SB 484 Is All Methed Up

I’ve had asthma my whole life, but for the past 15 years or so it has been mild enough to control with over-the-counter medication.

I tell you this because I want to be upfront about my bias — my wheezing, unadulterated rage, really — at a law being debated right now in Sacramento that will require a prescription for the purchase of any medication that contains ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, norpseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine (let’s just call all this "ephedrine" for the purpose of this article). Zyrtec-D, Claritin-D, Sudafed and Advil Cold and Sinus are some of the drugs you will need a doctor’s permission to purchase under the proposed law, all because some people use these drugs to make methamphetamine.

The bill, SB 484, has already passed the Senate, where state Sen. Mark Leno voted in favor (say it ain’t so, Mark!) and state Sen. Leland Yee voted against.

On Tuesday, it will be in front of two former San Francisco supervisors (Assembly members Tom Ammiano and Fiona Ma) during a Public Safety Committee meeting.

The law is modeled after one passed in Oregon in 2005. And since Oregon and California are basically twins, some folks think it would be a good idea to try it here because our state government is humming along with no bigger issues. To be clear: Meth is a huge problem that has affected even my own family and I agree that we should be working to fight this scourge, but SB 484 is misguided nonsense.

 In Oregon, where this very law has been "successful," local meth production is down. But according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, the market "has been increasingly supplied with methamphetamine from other southwestern states and Mexico." (Senate Analyst Report: Download SB 484 Senate Bill - Bill Analysis.)  And a recent study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services shows that the rate of meth use in Oregon is greater than California. (Great. Next we’ll be copying Louisiana’s emergency-evacuation program.)

In 2005, the federal government prohibited the purchase of more than 7.5 grams of ephedrine per month and made it so you have to show identification and sign a promise to be good with your sniffles medicine. (21 U.S.C. sec. 830(e).) The number of labs busted in California declined 83 percent from 2003 to 2007. Oregon saw a 95 percent total reduction during the same period. (See Analyst Report, above.) So we’re talking about a difference of 12 percent, or 64 labs in California, potentially attributable to requiring a prescription. And that’s only if we assume zero difference in law-enforcement resources.

Bearing in mind that there’s no evidence that meth use diminishes with the elimination of local labs (there is some evidence that use actually increases with the more pure product from Mexico — just ask Iowa), let’s look at some of the costs associated with requiring a prescription: 

• In 2008, the state received about $4.5 million in sales-tax revenue from ephedrine products. Prescriptions are not taxed, so that money’s gone.
• California’s 8 million uninsured surely count asthma and allergy sufferers among their ranks, and trips to the emergency room when an attack strikes will be paid for by the collective goodwill of taxpayers. Medicaid costs will rise, too.
• Aside from the collective costs, there are the personal costs borne by you and me when we want medicine that works. Studies confirm what we all know: Drugs containing the "substitute" phenylephrine instead of ephedrine don’t work as well and have to be taken more frequently. These costs include time off work, co-pay for a doctor visit and the cost of the drug itself (reportedly, Sudafed costs $25 in Oregon), not to mention the toll all of this ridiculousness takes on one’s mental health.

Instead of limiting effective medicine to the persistent and insured, other states like Kentucky and Massachusetts actually target the problem — people who hoard ephedrine from multiple sources — and have simply created computer systems that better track such purchases. There’s a thought.

Note that, in addition to free time and evil, meth producers also require things like fingernail polish, paint thinner, table salt, vehicle starter fluid, matches, and pots and pans. Let’s hope The City’s representatives help defeat SB 484, or else we’ll soon need a note from our mothers to engineer a pedicure.

Comments

[Beth Spotswood]

I like how Kamala's headshot has her gazing off into the distance of a library, obviously thinking to herself, "I'm going to do this with conviction..."

[David Light]

Attack on personal freedoms, bad. The right to a productive cough and Sinus pressure relief, good. They say the plastic strips in a $20 bill can be tracked from space, indeed, big brother is watching. Thank you for your diligence in the due process of SF law. We need a few good eyes and ears out here in the E Coast!

