Governor Patrick to Reconsider Massachusetts Code of Conduct
A recent article discussed the approach Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has taken for engaging business and economic development in his state. The article illustrated his and the state’s “choppy history with business development.” For example, Evergreen Solar Inc., a solar-panel manufacturer that the Patrick administration promised $58 million in state aid, decided to shift manufacturing jobs to China and close a new plant at Devens.
Spokeswoman Kimberly Haberlin noted that Governor Patrick and many other members of his administration are engaging in a number of meetings designed to “bring more jobs, more business investment, and more tourism dollars home to the commonwealth.”
However, the article noted that the Governor seems to be sending “mixed messages” to various industries about bringing business to Massachusetts. For example, in 2008, Patrick pushed through a $1 billion Life Sciences Initiative aimed at boosting the Massachusetts biotechnology industry. “He quickly jetted off for San Diego to attend the annual Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) conference and promote the new law.”
But he, “then-House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, and Senate President Therese Murray received a rocky reception because of a separate health care cost-control bill pushed by Murray and later signed into law by Patrick.” The bill, known as the Massachusetts Code of Conduct, “included a ban on gifts of any kind from pharmaceutical manufacturers to doctors, their family members, or their employees.
“That prompted the strange juxtaposition of Patrick arriving at the conference to participate in an industry panel discussion, and shortly be named BIO’s “Governor of the Year,” while BIO leaders were still cleaning their ink-stained hands after writing letters complaining to members of his delegation.”
BIO itself said to DiMasi “the gift-ban provision threatens research and treatment for patients in the commonwealth.” And GlaxoSmithKline accused the Massachusetts political establishment of harboring “a strong anti-biopharmaceutical streak.”
Consequently, the article noted how last fall, “Patrick made two fresh points on the subject during his re-election campaign. He said the ban was never intended to extend to the state’s medical device industry, and thus should be narrowed.”
He also said the “state pharmaceutical ban itself was ripe for repeal or modification, since the Obama administration’s federal health care overhaul included superseding language.” According to a spokesman, “the Department of Public Health, which oversees these regulations, is currently reviewing the ways in which Massachusetts regulations are impacted by federal law in order to determine whether there are any additional steps that need to be taken.” A study done by MIT showed that the Code of Conduct is having significantly negative effects on patient care and medical innovation.
Ultimately, with more and more companies picking up and leaving Massachusetts, and new businesses and other industries deciding to set up their offices in other states, it is becoming clearer to some that the Code of Conduct must go. With the Sunshine Act set to take place in 2013, the reporting requirements under the code will be unnecessary and duplicative. Accordingly, Governor Patrick would be doing a service to the patients, health care practitioners, and entrepreneurs of Massachusetts by urging his legislature to repeal the Code of Conduct.