Copyright 2000 Newsday, Inc.
Newsday (New York, NY)
January 17, 2000, Monday NASSAU AND SUFFOLK
EDITION
SECTION: EXECUTIVE EDITION; Page 15
LENGTH: 1344 words
HEADLINE:
BUSINESS FORUM
BYLINE: Robert Milanese; Thomas J.
McAteer; Howard Kipnes; Patricia Howley
BODY:
Brand Drug Companies Monopolize
Dear Business Editor:
At a
time when the nation is wrestling with how to bring health care costs down,
Americans should be cognizant that brand drug companies are going to
extraordinary lengths to preserve their market monopolies and keep the cost of
pharmaceuticals at a historic high.
The brand drug industry is working
diligently to suppress competition from generic drugs, which offer a safe,
effective, bioequivalent, FDA-approved alternative-at a cost as much as 70
percent below the brand. It has been reported that Schering-Plough alone spent $
2.25 million lobbying Washington in just the first six months of 1999, primarily
to support its blockbuster Claritin.
It is ironic that as Congress
debates Medicare reform and ways to reduce the high cost of prescription
medication to the elderly, it is also considering a bill that would grant
patent extensions to eight brand name drugs
(including Claritin) and deny American consumers the opportunity to choose more
affordable generic versions.
According to a recent poll by Merck-Medco
Managed Care, 88 percent of respondents would use generic drugs if recommended
by their pharmacist or physician, and 80 percent said they would favor generics
to reduce "health care costs to society."
Consumers are entitled to know
that generic pharmaceuticals represent one of the most promising answers to the
health care cost dilemma. Which is not to say that brand drug companies aren't
entitled to healthy profits, patent protection and recouping of the dramatic
R&D investments that lead to the discovery of important new drugs. But they
are not entitled to subvert a freely competitive marketplace, especially at
public cost.
Robert Milanese, president,
National Association of
Pharmaceutical
Manufacturers,
Ronkonkoma
Protect Patient
Safety
Dear Business Editor:
Patient safety has emerged as the
prevailing concern of the $ 1.4 trillion health care industry, catalyzed by the
report issued by the Institute of Medicine in November. As a result, the
industry must move quickly to set standards, track progress and fund research.
Physicians, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, ancillary providers and health
insurers will need to cooperate closely to bring this about expediently and
efficiently.
Our imperative is clear: The next wave of health care
reform will be driven by the information explosion and the empowered consumer.
Consumers will be the engine of change in health care.
It is time to
turn down the heat and turn up the light on the health care debate, to provide
safety and security and to restore confidence in our health care system.
Thomas J. McAteer Jr.
president and chief executive officer,
Vytra Health Plans
Melville
Taxed About Suffolk's Sewer
Rates
Dear Business Editor:
Why are Suffolk County's sewer rates
structured differently than other Suffolk County taxes? We are all taxed the
same rate for the county police, regardless of our particular town's usage of
police services. Each of Suffolk's sewer districts, however, is charged a
different rate, from a low of $ 3.83 to a high of $ 22.88 per 1,000 gallons.
In addition, it appears that a surplus of collected funds in one
district is not automatically credited to that particular district and
subsequently used to decrease its rate. Instead, a surplus may be transferred
arbitrarily to another district to subsidize and offset a future rate increase
for that district.
An example of this situation was recently uncovered
when the Hauppauge Industrial Association began looking into the basis for a
proposed sewer rate increase in the Hauppauge Industrial Park. It was
discovered, to the amazement of the HIA Board of Directors, that a short while
ago approximately $ 1 million had been transferred from the Hauppauge Industrial
Park's sewer district No. 18 into other Suffolk sewer districts, thus enabling
the recipient districts to maintain lower rates while Hauppauge's was scheduled
for an increase.
As a result of our limited investigation, the Hauppauge
Industrial Association recently requested copies of all Suffolk County Sewer
District budgets from the inception of sewer district No. 18 to the present.
Sewer rates should match the district's costs, and excess revenue should be
returned to the ratepayers. Ultimately, the HIA believes the solution lies in
the creation of a single county sewer district so that all rates will be the
same. Protection of our groundwater is a countywide problem, and sewage
treatment helps protect that resource to the benefit of all. Accordingly, a
countywide approach is warranted.
We intend to continue to work with
officials of Suffolk County to find an amicable solution to these concerns.
Howard Kipnes, president,
Hauppauge Industrial Association
Newsday asked Suffolk Public Works Commissioner Charles Bartha to
respond. He said many of the county's 22 sewer districts are charged different
rates primarily because they were formed at different times and have differing
characteristics. The Hauppauge Industrial Park's district is the only one
charged based on gallonage because its water usage is different, Bartha said.
The other districts are charged either on a per-unit basis or according to the
assessed property value.
Bartha confirmed that $ 1.16 million was
transferred from sewer district No. 18 but described the money as a surplus that
was put into a county fund used to stabilize sewer rates. He also said the money
wasn't raised from the taxpayers in district No. 18 but originated from the
stabilization fund. He said there are additional surplus funds within district
No. 18 to make improvements without having to incur debt service.
Work
Together Toward Common Goal
Dear Business Editor:
Governor
Pataki and our state legislators recently enacted Jobs 2000 legislation and
established the New York STAR office (Science, Technology and Academic Research)
as vehicles to accelerate economic development. The Long Island Forum for
Technology (LIFT) and other Long Island economic development organizations
recognize the need to access these funding programs for our region. However, the
Long Island economic development community consists of a significant number of
organizations and agencies whose missions sometimes overlap and whose agendas
sometimes conflict.
If this region is to successfully obtain state
support for local economic development, each group needs to articulate its
function and capabilities, eliminating duplication and overlap. Leaders must
reach consensus on a strategy for development and a strategy to pursue state
funds. Long Island needs to present the state with a plan that has broad support
and demonstrates a unity of purpose.
Initiatives for Long Island should
be carefully selected and designed to have clear, measurable parameters and time
frames for determining successful outcomes. Economic development programs need
the same qualities as successful businesses: good planning, clear goals, focused
effort, targeted results. The investor-in this case New York State-should have
our projection of the return on investment as an integral part of the Long
Island proposal. Economic development should run like a profitable business
enterprise.
Others before me have spoken out about Long Island's
propensity to compete when we should cooperate. I believe we are at a point
where divisiveness will be a major impediment to securing state support.
Leadership in academia, industry and development services must find a common
ground from which to launch a powerful, unified, business-based economic
development strategy for Long Island, a program that will compel support from
Albany.
Patricia Howley,
Acting Executive Director
Long
Island Forum for Technology
Letters should be timely and brief, and may
be edited for clarity and accuracy. Write to Business Letters, Newsday Business
Desk, 235 Pinelawn Rd., Melville, NY 11747-4250, or fax 516-843-5459.
GRAPHIC: Photo - Thomas J. McAteer Jr.
president and chief executive officer, Vytra Health Plans Melville
LOAD-DATE: January 17, 2000 