Keep up the good work

[Mousqueton]

Mel:
You are not going to like this comment.

My ex-wife suffered from asthma since she was a child. As a matter of fact she had some serious bouts at least once a year that required hospitalization. Every symptom went away when she gave birth to our daughter. She did endure 9 miserable months though because she decided not to take any medication.

So there you have it.

I remember you mentioning that someone told you that you have big hips. Well; big hips, child birth to cure your asthma; I think there is a hidden message in here.

Rgds

[VenerableBede]

I like this Sweet Melissa. . . .more of her please.

[Christine]

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Your anaylsis is devoid of several important facts, but is filled with the propaganda of this bill's opponents who knowingly make hunreds of millions of dollars from criminals who produce and traffic meth. Meth labs are in the increase in CA and across the country and this trend will continue (check NDIC, DEA, CA BNE, etc.). Mexico and most other Central American oucntries have banned pseudoephedrine (PSE) and PSE msurfers are making a mockery of the CMEA, which is designed to "control" sales. When Oregon passed it's law, PSE prices DID NOT increase. In fact PSE prices are lower in Oregon than they are as OTC in Califorina (generics, larger count bottles - very intuitive stuff). As for healthcare costs, according to the Oregon Dept. of Helth Services, Mediaid cost increase $7,000 for the entitre states of Oregon, which was far ouffset by costs savings from not cleaing up meth labs. As for the Co-pay another Red Hearing. Sicne we already know PSE won't cost more, simply pay out of pocket as you already do. If you want your insurance to pay, if your co-pay is lower than what you current pay, you will be saving money. As for loss sales tax revenue - what a joke. Most people in Oregon switch to other OTC drugs, those sales will be taxed in CA. According to the US Attorney's Office, more than have the PSE sold in CA is diverted to meth labs. That's blood money we can't afford because it cots us millions more in human missery. This bill will conservatively save Californias 10 million dollars by not investgiaiting, prosecuting, and incacerating - not to mentioned the $1 million in clean up costs for DTSC each year. As for electronic trakcing - once again, do your research. Those states with it: Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas - all are experiencing INCREASING meth labs. Those systems don't work and those states will tell you so if you take the time to ask them. Some people may be inconvenienced, but this is a public safety and pulic policy call. Oregon used to removed abut 40 kids each year from meth labs. Since its bill was enacted three years ago - they have removed only one child! Will meth still be available - unfortunately yes. However, SB 484 will eliminate meth PRODUCTION in CA and that alone is worth passing this law.

[Christine]

I apologize for my earlier typos - I knocked it out quick and didn't have time to proofread. Anyway, those who are truly interested in the facts about this bill – go to http://www.oregondec.org/ and read them. Public policy is always best made when it's based on facts and not rhetoric.

[Melissa Griffin]

@Christine - Let's address your points one by one:

(1) is filled with the propaganda of this bill's opponents who knowingly make hunreds of millions of dollars from criminals who produce and traffic meth. - I cited the senate analyst report and government studies. So, um...no. Not true.

(2) Meth labs are in the increase in CA and across the country - again, not so says the DEA report cited by the senate analyst.

(3) When Oregon passed it's law, PSE prices DID NOT increase. - I gave you the cite.

(4) In fact PSE prices are lower in Oregon than they are as OTC in Califorina (generics, larger count bottles - very intuitive stuff). - Bigger bottles! How is that stopping local production? Meth producers would just have to find "buyers" with insurance now. Hardly addressing the issue. And I doubt the claim about prices being lower, though that's not a dealbreaker.

(5) As for healt hcare costs, according to the Oregon Dept. of Helth Services, Mediaid cost increase $7,000 for the entitre states of Oregon. - Oregon has a population of about 3.5 million. California has 37 million. And 8 million of our citizens are uninsured.

(6) which was far ouffset by costs savings from not cleaing up meth labs.- Not sure what the cost is to clean up 64 fewer meth labs...

