r 20,1993
tn
rejected,
•r voters,
e the vot-
ation dis-
authorize
n't autho-
cts within
ted to the
0 per-stu-
liff said,
that while
of equal-
te is still
mding for
is sharing
nave said
dditional
: two-year
he cost of
d $50 mil
ls 4 inches
iches thick
nds.
: abdomen
to the left
nber of the
. is carried
> make the
it were air-
lected to a
a patient's
en he was
having the
hensive. It
: know ex-
he said he
?t it "when
t going to
■ton proba-
■ed a week
Opinion
iednesday, January 20,1993
The Battalion
Page 13
Editorials
Power to the people
Keep election-year enthusiasm
Upjohn Co. pregnant with profit
Birth control costs low-income women, taxpayers
:heduling
d have to
:essary to
?se down
ie various
vehicular
rrossing
ites will
Like it or not, Bill Clinton is presi-
Jait. Last fall, over 80 percent of all
jgistered voters cast their ballots,
lid the majority voted for change.
Clinton will be inaugurated to-
lay, and supporters affiliated with
py political party can either fall
sleep for the next four years or rise
'action. Regardless, the political
jiocess will continue no matter who
I olds the office. The people's in-
ilvement in politics, however, will
itimately determine the outcome
jfthe next four years.
Republicans and Perot supporters
lould not sit in the dark and wait
|rthe Democrats to fall from the
feed presidential seat in order to
2ttheir policies enforced. Similar-
; the Democrats cannot afford to
row too comfortable in office; the
ibhas just begun.
The American people wanted
some sort of change, and despite in
dividual voter's opinions regarding
the election results, change is still in
the people's hands.
The final bell hasn't sounded yet;
the policies of the next four years
have not been enacted. Policies are
influenced by the voice of the
American people and do not de
pend solely upon Congress or presi
dential appointees.
It is time to take a stand and ei
ther support or criticize current na
tional, state and local elected offi
cials and their policies. Whether
people join action groups or write
letters to Congressmen, the result is
still change. To do anything less
than get involved is to surrender
politics to the wind.
Change does not happen without
action, nor does it end with an elec
tion. Now is the time to act.
JOHN
SCROGGS
Columnist
D epo-Provera — Remember that
name. It is a new contracep
tive developed by the Upjohn
Co. Of course, the pharmaceutical
company originally released the drug
for approval in the United States for
treatment of kidney and uterine can
cer, until they found out that the drug
also prevents pregnancies — side ef
fects can be so fun! Anyway, on Oct.
29,1992, the Food and Drug Adminis
tration gave its approval for the drug
to be sold as a contraceptive.
Depo-Provera is a synthetic copy of
the female hormone progesterone. A
150 milligram dose injected into the
arm or buttock of a woman every three months has proven
to be more than 99 percent effective in preventing
pregnancy.
Of course, a needle is not the only thing Upjohn will be
sticking women with! Upjohn is drastically increasing the
price of Depo-Provera now that they have moved it into the
birth-control market.
Does the phrase "price-gouging" mean anything to this
pharmaceutical giant? Jeri Rasmussen, executive director
of the Midwest Health Center for Women, is quoted by the
Associated Press as having said that Upjohn raised the
price of the drug to cash in on women looking for a new
method of birth control. She continued by saying that her
clinic now has to pay $34 a shot — the same shot that
before FDA's second approval only cost $12. After doing a
little math, we discover a $22 increase. Pure profit. Sounds
like gouging to me.
The official statement by the Upjohn Co. is, of course,
that the increase was to help cover the cost of research and
development for the product. Dr. Michael Policar, vice
president of medical affairs for Planned Parenthood, said
that Depo-Provera was researched decades ago. According
to Dr. Policar, Upjohn could not justify such a remarkable
increase. Numerous other members of the medical
community expressed outrage at the gall of the Upjohn Co.
Now consider one more thing — exclusive sales rights
for three years. Yep, only Upjohn can use — or abuse —
this new wonder drug for three full years.
The high success rate and the low maintenance method
of taking the contraceptive make it ideal for many young,
low-income women. The new price, however, makes it less
than ideal. Yet, women using Depo-Provera won't be the
only ones stung by this little bee.
