The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)
Purdue Pharma shifts strategy
OxyContin maker leaves top pharma lobbying group
STAMFORD — Purdue Pharma has confirmed that it has left the pharmaceutical industry’s top lobbying group, a significant shift in the bankrupt OxyContin maker’s political strategy.
The company said in a statement this week that it had ended its nearly twodecade membership in the Washington, D.C.based PhRMA in the fourth quarter of this year, although it said the dissociation was amicable. Its departure from an organization that spends tens of millions of dollars annually to advance the pharmaceutical sector’s political agenda follows its September bankruptcy filing, a process that has prompted Purdue to restrict its lobbying.
“This decision does not reflect any substantive disagreement with PhRMA,” Purdue said in the statement. “The company appreciates the many years of partnership it has shared with the organization.”
Messages left for PhRMA were not returned. Its acronym stands for Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
Purdue also said it “remains dedicated to an effective compliance program and has a longstanding code of ethics and other policies that mirror best practices outlined in the PhRMA code and which are regularly reviewed and enhanced to meet evolving needs.”
Those measures have not prevented the approximately 2,700 lawsuits against the company — including complaints from Connecticut’s attorney general and about three dozen cities and towns in the state — that allege the company fueled the opioid crisis with deceptive OxyContin marketing. The company denies the allegations.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong declined to comment on Purdue’s relationship with PhRMA.
Purdue’s statement did not make clear whether the exit from PhRMA was linked to a company plan that has instituted a number of operational changes, including new lobbying limits. Positioned by the company as a sign of its commitment to ethical
conduct, the “voluntary selfinjunction” was enacted through the firm’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.
Among those requirements, it can no longer lobby at any level of government for legislation or regulations that would encourage or require opioid prescribing, punish a lack of treatment with opioids or constrain access to nonopioid pain treatments.
Additionally, Purdue can no longer lobby against a number of measures, including any that would restrict initial opioid prescriptions to treat acute pain or entail using “medicationassisted treatments” that might include buprenorphine or methadone, with behavioral therapy, to help patients suffering from opioid addiction or dependence.
Financial questions
Purdue’s massive fiscal commitments might have contributed to its departure from PhRMA.
It has offered to settle the lawsuits with a plan that it values at more than $10 billion. In the meantime, it has predicted that it would spend about $263 million this year on legal costs and related professionalservices expenditures.
Such obligations possibly hampered Purdue’s ability to meet PhRMA’s membership requirements, which include spending a threeyear annual average of at least $200 million on research and development.
In addition, PhRMA’s membership costs appear to amount to several million dollars annually for each company.
In 2017, the group’s membership dues jumped 62 percent yearoveryear to $396 million.
The same year, PhRMA spent about $128 million on lobbying, at a time when its members grappled with attacks across the political aisle that they were charging too much for their drugs.
Days before his January 2017 inauguration, President Donald Trump accused the industry of “getting away with murder” with its pricing.
“Pharma has a lot of lobbies, a lot of lobbyists and a lot of power. And there’s very little bidding on drugs,” Trump said at the time. “We’re the largest buyer of drugs in the world, and yet we don’t bid properly.”
PhRMA’s approximately three dozen listed members include industry giants such as Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Pfizer.
After Purdue’s departure, Ridgefieldbased Boehringer Ingelheim represents the sole Connecticutheadquartered member.
Longstanding lobbying
Purdue’s lobbying comprises a small fraction of the pharmaceutical industry’s activity in Washington, D.C., but the firm has maintained a presence in the national capital for many years.
During 2017, Purdue spent about $940,000 on lobbying and increased that amount last year to its highestever level, $1.12 million, according to the politicalfinance watchdog Center for Responsive Politics.
Nine of the 10 lobbyists Purdue employed in 2018 were “revolving door” members with Capitol Hill connections, CRP found.
Disclosures for Purdue-affiliated lobbyists this year have given vague objectives such as “monitoring legislative and regulatory activities impacting the pharmaceutical industry,” according to federal records.
In earlier years, the company hired lobbyists for a number of issues, including those pertaining to Medicare and Medicaid coverage and reimbursement and the Stop Oxy Abuse Act.
Introduced in 2011 by thenRep. Mary Bono, RCalifornia, the bill would have limited prescribing of OxyContin and other controlledrelease drugs containing its active ingredient of oxycodone to patients with severe pain. The legislation was never enacted.
Purdue’s increased lobbying has coincided with a major drop in its political fundraising and elected officials’ widespread disavowal of campaign contributions from the Sackler family members who own the company.
In the 2018 campaign cycle, Purdue’s political action committee raised its lowest total since 2010, collecting $35,679, according to CRP. In that span, it spent $20,733 — its lowest outlay for such a period.
“At the same time their contributions dried up, their lobbying ramped up — which is, in general, common when either an industry or company has some kind of crisis,” Daniel Auble, a senior researcher for CRP, said in a recent interview. “In the case of Purdue Pharma, it’s probably pretty clear why they’re spending more because of Congress taking up the issue of opioids . ... They’re clearly still trying to influence what goes on.”
The company has exerted political influence in other ways.
A 2018 report by thenSen. Claire McCaskill, DMissouri, found that Purdue ranked as the top donor among five pharmaceutical companies that poured millions of dollars into prominent nonprofits that had supported widespread opioid use.
In a statement at the time, Purdue did not dispute the study’s findings.
“We have supported thirdparty organizations, including with annual dues and unrestricted grants, that are interested in helping patients receive appropriate care,” the statement said.