(7) As for the Co-pay...simply pay out of pocket as you already do. If you want your insurance to pay, if your co-pay is lower than what you current pay, you will be saving money. - Neither of us knows what every insurance company charges in a co-pay, so we can't assume it will be lower, plus this does not address the issue of the uninsured.

(8) As for loss sales tax revenue - what a joke. Most people in Oregon switch to other OTC drugs, those sales will be taxed in CA. - Those OTC drugs do not work as well. Period.

(9) According to the US Attorney's Office, more than have the PSE sold in CA is diverted to meth labs. That's blood money we can't afford because it cots us millions more in human missery. - I'm not pro-meth - but I think there are better ways to deal with "smurfing".

(10) This bill will conservatively save Californias 10 million dollars by not investgiaiting, prosecuting, and incacerating - not to mentioned the $1 million in clean up costs for DTSC each year. - I have no idea where you're getting those figures from, but assuming they are true, those same resources will just be used to deal with all the trafficked-in meth. You can't legislate away demand.

(11) As for electronic trakcing - once again, do your research. Those states with it: Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas - all are experiencing INCREASING meth labs. Those systems don't work and those states will tell you so if you take the time to ask them. - Actually, Kentucky Law enforcement representatives criss-cross the nation touting their "stop sale" program as a model for other jurisdictions.

(12) Some people may be inconvenienced, but this is a public safety and pulic policy call. Oregon used to removed abut 40 kids each year from meth labs. Since its bill was enacted three years ago - they have removed only one child! - And how many more children have been removed from homes where people USE meth because the Mexican kind is more pure.

(13) Will meth still be available - unfortunately yes. However, SB 484 will eliminate meth PRODUCTION in CA and that alone is worth passing this law. - actually, it won't eliminate meth production in CA any more than it did in Oregon (which still has labs). Fewer labs, of course, but still there. For 12 percent fewer labs we would inconvenience and put out of reach safe, effective drugs for all of California? On this, we can just agree to disagree.

Thank you for writing.

[Christine]

Melissa,

You argument is only as good as the information you use to support it. Unfortunately you relied upon the Senate Public Safety analysis. And who could blame you because one would expect such a document to unbiased and accurate. Unfortunately this one is not. It was authored by a former public defender who is notoriously anti-law enforcement and particularly anti-drug policy. This report was exposed for the hack job it is during the Senate Public Safety committee (watch the Capital web cast of the hearing for yourself). The committee rejected the report and that’s why they voted 6 to 1 to pass the bill. Rather than spend much time on highlighting the faults of the analysis, I will address the inaccuracies that are relevant to our discussion.

(2) Meth labs are on the increase in the United States and in California. The El Paso Information Center maintains the meth lab database for all agencies, including DEA, and the facts are undeniable http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/map_lab_seizures.html . From 2007 to 2008, meth labs incidences increased by 873 nationwide. Thus far in 2009, this upward trend is continuing. The CA Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement (BNE) recently did a study and found that meth labs are underreported in CA by more than 10%. The CA Dept. of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) is the agency that pays for the removal of the hazardous waste for everyone in CA so its records are most accurate. DTSC always removes more labs (especially lab dumps that are often not reported as law enforcement matters) than EPIC has recorded. Also bare in mind that BNE, which typically seizes more than half of the meth labs in CA, in recent years has suffered a 70% reduction in its meth enforcement program. It’s no wonder more labs aren’t being found. All of the meth lab dumps represent labs that weren’t found – and I can assure you the Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations (DTO) are not smuggling their meth lab trash into CA.

(3) You actually cite a blogger as a credible reference? I suggest you do what I did and research it for yourself. Call several retail stores that operate in both CA and Oregon (e.g., Wal MART, Rite Aid, Target, etc.) and compare the prices of the same products (generics and brand names – same tablet count and milligrams). Here is what you will find: PSE is less expensive in Oregon per milligram than it is in CA. And according to Ken Wells, President of Oregon’s Pharmacy Assoc., the price of PSE DID NOT INCREASE when Oregon enacted its law. This stuff is pure fiction!