Taxpayers may also feel o sting. Minnesota, for
example, reimburses the cost for women on medical
assistance. The reimbursement rate skyrocketed from
$10.95 a dose to $31 a dose when Upjohn became aware of
the drug's potential. This will obviously come directly out
of the Minnesota taxpayer's pocket.
A little closer to home, or rather to your wallet, the
federal government will also help pay for Depo-Provera
through the Title X program, a federal grant designed to
assist family planning agencies. The government has yet to
set a reimbursement rate, but federal government means
federal taxes.
Looks like all of us are getting "injected in the buttock"
by Upjohn's decision to make more money.
The true pain, though, will be experienced by young
women who are socio-economically disadvantaged but are
still unable to qualify for federal or state assistance. They
are the people who will have to come up with nearly a 200
percent increase.
So, the facts are 1) Upjohn Co. is the only manufacturer
of the only injectable contraceptive that is more than 99
percent effective, 2) Upjohn will be in total control of this
market for at least three years, and 3) the president of the
Upjohn Co. needs a little extra cash to remodel his office
suite. I realize that this country was founded on a belief in
capitalism and free market. I also understand that Upjohn
has complete regulatory economic freedom. What is
beyond my ability to comprehend is why Upjohn, a very
powerful and affluent company, feels the need to do what
is unnecessary for its survival and is so obviously
unethical.
Is there any reason beyond pure greed that Upjohn
raised the price from an average of $12 per injection to a
steep $34? Greed, although perfectly legal, seems to be
such a petty emotion for a seemingly upstanding national
leader in pharmaceutical needs. It's just a thought.
Scroggs is a senior English and philosophy major.
Financial aid crunch
Minority students hit hardest
; vice presi-
:il.
h was not
m. Wednes-
tM United
College Sta-
, memorials
:ark Tribute
? Director's
exas A&M
ition, Texas
The all-too-familiar monster of
sing tuition costs coupled with
late budget cuts and a struggling
inandal aid system is raising its
i§ly head once again. This time,
hnority students appear to be the
timary victims.
hits annual report, the American
ouncil on Education, consisting of
,500 colleges and universities,
famed Congress and the in-coming
^ministration that minority access
) higher education is in grave dan-
ir. Unless America takes immedi-
le action, the entire country will
ndoubtedly follow the lead of Cali-
imia and New York, where budget
unches and marked declines in
minority enrollment have occurred
mulatneously
Among President-elect Bill Clin-
)n's many proposals is the creation
a National Service Trust whereby
Indents will be allowed to borrow
aoney for education costs and re-
ay their debt either through public
service or
payroll c
iken. Thi
deduction when
ittle
ve and
with
,
ED
I
I
•1736
place the current federal aid pro
gram which has suffered greatly
From surprisingly high numbers of
students who clefault on their loans.
It is time for that change, and
who better to provide that than the
man whose entire election cam
paign hinged on the promise of
change? Clinton's ideas are innova
tive, and, properly instigated, the
National Service Trust has the po
tential to be a very successful feder
al aid program.
With current trends indicating
that today's kindergarten students
will have to cough up $75,000 for a
four year degree, all but a fortunate
few students — minority or other
wise — face the growing threat that
the cost of education will become
insurmountable. We must enact
and support new and better meth
ods of slaying this dragon before it's
too late.
bowl coverage,
apen letter to NBC
I want to express my disappointment
% your coverage of the 1993 Mobil
Bowl. I was present at the game
U witnessed the lack of
Portsmanship demonstrated by
•'embers of the camera crew.
During the halftime performance of
ie Texas Aggie Band, the on-field crew
e peatedly disrupted the marching
Items of the band. The Aggie Band
^precision marching unit whose
: °rmations are close with no space
liable between members for one
Itionary person, much less for three
•ftiera crew members, a large
^vision camera, and the associated
fnera cables.
Close-up shots of the band members
J nbe acquired from the edge of the
Nation rather than the middle of the
formation. This action was disruptive
to the band as well as distracting to the
audience in the stands.
