RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS: We Demand an Explanation for the Price Increases of Mylan's EpiPen Print
Wednesday, 31 August 2016 11:51

Excerpt: "We are writing today to express our concern with the repeated and significant price increases for Mylan's EpiPen Auto-Injector."

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. (photo: Salon)
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. (photo: Salon)


We Demand an Explanation for the Price Increases of Mylan's EpiPen

By Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, Reader Supported News

31 August 16

 

ear Ms. Bresch,

We are writing today to express our concern with the repeated and significant price increases for Mylan's EpiPen Auto-Injector ("EpiPen"), and to request information about Mylan's efforts to increase access to EpiPens by expanding its patient assistance programs and introducing a generic version of the EpiPen.

The EpiPen auto-injector delivers a life-saving dose of epinephrine to patients suffering from anaphylaxis.[1] Anaphylactic shock can lead to serious injury or death if untreated; thus, making sure the EpiPen is readily available for use is a critical part of life for millions of Americans living with severe allergies?[2] The need is so great that Congress recently passed legislation that helps ensure schools have EpiPens on hand for children who experience anaphylactic shock.[3]

The EpiPen, however, has become so exorbitantly expensive that access to this lifesaving combination product is in jeopardy for many Americans. As of May 2016, Mylan had increased the price ofEpiPens in the United States by over 480%, from $103.50 for a set of two in 2009 to $608.61 today.[4] Some Americans who are unable to afford this cost increase have resorted to carrying expired EpiPens--or carry no EpiPens at all.[5] Emergency medical responders, meanwhile, have reported injecting epinephrine using manual syringes-a less expensive but more difficult[6], and thus more dangerous, method of treating anaphylaxis.[7]

Mylan's near monopoly on the epinephrine auto-injector market has allowed you to increase prices well beyond those that are justified by any increase in the costs of manufacturing the EpiPen.[8] At the same time, your company - based in Pennsylvania- me v-ed its tax address to the Netherlands through a "corporate inversion"[9] to avoid paying its fair share of corporate taxes. Your own total annual compensation, meanwhile, increased from a reported $2.4 million in 2007 to $18.9 million in 2015-an increase of over 670%.[10]

Your company has responded to concerns about the high cost of the EpiPen by arguing that its three EpiPen accessibility programs ensure consumer access to the product, despite the high cost.[11] In fact, on August 25, 2016, you announced expansions to your accessibility programs: increasing the maximum value of your savings card from $100 to $300 and expanding eligibility for your patient assistance program to customers at or below 400% of the federal poverty level. You did not, however, agree to lower the price of brand-name EpiPens.[12] Instead, you announced on August 29, 2016, that Mylan would offer the first generic to the EpiPen for $300, a 50% discount from the brand price.[13]

These changes will help some customers who are struggling to afford EpiPens. Your discount programs, however, represent a well-defined industry tactic to keep costs high through a complex shell game. When patients receive short-term co-pay assistance for expensive drugs, they may be insulated from price hikes, but insurance companies, the government, and employers still bear the burden of these excessive prices. In tum, those costs are eventually passed on to consumers in the form of higher premiums.[14] Because couponing can massively inflate costs, this practice has been outlawed by the government in Medicare and Medicaid.[15] But couponing practices are perfectly legal for commercial insurance and Affordable Care Act exchange coverage.

While your announcement of a $300 authorized generic could ease the financial burdens of insurers and consumers, that depends on whether Mylan will make the product available to the same degree an independent competitor would. Further, the generic raises additional questions about Mylan's pricing of EpiPens. The price of the generic, for example, is still three times higher than the cost of the branded EpiPen in 2007.[16] And Mylan asserts that the generic is "identical to the branded product"-further calling into question the excesively high price of branded EpiPens.[17]

To help us better understand the impact of Mylan's recent efforts to increase access to EpiPens on consumers and taxpayers, please provide answers to the following questions no later than September 12, 2016:

1. The My EpiPen Savings Card™ ("Savings Card") offers consumers a $300 savings credit, per pack, for three EpiPen 2-Pak® cartons. Only consumers with commercial insurance can use the Savings Card.[18] Until recently, when your Savings Card offered only a $100 credit, Mylan claimed that, "80% of commercially insured patients using [Savings Card] received [an] EpiPen® Auto-Injector for $0."[19]

  1. In the past 12 months, how many consumers used the Savings Card and how many filled prescriptions without the Savings Card?

  2. In the past 12 months, how many of those consumers who used the Savings Card had to pay a co-payment to fulfill an EpiPen prescription? What was the average co-pay, per prescription, for those consumers? What was the maximum co-pay for those consumers?

  3. For the past 12 months and for 2009, what was the total cost of EpiPens to commercial health insurers for prescriptions filled by consumers using Savings Cards? For the past 12 months and in 2009, what was the average price paid for an EpiPen by commercial health insurers who allow the use of Savings Card, and how does that cost compare to the EpiPen's list price during the respective time period?