(4) As for your argument that meth producers would just have to find “buyers” with insurance. This is a non-issue. Oregon has a substantial prescription drug diversion problem like most states, and “doctor shopping” is one of the main methods used by criminals. In the three years Oregon has had its law, there has not been one documented case of someone illegally obtaining PSE from a doctor. If someone is going to through that hassle they are going to obtain far more lucrative medications such Oxy or Vicodin which earns more money on the black market and doesn’t require someone to extracted the PSE from it before it can be used.

(5) & (6) As for the healthcare costs, I should have quoted the Dept. of Health Services – they said it better than my paraphrasing: “The increase in the cost of prescriptions to the state’s Medicaid program is far out-weighed by the decrease in costs associated with public safety, emergency room visits, and social services.” I absolutely agree that CA is bigger so our cost will be bigger, but so will our savings. As for the uninsured, Oregon checked with the directors of various programs that served the homeless and uninsured and they reported the Oregon law had no impact on their clients. As for the uninsured flooding our emergency rooms – according to Doctor Dan Handel, President of the Oregon chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians, Oregon has none of this anywhere in Oregon. Dr. Handel went wrote in his letter supporting SB 484, “Given the clear relationship between the use of pseudoephedrine and the creation of methamphetamine, and plenty of viable alternatives on the market to use for decongestants, we think that this law in the state of Oregon has had a clear benefit without any compromise to the health of our citizens. We hope that California is successful in the passage of this legislation.”

(7) As we have already established – PSE prices will not increase. In fact, they will probably decrease because of the generic brand and much larger count bottles, which mean fewer trips to the pharmacy than the current 3.6 grams a day and 9 grams in a 30 day period. But let’s assume they jus stay the same. If you get a prescription for PSE – simply pay what you were paying before. Those currently on Medical who get PSE now have to have a prescription for OTC for Medical to pay for it. These folks won’t even notice a change. If you want to use your insurance – that’s your prerogative, but let’s stop perpetuating this co-pay myth.

(8) There is no need to debate the efficacy of PE versus PSE. Pseudoephedrine is NOT and essential medication. PSE doesn’t cure anything. PSE relieves the symptoms of a cold or allergy (nasal or sinus congestion). It does not, by any means, treat the underlying cause of the medical condition nor will it speed up recovery. Essential medications are those that treat illnesses that, if left untreated, will result in serious harm or death. For example, an essential class of medication includes insulin, blood pressure medication or medication to control heart function. These medications are truly essential, if they are not taken, or another viable alternative is not available, that will likely result in serious health consequences and potential death. The Government of Mexico and other Central and South American countries have banned PSE use altogether – clearly they have deemed PSE as nonessential. There are far more substantial prescription medications without the negative side effects of PSE to treat people’s allergies. Oregon doctors found most people had been using PSE for ailments that, once properly diagnosed, resulted in a prescription of medication that worked much better for the patients.

