Republished with permission from Citizens for Health, Natural Health E-News Update, March 4, 2004
NIH Nailed for Kickbacks from Drug Companies/ Congress Criticized for Ethics System
Recent investigations into the activities of the National Institutes of Health and some Congressional leaders raise serious questions about conflicts of interest with big money industries and the undisputable "revolving door" between lawmakers, scientists and pharmaceutical companies.
NIH officials required to disclose outside income
On Monday, lawyers from the U.S. Department of Ethics announced that top-ranking officials from the National Institutes of Health must publicly divulge any income acquired from drug companies and other outside employers on a yearly basis. The announcement came from the newly formed NIH blue-ribbon panel on conflict-of-interest policies.
Federal regulators are making serious inquiries into NIH drug industry ties after a December 7, 2003 Los Angeles Times report detailed hundreds of payments of consulting fees and stock options from pharmaceutical companies to high-level officials at NIH. According the L.A Times, more than 94% of those top-level employees were never required to publicly reveal how much money they made in these consulting deals with the drug industry. This news not only highlights some serious ethical questions, but also questions the integrity of the nation's most publicly trusted medical research institute.
"Our center has great respect for the important work of the National Institutes of Health," said Diana Zuckerman, President of the National Center for Policy Research For Women and Families. "However, we are concerned about how conflicts of interest are undermining the integrity of medical research. More and more research studies are being reported at professional meetings and in medical journals by individuals with a product or point of view to sell."
The House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee is also demanding and explanation and dollar figures for drug industry payouts to agency scientists. "Eliciting the dollar amount is relevant for determining whether the compensation is so excessive or disproportionate to the time expended as to suggest, for example, that public office is being used for private gain," Rep. James C. Greenwood (R-Pa.), chairman of the Subcommittee, quoted from a Jan. 27 directive to NIH ethics officers from Edgar M. Swindell, associate general counsel for ethics at the Health and Human Services Department.
Can't Count on Congressional Ethics.
Though Congress may investigate conflicts of interest off Capitol Hill, don't bank on your legislators jumping at the chance to regulate one other. Several government watchdog groups became vocal this week in response to recent moves on the Hill that allow legislators to more easily sweep ethics issues under the rug. According to groups like Common Cause and Judicial Watch, the House ethics committee serves little purpose since public interest groups can no longer file official complaints and legislators seem to have an informal pact not to push for new investigations.
A group of public interest organizations say that the ethics committee has taken action on only 5 cases since 1997; yet at least 13 other cases should have been investigated and were not. "The ethics committee today serves as a shield for members of Congress rather than a committee to protect the interests of the institution and the American people," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21.
One of the most recent and controversial examples of Congressional conflict of interest and corporate payoffs came with the February announcement that Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., was offered a $2 million lobbying position with the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (Pharma). Coincidentally Rep. Tauzin chaired the House committee that wrote the new Medicare prescription drug coverage law, touted by many as the biggest government give- away to any industry in history. Should Tauzin take the position, he would be one of the largest single beneficiaries of a law that he helped author.
The scandal has sparked public outrage about the revolving door between industry and government, but Tauzin's spokesman says the Congressman has broken no ethics rules. "If true, that only demonstrates, once again, the inadequacy of the rules governing congressional behavior," one Wall Street Journal columnist said recently.
While many want a full ethics committee investigation, others hope that at the very least the scandal will help generate Member support for corrections to the drug bill.
Sources:
Ethics Policy Announced for NIH Officials, LA Times
House Ethics System Criticized, Boston Globe
Washington's Revolving Door, Oregonian
Back to top of document