  4. In the past 12 months, how many consumers using the Savings Card wete covered by insurance obtained through the Affordable Care Act state or federal health insurance exchanges? What was the average co-pay, per prescription, for these consumers? What was the average amount paid, per prescription, by the health insurance plan, and how does that price compare to the list price?

  5. After congressional scrutiny, Mylan recently increased the value of its Savings Card credit from $100 to $300. How many customers does Mylan anticipate it will reach with its new Savings Card in the next 12 months? Of those customers, how many does Mylan anticipate will pay a $0 co-pay? How many will pay a copay of under $100? Of above $100?

  6. How did Mylan determine that the $100 coupon covered the copayments of 80 percent of its commercially insured patients?

2. The patient assistance program provides uninsured consumers at incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level with free access to EpiPens?0

  1. Please provide a description of the terms and conditions of the patient assistance program.

  2. In the past 12 months, how many EpiPens did Mylan provide through the program?

  3. In the past 12 months, how many consumers did Mylan serve through the patient assistance program?

  4. Does Mylan have programs in place to direct uninsured consumers towards insurance options, such as the Affordable Care Act health insurance exchanges, Medicare, or Medicaid? If so, please provide an overview of those programs. In the past 12 months, how many uninsured consumers has Mylan converted to insured consumers, and what forms of insurance did those consumers purchase?

  5. After congressional scrutiny, Mylan recently increased eligibility for its patient assistance program from 200% to 400% of the federal poverty level. How many more customers does Mylan anticipate reaching with this new program in the next 12 months, and how many EpiPens does it anticipate handing out? How does Mylan plan on alerting newly-eligible consumers about the patient assistance program? How much will it cost to implement the program?

3. The EpiPen4Schools® program provides American schools with four free EpiPen or EpiPen Jr. Auto Injectors each calendar year, including a free "replenishment product" should an EpiPen be used in response to a life-threatening allergic reaction.[21]

  1. Please provide a description of the terms and conditions of the EpiPen4Schools® enrollment program. Do schools pay to enroll in the program and receive access to their four free EpiPens?

  2. In the past 12 months, how many schools have purchased additional EpiPens from the EpiPen4Schools® program? How many additional EpiPens, in total, were purchased? What is the average cost to schools per additional EpiPen?

  3. Please provide a list of all schools, including their location, that have received EpiPens under this program.

  4. It has been reported that Mylan, at least for a period of time, conditioned the receipt of free products on the school's promise not to purchase alternative products.[22] During what period was this condition in place? What was the purpose of the restriction? If no longer being used, why did Mylan eliminate it?

4. Mylan recently announced that it is "opening a pathway so that patients can order EpiPen® Auto-Injector directly form the company, thereby reducing the cost."[23] How much money does Mylan anticipate charging customers, per EpiPen, that order directly from the company?

5. It is illegal for consumers covered under Medicare or Medicaid to use the Savings Card, nor can these consumers access EpiPens through the patient assistance program.[24]

  1. What safeguards does Mylan have in place to ensure that it does not provide Savings Cards to Medicare or Medicaid beneficiaries?

  2. How has Mylan worked to ensure access to these patients?

  3. What is the average co-pay per EpiPen paid by individuals covered by Medicare Part D? What is the average co-pay per EpiPen paid by individuals covered by Medicaid?

  4. What is the average amount paid by Medicare Part D plans for EpiPens, and how does that compare to the list price of an EpiPen? What is the average amount paid by Medicaid?

  5. What is the total amount paid by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) via Medicare Part D catastrophic coverage over the past 12 months for EpiPens?

  6. What is the total amount Mylan has received in reimbursement from the federal government over the last 12 months for EpiPens? In 2009?

6. Has Mylan estimated the cost to the company of its Savings Card and patient assistant program expansions? If so, what is the cost? What is the anticipated revenue to the company as a result of the expansions?

7. On August 29, 2016, Mylan announced that it would offer an "authorized generic" version of the EpiPen for $300.[25]

  1. What regulatory approvals does Mylan need before it can sell an authorized version ofEpiPen, and, typically, how long does it take for the Food and Drug Administration to grant approval?

  2. What production issues (such as designing a new label) must occur before the product is released, and how long do those steps typically take? Please provide a timeline, including the steps that must occur, for the introduction of the authorized generic version of the EpiPen.

  3. Mylan claims that the branded version of the EpiPen and the "authorized generic" are "identical." Given that the $300 generic and $600 branded EpiPen are functionally equivalent, how does Mylanjustify the higher price of the branded EpiPen?

  4. Does Mylan have plans to expand its patient assistance programs to consumers seeking the generic EpiPen? If not, how does Mylan plan on ensuring that consumers seeking the authorized generic can access it?