(9) & (11) If you develop a better way to deal with PSE smurfing please lets us all know. The most effective way would be to do what Central and South American countries are doing by banning PSE. However, the next best thing that still allows legitimate access is prescription. Electronic Tracking Systems (ETS) with blocked sales doesn’t work. CVS implemented a block sale feature into its CA integrated database in October of 2008. Within the first hour, CA CVS stores blocked 194 illegal PSE purchases. Within the next 20 days they blocked 9,400 illegal purchases. An examination of 11 random LA area CVS stores revealed they sold 16,000 less grams (87%) in November than they did on October before the block sale system. That’s enough PSE to produce 30 pounds of meth! Now I know what you are thinking – sounds like the system works great Wrong! The smurfers have already adapted to this system and law enforcement follows smurfers everyday from one CVS to another (and Rite Aid which has the same type of system). Law enforcement has access to the database reports that at least half of the data in the database is garbage. The system is easily defeated by using multiple people, using multiple ID, and with employee collusion. A smurfing cell of 18-20 people can obtain enough PSE in a day to make 2 to 4 pounds of meth – and they earn a substantial profit for each box. And there is more proof that ETS don’t work. Kentucky is supposed to be the crown jewel of such a system. You stated they are touting their system across the nation, I believe you mean Appriss (the company that developed MethCheck database system) is peddling its wares because they stand to make a lot of money. In f act, they charge the taxpayers of Kentucky $500,000 for Methcheck’s services. And what are the results? In 2007 Kentucky had 302 meth lab incidences and in 2008 they had 428. So far this year they are on track to pass the 2008 numbers. That’s why Kentucky officers like Dave Gilbert say, “I would urge you and your colleagues to please consider passing legislation similar to Oregon. If not, California will not see a decline in meth labs just as Kentucky has not.” Hardly an endorsement for that system. Research the many news articles in which Kentucky police share their grief. And feel free to call the Kentucky Sate Police – they will confirm the numbers and that the system isn’t decreasing labs. And Kentucky is not alone, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Arkansas have similar systems and very state’s meth labs increased last year – rfer back to the EPIC numbers! Lastly, ETS develop an enormous amounts of leads that police have to track – these investigations are time consuming and costly and usually are not successful. Tennessee has developed 500,000 leads. At a time when police are being cut, do we really want a system that is reactive instead of preventative? The CA BNE (that seizedsmore than half of the meth labs) is currently facing a $20 million reduction to its general fund – that’s more than half of its budget. They say it will close 50 multijurisdictional task forces throughout CA that arrested more the 7,000 people last year and seized many meth labs. Unconscionable!

(10) Let’s face it – no bill would have survived Senate Appropriations in our fiscal environment is it cost the State money. Their analysis agreed, SB 484 will save CA money: (and this is just meth lab related – not meth in gernal)
Prison Sentences $6,156,551
County Jail $1,959,048
Prosecution costs $5,780,000
CLEAN-UP COSTS RESULTING FROM METH LABS
CA Dept. of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) $1,055,098
LAW ENFORCEMENT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH METH PRODUCTION
INVESTIGATIONS (2008)
184 meth labs @ $5,722 $1,052,848
190 dump sites @ $2,282 $433,580
TOTAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH METH LABS $16,437,125
OTHER INCIDENTAL SAVINGS
Training, certification, medical monitoring, storage of evidence samples, destructions, equipment $546,347

There is a documents with all the support facts and figure at this site: http://www.oregondec.org/

(12) You said, “and how many more children have been removed from homes where people USE meth because the Mexican kind is more pure.” Pardon my lack of tact, but what a lame argument. First, this argument assumes that because kids will be endangered in homes where meth is used we should do nothing abut those who are removed from meth lab homes. From which, by the way, once the kids are removed, 40% test positive for meth. As for the Mexican meth being more pure – here are the facts. The Mexicans make meth the same way everyone else does – they just make more. Once meth is converted from meth oil into a hydrochloride it’s very pure – this is where meth starts to dilute as it makes it way through the market. Every time we have implemented precursor controls, there has been a corresponding increase in meth prices and a decrease in meth purity (research the Oregonian article call An Unnecessary Epidemic for details on the studies). That in turn always produces a reduction in meth addiction, meth arrests, ER admissions, and meth related crime. Unfortunately all those trends have reversed themselves and that is what we are again experiencing from the CMEA. This time we have the achilles heal of the problem – there are several ways to make meth and many items can be substituted, but the single, indispensable, precursor is PSE. Effectively control PSE and you effective control meth production. There is nothing left.

(13) Contact the Oregon State Police and they will share with you that the few remaining meth labs they seize are residual labs (nonfunctional boxed labs). They actually have fewer than five function meth labs, or those capable of functioning, are the result of PSE smurfed from neighboring states. That’s still a problem, but from 200+ to less than 5 – that’s impressive!

