AdvancePCS and "trade secrets": comments from some STRS retiree court observers
Dennis and Nancy,
I too was in court with the two of you last year and I agree Jim Petro's attorney did little to nothing to help our plight with AdvancedPCS.
I remember STRS taking no action on the Charter Schools that had not paid their employer and employee contribution and went out of business and STRS did nothing. I believe I read that Steve Mitchell got credit for a change that the employer contribution is now taken at the State Department of Education level. I disagree with that statement as Richard Stearns and I both testified on separate occasions in front of the Senate Education Committee for that change to be made. Never did I see STRS at the Senate testifying for these deductions to be made. I also activated the members of ORTA to write letters after I had done the math on the unpaid contributions which were published in an ORTA Quarterly. I did the documentation after going through hours of Auditor Petro's audits found on the web.
I ask you where is STRS in leading the charge on these matters? Where are our governments officials in due diligence?
Cathy Burner
10/11/05
Nancy, I agree with what you have written. I recall sitting there with you a year ago in court listening to the lawyer representing AdvancePCS argue that the rebate information was a "trade secret" and I also recall the lawyer representing STRS (from Jim Petro's office) not objecting to that argument. This bothers me today, given the New York decision about AdvancePCS being involved in kickbacks and withholding rebates from their customers. STRS, in my opinion, should have been arguing for full and open disclosure by AdvancePCS.
Dennis Leone
10/11/05
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:45 AM
Subject: Fwd: Multiple employers FORCE more transparency from the PBM's
Dr. Asbury and Ms. Knoesel:
An article about 52 businesses that are fighting for more of a PBM's rebates and for greater truth and disclosure from PBMs follows. STRS must fight actively for such disclosure and greater discounts to protect the Health Care Stabilization funds for current and future STRS members. AdvancePCS's (Caremark) argument that to divulge such is a "trade secret" is nonsense to protect Caremark's profit and such secrecy does not promote competition--in fact it prohibits open competition based on the facts of the drug company discounts (rebates).
Nancy B. Hamant, Legislative Chair
Warren County RTA
I too was in court with the two of you last year and I agree Jim Petro's attorney did little to nothing to help our plight with AdvancedPCS.
I remember STRS taking no action on the Charter Schools that had not paid their employer and employee contribution and went out of business and STRS did nothing. I believe I read that Steve Mitchell got credit for a change that the employer contribution is now taken at the State Department of Education level. I disagree with that statement as Richard Stearns and I both testified on separate occasions in front of the Senate Education Committee for that change to be made. Never did I see STRS at the Senate testifying for these deductions to be made. I also activated the members of ORTA to write letters after I had done the math on the unpaid contributions which were published in an ORTA Quarterly. I did the documentation after going through hours of Auditor Petro's audits found on the web.
I ask you where is STRS in leading the charge on these matters? Where are our governments officials in due diligence?
Cathy Burner
10/11/05
Nancy, I agree with what you have written. I recall sitting there with you a year ago in court listening to the lawyer representing AdvancePCS argue that the rebate information was a "trade secret" and I also recall the lawyer representing STRS (from Jim Petro's office) not objecting to that argument. This bothers me today, given the New York decision about AdvancePCS being involved in kickbacks and withholding rebates from their customers. STRS, in my opinion, should have been arguing for full and open disclosure by AdvancePCS.
Dennis Leone
10/11/05
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:45 AM
Subject: Fwd: Multiple employers FORCE more transparency from the PBM's
Dr. Asbury and Ms. Knoesel:
An article about 52 businesses that are fighting for more of a PBM's rebates and for greater truth and disclosure from PBMs follows. STRS must fight actively for such disclosure and greater discounts to protect the Health Care Stabilization funds for current and future STRS members. AdvancePCS's (Caremark) argument that to divulge such is a "trade secret" is nonsense to protect Caremark's profit and such secrecy does not promote competition--in fact it prohibits open competition based on the facts of the drug company discounts (rebates).
Nancy B. Hamant, Legislative Chair
Warren County RTA
posted by Kathie Bracy at 10:48 AM
<< Home