  5. Typically, when a generic alternative enters the market, it takes a dramatic share of the branded products sales quickly.[26] Once Mylan begins to sell an authorized generic version of EpiPen, what percent of epinephrine auto-injector sales will be for the authorized generic product versus the branded EpiPen? Will Mylan commit to filling all orders for the authorized generic version of the EpiPen so the generic alternative is available to all epinephrine auto-injector consumers? Will Mylan commit to not shifting production from the authorized generic version to branded EpiPen if it will result in delaying the ability of Mylan to fill orders for the authorized generic? Will Mylan commit to not rationing the product or sale of the authorized generic version of EpiPen?

Thank you for your prompt response. We look forward to working with you to ensure that all Americans have access to life-saving medication.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Warren
United States Senator


EDITOR’S NOTE: For a complete list of this letter's signatories, please see the embedded PDF at the bottom of the page.



Sources

  1. Mylan, "Frequently Asked Questions About EpiPen (epinephrine injection) Auto-Injector and Anaphylaxis" (2016) (online at https://www.epipen.com/about-epipen/faq).

  2. Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, "Anaphylaxis in America" (2014) (online at hhttp://www.aafa.org/page/anaphylaxis-in-america.aspx).

  3. See, for example, H.R. 2094: The School Access to Emergency Epinephrine Act, signed into law November 13, 2013 (online at https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/2094/).

  4. "Rising cost of potentially life-saving EpiPen puts pinch on families," CBS News (August 16, 2016) (online at http://www.cbsnews.com/news/allergy-medication-epipen-epinephrine-rising-costs-impact-on-families; Tara Parker-Pope and Rachel Rabkin Peachman, "EpiPen Price Rise Sparks Concern for Allergy Sufferers," New York Times (August 22, 2016).

  5. Tara Parker-Pope and Rachel Rabkin Peachman, "EpiPen Price Rise Sparks Concern for Allergy Sufferers," New York Times (August 22, 2016).

  6. Ike Swetlitz, "America has a dangerous EpiPen Crisis," The Week (July 28, 2016) (online at http://theweek.com/articles/634878/america-dangerous-epipen-crisis).

  7. Ike Swetlitz, "High price ofEpiPens spurs consumers, EMTs to resort to syringes for allergic reactions," STAT (July 6, 20 16) (online at https://www.statnews.com/2016/07/06/epipen-prices-allergies/?s campaign=fb ).

  8. The EpiPen delivers $1 worth of epinephrine. See Cynthia Koons and Robert Langreth, "How Marketing Turned the EpiPen Into a Billion Dollar Business," Bloomberg (September 23, 2015) (online at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artieles/2015-09-23/how-marketing-turned-the-epipen-into-a-billion-do liarbusiness).

  9. Liz Claman, "EpiPen Price Gouging Came as Mylan Pulled Off Tax Inversion," Fox Business (August 24, 2016).

  10. See Ben Popken, "Mylan Execs Gave Themselves Raises As They Hiked EpiPen Prices," NBC News (August 23, 2016) (online at http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/mylan-execs-gave-themselves-raises-they-hikedepipen-prices-n636591); Mylan Inc., Schedule 14A: Information Required in Proxy Statement (2010); and Mylan N.V., Form 10-K/A Amendment 1 (for fiscal year ending December 31, 2015).

  11. Mylan, "Mylan's Commitment to EpiPen® (epinephrine injection, USP) Auto-Injector Access" (August 22, 2016) (online at http://newsroom.mylan.com/access). These programs include a coupon card (the My EpiPen Savings Card™) to cover copays for insured patients, a patient assistance program for uninsured patients, and the EpiPen4Schools® program.

  12. Jonathan D. Rockoff, "Mylan Boostst Assistance for EpiPen After Pricing Backlash," Wall Street Journal (August 25, 20 16).

  13. Mylan, "Mylan to Launch First Generic to EpiPen® Auto-Injector at a List Price of $300 per Two-Pack Carton, a More than 50% Discount to the Brand Product" (August 29, 20 16).

  14. See, for example, David H. Howard, Ph.D., "Drug Companies' Patient-Assistance Programs-Helping Patients or Profits?" New England Journal of Medicine 3 71 :2 (July 10, 2014 ): 97-99 (online at http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMp1401658); JosephS. Ross, M.D., and AaronS. Kesselheim, M.D., J.D., M.P.H., "Prescription-Drug Coupons-No Such Thing as a Free Lunch," New England Journal of Medicine.

  15. See Department of Justice Office of Inspector General, "Special Advisory Bulletin: Offering Gifts and Other Inducements to Beneficiaries" (August 2002); Department of Health and Human Services Office oflnspector General, "Special Advisory Bulletin: Pharmaceutical Manufacturer Copayment Coupons" (September 2014).