In conclusion, we are facing the perfect storm: Meth labs are on the upswing (Govt. of Mexico is forcing DTO’s to shift operation back into CA); CA currently has an abundant and readily accessible supply of PSE; law enforcement is being gutted; we have the Consumer Health Care Product Assoc. and Pharma making huge profits off human misery and costing us tax payers more money while they fight good public policy; and we have a minority population who is more concerned about the sniffles than meth labs. This is a recipe for disaster!

[Mac]

Doh! Nothing more from Melissa?

[SB 484 SUPPORTER -- DO THE RIGHT THING]

You are obviously being paid by the industry because you are totally misinformed. First of all, this law will address -- directly -- the growing superlabs we have in California. It works -- look at Oregon -- there are no labs in Oregon. Second, do you know that we spend $16 million dollars a year in California on clean up, investigations & prosecutions in 2008? Third, did you know that the Pharmacial Association supports this legislation (like the DA's office, law enforcement organizations, etc) -- did you know that the cost of prescription PE is UNDER $3 in Oregon? Fourth, did you know that the industory was so concerned with California's proposed legistration that they want an electronic data base networking different retailers? Did you know that this system is currently in place with certain retailers in California (so it is nothing new) and that law enforcement officers who currently use THEIR SYSTEM is claiming that the information in the data base is NOT accurate because smurfers are using false identification documents - recently, they arrested a smurfer with 35 false identification.
DO THE RIGHT THING -- SB 484 DIRECTLY ADDRESSES THE INCREASING METH PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA FROM 2007 TO THE PRESENT.

[Melissa Griffin]

@Mac - I'm in the process of moving residences.

@SB484 - "You are obviously being paid by the industry" - I don't know what industry you are referring to, but I'm being paid by no one but the newspaper.

I'll do my best to answer people's hysterical ramblings when I get a few hours of free time.

[SB 484 SUPPORTER -- DO THE RIGHT THING]

Melissa -- Thank for taking the time to address the issues and facts raised by Christine and SB484 in three short sentences. I see that these issues are not important to you and you really have no response to the facts and issues raised in this debate.

[vansmack]

Just leave my cans of Whipped Cream on the shelves and nobody will get hurt...

[vansmack]

Oh, and SB 484 SUPPORTER - she said she's moving and will get back to you. She doesn't owe you anything - she's not a public figure, she doesn't even have a vote on the bill! She's just a person expressing an opinion on her site that you disagree with, so back off. The sense of entitlement in this world is far surpassing the point of ridiculous....

[SB 484 SUPPORTER -- DO THE RIGHT THING]

Lesson -- don't write about issues that you can not debate in an educated informed manner.

[vansmack]

Good one, Farva. Now I hope she doesn't reply to you.

[Melissa Griffin]

SB 484 died in the Public Safety Committee yesterday.

[vansmack]

http://tiny.cc/h92tl

[Christine]

Kind of . . . it's still on "reconsideration" which provides those members who elected to not vote at the hearing to change their minds. Three voted to support and two were conflicted enough to remain neutral. Don't count your chickens before they hatch!

[Melissa Griffin]

Granting reconsideration status is a matter of courtesy that legislators grant to any bill that fails. Though it does provide a mechanism for a re-vote, it's not an indicator of hope.

[Jake62]

Christine, I have one comment regarding your points in number (9) and (11) above: "… And what are the results? In 2007 Kentucky had 302 meth lab incidences and in 2008 they had 428. So far this year they are on track to pass the 2008 numbers…..And Kentucky is not alone, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Arkansas have similar systems and very state’s meth labs increased last year – rfer back to the EPIC numbers! "

We can agree that an increase in EPIC numbers are a result of more labs found, correct?. But has it occurred to you that more labs are found as a direct result of law enforcement having access to new web-based investigative tools that allows them to very easily track certain individuals?

Better tools for law enforcement = More lab bust and people arrested.
More lab bust and people arrested = Increase in EPIC numbers.