A bill introduced in Minnesota that would effectively nullify some Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules that prevent treatments from being used by terminally ill patients.
Introduced by State Sen. Branden Petersen, S. F. No. 100 (SF100) is the latest pushback against the FDA and their controversial methodology of approving drugs for mass consumption.
Under SF100, a patient is eligible for experimental drugs or procedures not yet approved by federal regulators if they suffer from a terminal illness defined as having no cure.
Health care providers who prescribe these drugs to patients are shielded from liability under SF100.
At the same time, insurance companies are not required to cover the costs associated with purchasing the drug.
The bill states that “a health-related licensing board shall not revoke a license, fail to renew a license, or take any other disciplinary action against a licensee solely based on the licensee providing a prescription or recommendation, or providing treatment to an eligible patient that involves the use of an investigational drug, biological product, or device.”
In addition, SF100 states that “any official, employee, or agent of the state of Minnesota who attempts to block or who blocks access of an eligible patient to an investigational drug, biological product, or device shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and sentenced to imprisonment for not more than six months, payment of a fine of not more than $2,500, or both.”
Sf100 has been referred to the Health, Human Services and Housing Committee.
This legislation makes up part of a greater trend promoting medical freedom sweeping the nation. During this most recent November election, Arizona residents approved Prop. 303, known as the Arizona Terminal Patients’ Right to Try Referendum. The proposition allows investigational drugs, biological products or devices to be made available to eligible terminally ill patients, not permitted under the FDA.
Although these laws only address one small aspect of FDA regulation, they provide us with a clear model demonstrating how to nullify federal statutes that violate the Constitution. The strategy narrows the influence of nullification to limited aspects of the law itself. The strategy works because it focuses on ending specific federal policies large numbers of Americans from across the political spectrum oppose.
Dying dying people should not be deprived of their right to any means that might ease their pain or keep them alive, and it is extremely difficult for opponents to argue that dying people should be forced to use only drugs approved of by bureaucrats who are incapable of empathizing with their possible suffering.
In Louisiana, for example, the law received 80 percent approval, according to one survey. In three of the states that passed “Right to Try” laws, not a single politician voted nay. In Michigan, the entire state House voted yea with no abstentions, while only two senators voted against it.
The cumbersome bureaucratic process deployed by the FDA makes Right to Try laws necessary. It can take more than a decade and a billion dollars to get new medications on the market, according to Lucy Caldwell, communications director for the Goldwater Institute.
Mikaela Knapp provides a compelling real-life example.
According to a World Net Daily report when Knapp was diagnosed with kidney cancer, she and her husband, Keith, launched a social media campaign to lobby drug firms and the FDA to give her access to a new gene therapy. Their efforts gained national attention and generated 200,000 signatures on a petition at Change.org but failed to win access to the treatment. The 25-year-old newlywed died April 24.
The ugly truth is she died waiting for somebody’s permission that never came.
This serves as yet another example of failure in Washington D.C. The FDA shows no inclination to change its rules, and Congress has not made any move to loosen restrictions, despite countless stories like Knapp’s The courts haven’t helped either. In 2003, a federal judge ruled that terminally ill people do not have a right to access to investigational medicine. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider an appeal on that ruling.
The fact that federal regulatory agencies and federal courts refuse to show compassion for terminally ill patients make state Right to Try bills crucial. SF100 would bypass stubborn federal bureaucrats and open give hope to those suffering from terminal illness.
For Minnesota: Support this bill by following all the action steps at THIS LINK
For other states: Take action to support this legislation in your state at this link.
- Missouri Bill Would Prohibit Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases - March 1, 2024
- To the Governor: Louisiana Passes Permitless Concealed Carry - February 29, 2024
- To the Governor: Utah Bill Would Prohibit Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases - February 29, 2024