  16. Sarah Karlin-Smith, "Mylan to launch a generic EpiPen amid pricing outrage," Politico Pro Health Care Whiteboard (August 29, 2016).

  17. My1an, "Mylan to Launch First Generic to EpiPen® Auto-Injector at a List Price of $300 per Two-Pack Carton, a More than 50% Discount to the Brand Product" (August 29, 2016) (online at http://newsroom.mylan.com/2016-08-29-Mylan-to-Launch-First-Generic-to-EpiPen-Auto-Injector-at-a-List-Price-of-300-per-Two-Pack-Carton-a-Morethan-50-Discount-to-the-Brand-Product).

  18. My1an, "My EpiPen Savings Card™" (online at https://www.activatethecard.com/epipen/?gal.113892615.1859762553.1471903476).

  19. Mylan, "Mylan's Commitment to EpiPen® (epinephrine injection, USP) Auto-Injector Access" (August 22, 2016) (online at http://newsroom.mylan.com/access).

  20. RxAssist, "Program Details: MYLAN EpiPen 2-Pak Auto-Injector Patient Assistance Program EpiPen (epinephrine)"; Austen Hufford and Jonathan D. Rockoff, "Mylan Boostst Assistance for EpiPen After Pricing Backlash," Wall Street Journal (August 25, 20 16) (online at http://www.wsj.com/articles/under-pressure-for-raising-prices-mylan-boosts-assistance-onepipen-1472125304).

  21. Mylan, "EpiPen4Schools®" (online at https://www.epipen4schools.com/).

  22. Ike Swetlitz and Ed Silverman, "Mylan may have violated antitrust law in its EpiPen sales to schools, legal experts say," STAT (August 25, 20 16) (online https://www.statnews.com/2016/08/25/mylan-antitrust-epipenschools/).

  23. Mylan, "Mylan Taking Immediate Action to Further Enhance Access to EpiPen® (Epinephrine Injection, USP) Auto-Injector" (August 25, 2016) (online at http://newsroom.mylan.com/2016-08-25-Mylan-Taking-ImmediateAction-to-Further-Enhance-Access-to-EpiPen-Epinephrine-lnjection-USP-Auto-Injector).

  24. See, for example, Department of Health and Human Services Office oflnspector General, "Manufacturer Safeguards May Not Prevent Copayment Coupon Use for Part D Drugs" (September 2014) (online at https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-05-12-00540.pdf).

  25. Mylan, "Mylan to Launch First Generic to EpiPen® Auto-Injector at a List Price of$300 per Two-Pack Carton, a More than 50% Discount to the Brand Product" (August 29, 2016).

  26. For example, the FTC estimated that, within a year of generic entry, the generic has taken 90 percent of the branded company's sales. See Federal Trade Commission, "Pay for Delay: How Drug Company PayOffs Cost Consumers Billions" (January 20 I 0) (online at https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/pay-delayhow-drug-company-pay-offs-cost-consumers-billions-federal -trade-commission-staffstudy/100112payfordelayrpt.pdf), p. 8.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Dilma Rousseff's Impeachment Trial Nears an End, Endangering Brazilian Democracy Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=29455"><span class="small">Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept</span></a>   
Wednesday, 31 August 2016 08:23

Greenwald writes: "Dilma Rousseff's removal results in the empowerment of a party that was not elected to the presidency."

Suspended Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff attends a Senate impeachment trial in Brasilia, Brazil, Aug. 29, 2016. (photo: Xinhua/Li Ming/Getty Images)
Suspended Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff attends a Senate impeachment trial in Brasilia, Brazil, Aug. 29, 2016. (photo: Xinhua/Li Ming/Getty Images)


Dilma Rousseff's Impeachment Trial Nears an End, Endangering Brazilian Democracy

By Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept

31 August 16

 

uring the Olympics, Brazil’s “interim president,” Michel Temer, fearing boos, broke protocol by demanding that his name not be announced when he appeared at the opening ceremony (he was widely booed anyway) and then hid entirely by skipping the closing ceremony. By stark contrast, the nation’s actually elected president, Dilma Rousseff, chose to go to the Senate today to confront her accusers, as the gang of corrupt operatives and criminals constituting the Brazilian Senate moves to the end of its impeachment trial, with the virtually inevitable result that the twice-elected Dilma will be removed. It’s the embodiment of cowardice versus courage:

(photo: The Intercept)

(photo: The Intercept)

(photo: The Intercept)

The most remarkable aspect of all of this — and what fundamentally distinguishes this process from impeachment in, say, the U.S. — is that Dilma’s removal results in the empowerment of a completely different party that was not elected to the presidency. In fact — as my Intercept Brasil colleagues João Filho and Breno Costa documented this week — Dilma’s removal is empowering exactly the right-wing party, PSDB, that has lost four straight national elections, including one to Dilma just 21 months ago. In some cases, the very same people from that party who ran for president and lost are now in control of the nation’s key ministries.

