Mis­souri may fi­nally get a PDMP

The Kansas City Star - - Obituaries - BY CAIT­LYN ROSEN [email protected]­star.com

Mis­souri is on the brink of fi­nally end­ing its sta­tus as the na­tion’s only state with­out a pre­scrip­tion drug mon­i­tor­ing pro­gram (PDMP), end­ing a decade­long leg­isla­tive bat­tle.

The Se­nate voted 21 to 10 to es­tab­lish a PDMP, which is aimed at com­bat­ing opi­oid ad­dic­tion. The bill, spon­sored by Sike­ston Repub­li­can Rep. Holly Re­hder, now heads back to the

House, where it is ex­pected to pass quickly and reach Gov. Mike Par­son for his sig­na­ture.

“Gov­er­nor Par­son has been a long­time sup­porter of im­ple­ment­ing a PDMP and is thank­ful for the Gen­eral Assem­bly for pri­or­i­tiz­ing this leg­is­la­tion,” Kelli Jones, Par­son’s Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Direc­tor, said.

This leg­is­la­tion has passed the House pre­vi­ously, only to fail in the Se­nate. Last year, the bill didn’t even reach the Se­nate floor be­cause of op­po­si­tion from a six-mem­ber Se­nate con­ser­va­tive cau­cus.

This year, how­ever, law­mak­ers were able to work out a com­pro­mise that ad­dressed some of the con­cerns. Con­ser­va­tive law­mak­ers have long con­tended that a data­base of per­sonal pre­scrip­tions vi­o­lates pri­vacy rights guar­an­teed by the fourth amend­ment.

All eight Se­nate Democrats joined with 13 Repub­li­cans to pass the bill. Ten Repub­li­cans, in­clud­ing all but one mem­ber of the con­ser­va­tive cau­cus, voted against it.

Sen. Eric Burli­son, RBat­tle­field, said this is­sue was par­tic­u­larly frus­trat­ing be­cause he viewed it as a win-lose sit­u­a­tion. The win: sav­ing lives. The lose: com­pro­mis­ing the rights and pri­vacy of in­di­vid­u­als who have done no harm.

The Se­nate’s ver­sion of the bill cre­ates a joint over­sight task force to su­per­vise the col­lec­tion of pa­tient data. The panel will con­sist of mem­bers of state med­i­cal boards such as the board of heal­ing arts, the board of phar­macy, the board of nurs­ing, and the den­tal board.

Parkville Repub­li­can Sen. Tony Luetke­meyer noted that the bill went


through many changes and was “bet­ter be­cause of the de­lib­er­a­tive process.”

Sen. Cindy O’Laugh­lin, R-Shel­bina, was the only mem­ber of the con­ser­va­tive cau­cus to vote in fa­vor of the bill.

“I be­lieve this is a win for ev­ery­one and there aren’t many of those,” O’Laugh­lin said in a state­ment on Face­book. “I un­der­stand there are those who will won­der if this so­lu­tion re­ally does pro­tect their pri­vacy. I feel af­ter weeks of work and re­view this is a good so­lu­tion that pro­tects you and your pri­vacy.”

The de­tails of the com­pro­mise came af­ter a lengthy fil­i­buster ear­lier in the week, although most of the changes were worked out pri­vately be­tween the con­ser­va­tive cau­cus, Re­hder and Luetke­meyer.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.