Republican priority.

· Energy: Republican leaders are likely to push hard to enact Bush's

retrograde energy plan, developed largely in secret meetings with energy

executives and lobbyists. Rather than weaning Americans off fossil fuels,

this plan subsidizes old-style, polluting industries and does virtually

nothing to promote cleaner, sustainable alternatives. There will also be a

move to abolish the Public Utility Holding Company Act, a key

consumer-protection law that is supposed to prevent utilities from embarking

on the type of Enron-style empire-building that puts electricity consumers

and investors at risk.

· Regulatory rollbacks: A perennial priority of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

and other corporate interests, omnibus legislation to monkeywrench the

rulemaking process within federal agencies through paralysis by analysis may

be resurrected after several years in remission. The loss of Democratic

control of Senate committees will guarantee that little oversight of federal

agencies will occur, so few if any new health, safety and environmental

standards will see the light of day during the Bush administration.

· Campaign finance reform: It took 60 votes to get McCain-Feingold passed,

and that was with 50 Democrats in the Senate. In the new Senate, reformers

may need 12-13 Republicans to join with all Democrats to reform the

presidential public financing system or to pass a " free media " bill, which

is opposed by the broadcast lobby. Greater prospects might exist for

expanding disclosure requirements for 501©(4) groups, which are taking on

a larger role in elections as the drug industry and other corporate and

wealthy donors funnel millions of dollars to them.

The following members of the 108th Senate will prove either that they are

consumers' worst nightmare - or their best hope:

· Moderate-conservative Democrats: Sens. Evan Bayh (Ind.), Breaux

(La.), Carper (Del.), Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), Landrieu

(La.)*, Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), Zell (Ga.) and Ben (Neb.)

· Moderate Republicans: Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R.I.), Norm (Minn.), S

usan (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Arlen Specter (Pa.)

· Independent: Jim Jeffords (Vt.)

* Landrieu is in a runoff, which will determine whether she stays in the

Senate.

###

Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in

Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

NOTE: If you no longer wish to receive press releases from Public Citizen,

please send an email to the above address and type " unsubscribe " in the

subject field.