As a result, the unelected government now about to take power permanently is preparing a series of policies — from suspending Brazil’s remarkably successful anti-illiteracy program, privatizing national assets, and “changing” various social programs to abandoning its regional alliances in favor of returned subservience to the U.S. — that was never ratified by the Brazilian population and could never be. Whether you want to call this a “coup” or not, it is the antithesis of democracy, a direct assault on it.

As Dilma entered the Senate, I discussed all of this on Democracy Now this morning, which you can watch (with Portuguese subtitles) on the video above (the English transcript is here; I also discussed various aspects of the 2016 campaign, which can be seen here and here).

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Insulting Colin Kaepernick Says More About Our Patriotism Than His Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36573"><span class="small">Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, The Washington Post</span></a>   
Tuesday, 30 August 2016 13:44

Abdul-Jabbar writes: "Patriotism isn't just getting teary-eyed on the Fourth of July or choked up at war memorials. It's supporting what the Fourth of July celebrates and what those war memorials commemorate: the U.S. Constitution's insistence that all people should have the same rights and opportunities and that it is the obligation of the government to make that happen."

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. (photo: Unknown)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. (photo: Unknown)


Insulting Colin Kaepernick Says More About Our Patriotism Than His

By Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, The Washington Post

30 August 16

 

Let athletes love their country in their own ways.

uring the Olympics in Rio a couple of weeks ago, Army Reserve 2nd Lt. Sam Kendricks was sprinting intently in the middle of his pole vaulting attempt when he heard the national anthem playing. He immediately dropped his pole and stood at attention, a spontaneous expression of heartfelt patriotism that elicited more praise than his eventual bronze medal. Last Thursday, San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick chose not to stand with his teammates during the national anthem. To some, Kendricks embodies traditional all-American Forrest Gump values of patriotism, while Kaepernick represents the entitled brattish behavior of a wealthy athlete ungrateful to a country that has given him so much.

In truth, both men, in their own ways, behaved in a highly patriotic manner that should make all Americans proud.

The discussion of the nuances of patriotism is especially important right now, with Trump and Clinton supporters each righteously claiming ownership of the “most patriotic” label. Patriotism isn’t just getting teary-eyed on the Fourth of July or choked up at war memorials. It’s supporting what the Fourth of July celebrates and what those war memorials commemorate: the U.S. Constitution’s insistence that all people should have the same rights and opportunities and that it is the obligation of the government to make that happen. When the government fails in those obligations, it is the responsibility of patriots to speak up and remind them of their duty.

One of the ironies of the way some people express their patriotism is to brag about our freedoms, especially freedom of speech, but then brand as unpatriotic those who exercise this freedom to express dissatisfaction with the government’s record in upholding the Constitution. Colin Kaepernick explained why he will not stand during the national anthem: “There are a lot of things that are going on that are unjust [that] people aren’t being held accountable for. And that’s something that needs to change. That’s something that this country stands for — freedom, liberty, justice for all. And it’s not happening for all right now.”

What makes an act truly patriotic and not just lip-service is when it involves personal risk or sacrifice. Both Kendricks and Kaepernick chose to express their patriotism publicly because they felt that inspiring others was more important than the personal cost. Yes, Kendricks is a world-record pole-vaulter, but every athlete knows that breaking focus and concentration during a high-pressure competition can be devastating to the athlete’s performance. The Olympics was filled with favorites who faltered because of loss of focus. Halting his run in order to honor the national anthem could have cost Kendricks his medal. He was willing to take that chance.

Likewise, Kaepernick’s choice not to stand during the national anthem could create a public backlash that might cost him millions in future endorsements and affect his value as a player on his team, reducing salary earnings or even jeopardizing his job. If team ticket sales seriously dipped as a result, he would pay for his stance.

We should admire those who risk personal gain in the service of promoting the values of their country. Both athletes are in fine company of others who have shown their patriotism in unconventional ways. In 1989, when a federal law prohibiting flag desecration went into effect, Vietnam Veterans burned the American flag as a protest to a law curbing the First Amendment. Their argument was that they fought for the freedoms in the Constitution, not a piece of cloth, and to curtail those freedoms was an insult to their sacrifice. Ironically, the original purpose of flag desecration laws between 1897 and 1932 wasn’t to prevent political dissent, but to prevent the use of flag imagery for political campaigns and in advertising.