Nevertheless, although displeased, I
gave the benefit of the doubt to the
crew during the activity, assuming they
were just using poor judgment to get a
good shot of the band.
Their motives were all too clear a
few moments later. Your cameraman
headed off the field directly over to the
Notre Dame mascot and shared a
triumphant "high five" salute in
obvious celebration of the disruption of
the halftime performance of the Aggie
Band.
The unprofessionalism of this
display would be considered extreme at
the local network level much less from
the national crew.
I also would like to point out that the
Southwest Conference team is the host
team of the Mobil Cotton Bowl —
something your network seems to have
forgotten. Both teams — and bands —
should be treated with respect and
courtesy. Don't you agree?
I have programmed NBC off both of
my television sets at home and will
encourage others to do the same.
Joyce Lynn Canion
Class of ‘81
Change involves
socks, secretaries
It's time for change. And since Bill
Clinton said this, I think we should
expect him to begin this process.
But I'm sure he'll come up with one
of his signature lines, like the one that
helped him through what has now
gone down in the annals of history as
"Bill the pothead in England" — where
he claimed to have smoked marijuana
but had done so after listening to a
Judas Priest album for 16 hours
straight. Thus he claimed we should
never elect Judas Priest to the White
House, though Clinton is still the right
man.
So I'm confident Clinton will come
up with something like, "Well, I said,
'It's time for change,' but I was actually
telling A1 to change his socks. He
didn't want to because he wanted to
conserve the water that would be used
to wash his socks, that crazy earth
lover."
Then soon after, Ross Perot will go
on "Larry King Live" and announce,
"When I said 'It's time for change/ I
meant change for everyone. Everyone
should change his or her socks — not
just A1 Gore."
Then we will hear from Dan Quayle:
"I don't wear socks. Elect me back."
If I am to believe that Clinton is
really going to change things, he should
start with the oath. I happen to know
from private sources — Ross Perot —
that one section of the oath specifically
orders the harassment of weddings
involving the families of presidential
candidates who are running simply for
the sake of publicity. Even with these
few good qualities, I still believe the
oath should be changed.
One thing that I feel is necessary is
that we remove Hillary Clinton from
the stage when Bill Clinton is taking the
oath. I don't want him mistakenly to
think that this oath has to be followed
with the same dedication as the oath
taken during the marriage ceremony.
And we all know how well that one has
stood up.
Next thing, let's make the £>ath more
specific. I think we give presidents far
too much credit for their intelligence. I
mean, former President Bush chose Dan
Quayle to as second in command —
and Reagan chose Bush.
I would also like Clinton to change
the presidential parade. The parades
have gotten very boring. Last time we
had to watch Bush and Quayle,
jumping in and out our their limousine
in order to shake hands with the crowd.
We don't want to see this again, Bill.
Actually we want to see the secretaries
with whom you'll be fooling around
during the next four years.
Even if those secretaries are male,
put them out there!
We want change.
John Prashant
Class of '94
Editorials appearing in Trie Battalion reflect Ihe views of the
editorial board only They do not represent, in any way, the
opinions of other BattaBon staff members, the Texas A&M
student body, regents, administraUon, faculty or staff.
Columns, guest columns, and Mail Cali items express the
opinions of the authors only.
Tlie Battalion encourages letters to the editor and wfll print
as many as space allows in the Mail Call section Letters
must be 300 words or less and include the author's name,
class, and phone number.
Due to space restrictions, guest columns wiB not be
accepted unless the author contacts the opinion page for
prior approval before submitting columns.
We reserve the right to edit tetters for length, style, and
accuracy.
Letters should be addressed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald /Mail stop 1111
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843
r , 1993
1
an-
ould
Df its
bout
ear-
em-
itegy
n its
ould
yees
}, no
;ht.
;sary
ness
0s,"
•ong
jally
on
esti-
:e of
ap-
re-
£
ith
se-
the
t on
it to
ver-
ha~
any
een
jad-
the
the
»rsi-
in-
ite-
she
nal
are
ant
t
ent
3n.
tu-
bnt
iut
in.
ed
os
of
ve
:a-
se-
he
is,
gi-
it-
l a
P-
ts,
n-
ur
:a-
n-
}-
at