One sign of the maturation of American society is the willingness of those in the public eye, especially athletes, to openly take a political stand, even if it could harm their careers. The modern era of athletes speaking out began in 1966 with Muhammad Ali refusing to be drafted to fight other people of color. In 1967, I joined with football great Jim Brown, basketball legend Bill Russell, Muhammad Ali and other prominent athletes for what was dubbed “The Cleveland Summit.” Together we tried to find ways to help Ali fight for his right of political expression. I don’t know how much we were able to accomplish on a practical level, but seeing black athletes in support of Ali inspired others to speak out. The following year at the 1968 Olympics, African Americans Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists during the medal ceremony as a protest to the treatment of people of color in the United States. In 2014, NBA players LeBron James, Kyrie Irving, Jarrett Jack, Alan Anderson, Deron Williams and Kevin Garnett and NFL players from the Rams and Browns wore “I Can’t Breathe” shirts during warm-ups for a game to protest police killings of unarmed blacks.

What should horrify Americans is not Kaepernick’s choice to remain seated during the national anthem, but that nearly 50 years after Ali was banned from boxing for his stance and Tommie Smith and John Carlos’s raised fists caused public ostracization and numerous death threats, we still need to call attention to the same racial inequities. Failure to fix this problem is what’s really un-American here.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Virginia School Board Tells the Supreme Court It Has No Idea What a Transgender Person Is Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=25345"><span class="small">Zack Ford, ThinkProgress</span></a>   
Tuesday, 30 August 2016 13:21

Ford writes: "The school district's argument is literally this: If we can't discriminate against trans students, then we won't be able to discriminate against trans students."

Gavin Grimm, the
Gavin Grimm, the "G.G." in Gloucester County School Board v. G.G. (photo: Steve Helber/AP)


Virginia School Board Tells the Supreme Court It Has No Idea What a Transgender Person Is

By Zack Ford, ThinkProgress

30 August 16

 

Being able to discriminate against trans people, they argue, is vital to discriminating against trans people.

he Gloucester County School Board in Virginia really wants to make sure that transgender student Gavin Grimm (“G.G.” in court filings) cannot use the men’s bathroom and locker rooms during his senior year. Having lost its case at the Fourth Circuit earlier this year, the district petitioned the Supreme Court this week to hear its appeal.

Gloucester argues that it should not have to accommodate transgender students, but much of the petition focuses on an important question about when courts should defer to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulation. The Court’s three most conservative members recently expressed interest in increasing the power of the judiciary at the expense of federal agencies, and it is possible that the Court could take up this issue if they can secure a fourth vote.

Even if the Court does seize this opportunity to reconsider deference to agencies, however, this case is still fundamentally about whether a federal law prohibiting “sex” discrimination encompasses discrimination based on gender identity. The Department of Education concluded that it does, and that a regulation permitting gender-segregated bathrooms does not permit schools to exclude trans people from the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity. Gloucester does not simply believe that courts should not defer to the Department’s guidance. It believes that the Department’s guidance was wrong.

Gloucester argues that if Title IX protects both “gender identity” and “biological sex,” it somehow obliterates the law’s allowances for sex-segregated facilities:

Reading “sex” to include “gender identity” would make a hash of Title IX’s scheme allowing facilities and programs to be separated by “sex.”If “sex” signifies, not biology, but rather one’s “internal” sense of maleness or femaleness, the whole concept of permissible sex-separation collapses. What sense could there be in allowing “separate living facilities for the different sexes” if a biological male could legally qualify as a woman based merely on his subjective perception of being one? The answer is none.

This is tautological word soup; the school is arguing that if it can’t discriminate against transgender people, then it won’t be able to discriminate against transgender people. More importantly, the phrase “subjective perception” reveals that the school district does not understand what concepts like “gender identity” and “transgender” mean. It appears to believe that gender identity is a whimsical choice?—?as if a man can wake up one morning, decide that they feel like a woman, and that makes them “transgender.” In reality, a person’s gender identity is consistent; trans people stay that way and cis people do not suddenly decide to be trans. The district also ignores the fact that biological factors shape out gender identity, regardless of whether we are trans or cisgender.

It likewise seems lost on Gloucester that all people have a gender identity, whether they are transgender or not. It’s the only explanation for “preposterous” conclusions like this one:

As applied to Title IX, that preposterous construction would legalize just the kind of biologically based discrimination against men and women that Title IX was enacted to prevent. For instance, schools could exclude biological women from taking science classes or joining the chess team, so long as they allowed biological men who identify as females to do so. Only transgendered [sic] people would be protected under this Title IX regime; men and women who identify with their biological sex would receive no protection at all.

If that sounds like nonsense, that’s because it is. Because sex and gender align for most people, respecting gender identity instead of biological sex only changes how transgender people are treated. The men’s room would be open to all men, whether they are cisgender or transgender, and likewise for the women’s room. Gloucester’s argument is that trans men like Grimm are not men requires a rejection of all of the available information about gender identity that research has produced in the past half-century.

The school district actually argues?—?quoting dissenting Fourth Circuit Judge Paul Niemeyer?—?that when Title IX was passed in 1972, “virtually every dictionary definition of ‘sex’ referred to the physiological distinctions between males and females, particularly with respect to their reproductive functions.” But the Department’s 2014 guidance reflects two important differences across that 42-year gulf: The knowledge that transgender people are functionally the sex they identify with?—?all day, every day?—?and the reality that there are now openly-identifying transgender students attending schools. If transgender people aren’t recognized under “sex,” they aren’t recognized at all.

The school district’s argument is literally this: If we can’t discriminate against trans students, then we won’t be able to discriminate against trans students. Justice Stephen Breyer may have granted Gloucester the “courtesy” of hearing that argument before requiring it to accommodate Grimm, but hopefully he and his colleagues will not be convinced by it.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
An Oil Pipeline and a River: What Would Sitting Bull Do? Print
Tuesday, 30 August 2016 13:02

LaDuke writes: "It's 2016, and the weight of American corporate interests has come to the Missouri River, the Mother River. This time, instead of the Seventh Cavalry, or the Indian police dispatched to assassinate Sitting Bull, it is Enbridge and Dakota Access Pipeline."

Winona LaDuke. (photo: PSU)
Winona LaDuke. (photo: PSU)


An Oil Pipeline and a River: What Would Sitting Bull Do?

By Winona LaDuke, LA Progressive

30 August 16

 

I am not sure how badly North Dakota wants this pipeline. If there is to be a battle over the Dakota Access, I would not bet against a people with nothing else left but a land and a river.

t’s 2016, and the weight of American corporate interests has come to the Missouri River, the Mother River. This time, instead of the Seventh Cavalry, or the Indian police dispatched to assassinate Sitting Bull, it is Enbridge and Dakota Access Pipeline.

In mid-August, Standing Rock Tribal Chairman Dave Archambault II was arrested by state police, along with 27 others, for opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline. In the meantime, North Dakota Gov. Jack Dalrymple called for more police support.

Every major pipeline project in North America must cross indigenous lands, Indian Country. That is a problem.

The road west of Fargo is rarely taken. In fact, most Americans just fly over North Dakota, never seeing it.

Let me take you there.

My head clears as I drive. My destination is the homeland of the Hunkpapa Oceti, Standing Rock Reservation. It is early evening, the moon full. If you close your eyes, you can remember the 50 million buffalo—the single largest migratory herd in the world. The pounding of their hooves would vibrate the Earth, make the grass grow.

There were once 250 species of grass. Today the buffalo are gone, replaced by 28 million cattle, which require grain, water, and hay. Many of the fields are now in a single GMO crop, full of so many pesticides that the monarch butterflies are dying off. But in my memory, the old world remains.

If you drive long enough, you come to the Missouri River.

Called Mnisose, a great swirling river, by the Lakota, she is a force to be reckoned with. She is breathtaking. “The Missouri River has a fixed place in the history and mythology” of the Lakota and other Indigenous nations of the Northern Plains, author Dakota Goodhouse would explain.

In the time before Sitting Bull, the Missouri River was the epicenter of northern agriculture, the river bed so fertile. The territory was known as the fertile crescent of North America. That was then, before the treaties that reduced the Lakota land base. But the Missouri remained in the treaty—the last treaty of 1868 used the Missouri as a boundary.

Then came the theft of land by the U.S. government, and the taking of the Black Hills in 1877, in part as retaliation against Sitting Bull’s victory at the Battle of the Little Big Horn. In a time prior to Black Lives Matter or Native Lives Matter, great leaders like Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse were assassinated at the hands of police.

One truth: the Lakota people have survived much.

Forced into the reservation life, the Lakota attempted to stabilize their society, until the dams came. The 1944 Pick Sloan project flooded out the Missouri River tribes, taking the best bottom lands from the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara, the Lakota and Dakota. Over 200,000 acres on the Standing Rock and Cheyenne River reservations in South Dakota were flooded by the Oahe Dam itself, forcing not only relocation, but a loss of the Lakota world. The GarrisonOahe, and Fort Randall dams created a reservoir that eliminated 90 percent of timber and 75 percent of wildlife on the reservations.

That is how a people are made poor.

Today, well over two thirds of the population of Standing Rock is below the poverty level—and the land and Mother River are what remains, a constant, for the people. That is what is threatened today.

Enbridge and partners are preparing to drill through the riverbed. The pipeline has been permitted in sections from the west and from the east. The northern portion was moved away from the water supply of Bismarck, into the watershed of Standing Rock. That was unfortunate for the Lakota.

Despite Lakota legal and regulatory objections, the Dakota Access Pipeline construction began in May 2016. If finished it will snake through North and South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois, where it will link to a 774-mile pipeline to Nederland, Texas.

More than 570,000 barrels of Bakken crude oil will pass through the pipeline daily, along with 245,100 metric tons of carbon daily—enough carbon to combust the planet to oblivion.

The pipeline would span 200 water crossings, and in North Dakota alone would pass through 33 historical and archeological sites. Enbridge just bought the Dakota Access pipeline, noting that the proposed Sandpiper route—Minnesota’s 640,000 barrel per day Bakken line—is now three years behind schedule.

In late July, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe represented by Earthjustice, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Standing Rock claims the project violates federal and treaty law. Standing Rock also filed an intervention at the United Nations, in coordination with the International Indian Treaty Council.

As Chairman Archambault explained in a New York Times story:

“The Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation supported more protection of the tribe’s cultural heritage, but the Corps of Engineers and Energy Transfer Partners turned a blind eye to our rights. The first draft of the company’s assessment of the planned route through our treaty and ancestral lands did not even mention our tribe.

“The Dakota Access pipeline was fast-tracked from Day 1 using the Nationwide Permit No. 12 process, which grants exemption from environmental reviews required by the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act by treating the pipeline as a series of small construction sites.

“Without closer scrutiny, the proposal breezed through the four state processes.”

In Iowa where work on the pipeline is underway, three fires erupted causing heavy damage to equipment and an estimated $1 million in damages. Investigators suspect arson, according to Jasper County Sheriff John Halferty. In October 2015, three Iowa farmers sued Dakota Access LLC and the Iowa Utilities Board in an attempt to prevent the use of eminent domain on their properties to construct the pipeline.

The health of the Missouri River has been taken for granted.

Dammed in the Pick Sloan Dam projects, each project increases contamination and reduces her health. Today, the Missouri is the seventh most polluted river in the country. Agricultural run-off and now fracking have contaminated the river. My sister fished a gar out of the river, a giant prehistoric fish, only to find it covered with tumors.

Here’s just one case: In a January 2015 spill, saltwater contamination from a massive pipeline spill reached the Missouri River. In the baffling way of state and federal agencies, North Dakota’s Health Director David Glatt did not expect harm to wildlife or drinking water supplies because the water was diluted. The saying is: “The solution to pollution is dilution.” That is convenient, but not true.

Blacktail Creek and the Little Muddy River were contaminated after nearly 3 million gallons of saltwater with elevated levels of chloride contamination. All was diluted. But then there was that gar fish with the tumors.

There are pipelines everywhere, and fewer than 150 Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) pipeline inspectors in the whole country.

And now comes the risk from oil.

The pipeline companies generally discuss a 99 percent safety record, but studies have found that to be grossly inaccurate. A former Scientific American Editor, Trudy Bell, reports that PHMSA data from 2001 to 2011 suggest the average pipeline “has a 57% probability of experiencing a major leak, with consequences over the $l million range in a ten year period.”

Not good odds.

At Standing Rock, as the number of protesters grew from 200 to 2000, state law enforcement decided to put up a safety checkpoint and rerouted traffic on Highway 1806 from Bismarck to Standing Rock, hoping to dissuade people from coming and put the squeeze on Standing Rock’s Prairie Knights Casino, which is served by that road.

We just drove around; the scenic route is beautiful. And as supporters surge in numbers, the casino hotel and restaurants are full.

While North Dakota seeks to punish the Lakota, Chairman Archambault expresses concerns for everyone:

From the New York Times: “I am here to advise anyone that will listen that the Dakota Access Pipeline project is harmful. It will not be just harmful to my people but its intent and construction will harm the water in the Missouri River, which is one of the cleanest and safest river tributaries left in the Unit States. To poison the water is to poison the substance of life. Everything that moves must have water. How can we talk about and knowingly poison water?”

In the meantime, North Dakota Gov. Dalrymple announced a state of emergency, making additional state resources available “to manage public safety risks associated with the ongoing protest of the Dakota Access Pipeline.” He may have exceeded his scope of authority and violated civil and human rights to water.

Chairman Archambault’s interpretation: “Perhaps only in North Dakota, where oil tycoons wine and dine elected officials, and where the governor, Jack Dalrymple, serves as an adviser to the Trump campaign, would state and county governments act as the armed enforcement for corporate interests.”

There are a lot of people at Standing Rock today who remember their history and the long standoff at Wounded Knee in 1973. In fact, some of those in Standing Rock today were there in 1973 at Wounded Knee, a similar battle for dignity and the future of a nation.

I am not sure how badly North Dakota wants this pipeline. If there is to be a battle over the pipeline, it will be here. For a people with nothing else but a land and a river, I would not bet against them.

The great Lakota leader Mathew King once said, “the only thing sadder than an Indian who is not free, is an Indian who does not remember what it is to be free.”

The Standing Rock protest camp represents that struggle for freedom, and the future of a people. All of us. If I ask the question “What would Sitting Bull do?” —the answer is pretty clear. He would remind me what he said 150 years ago: “Let us put our minds together to see what kind of future we can make for our children.”

The time for that is now.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 Next > End >>

Page 1918 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN