(UPDATE2: It’s now officially on the agenda. This is from Senator Shumlin’s statement:

(UPDATE: Senate President Pro Tem Shumlin and Speaker Smith will be holding a press conference on their priorities for the rest of the legislative session, and GMD has just received word that it will likely include a decision to move quickly on marriage equality. If such an effort is passed into law, Vermont would become the first state to recognize same-sex marriages without being compelled by a court. Details if and when they materialize.)

I want to start by explaining that marriage is something that is, personally, an abstraction.  I get that people get married.  I get why they get married.  There are some very specific practical reasons for it, but those to me are more a matter of functional benefit than any emotional tie to it.

I could spend days trying to figure out why I view it so differently from most people I know, but I know that the way my mind works, I view all sorts of things differently from most people I know, but that’s not entirely relevant here.

This is what’s relevant here (hat tip myDD):

In Vermont, we’ve had civil unions for nearly a decade now.  The battle over them was intense, nasty and bitter.  There were bumper stickers with obscene comments about a particular sex act that were frequently visible.  People completely freaked out about the sanctity of marriage.  Some groups went around the area sponsoring anti-gay slide-shows talking about the dangers of homosexuality.  

In 2007 & 2008, we had hearings around the state on same-sex marriage (I love blogged one of those here).  The comments were nearly unanimous in support of it.  

I watched most of the debate in Massachusetts over same-sex marriage during their constitutional convention over the matter.  It was a fascinating shift– first with people opposing all forms of recognition of same-sex couples, and very quickly changing to civil unions as being the conservative alternative to full marriage and then just leaving it at full marriage.  In Vermont, those opposed to same-sex marriage are still trying very hard to bar the door.  As was reported in Green Mountain Daily:

The party line then (emphasis added):

Family groups believe Vermont’s “civil unions” law will have a negative impact on the state and may be used to undermine marriage laws across the country.
    Janet Parshall, chief spokeswoman for the Family Research Council, decried the lawmakers’ action.
    “This is ‘gay marriage’ in everything but name, and it is a direct assault on society’s most essential institution,” Parshall said.

The party line now:

“It appears that, from their side,” said (Stephen) Cable (President of the “Center for American Cultural Renewal” in Rutland), “it is a battle of semantics, and being in a position of being more accepted in terms of the word ‘marriage.’ From our perspective, ‘marriage’ is drastically different. The word marriage,” he said, “implies, you know, it implies [the] opposite sex can form a union. So it’s very, very different from our perspective.”

I get a bit complacent about all this sometimes.  I don’t generally come out to people really, because it doesn’t occur to me that they don’t know I’m a lesbian.  I reference my partner by name in casual conversation so anyone who doesn’t know will figure it out pretty quickly, but I rarely use language to describe our relationship that anyone else wouldn’t use.  I.e., I refer to our anniversary, our house, etc.  

It doesn’t really occur to me to approach this any different way.

And yes, there are political opportunists who attack homosexuality, and there is occasionally harassment in Vermont and governor Douglas actually used the threat of same-sex marriage as part of his fundraising material.  

But still, I feel like, you know these people are just nuts and I think most people get that they’re nuts.

Then I pull up Pam’s House Blend and read that a Spanish jury acquitted a man of murder.  What was his crime?  Killing two gay men.  How did he kill them?  He stabbed them 57 times, looted their apartment to make it look like a robbery and then set the place ablaze.

His defense?  Gay panic.

I look at that video above from the courage campaign and I look at this story and I just don’t even know what to say or do about it.  It’s just terrifying to me.

It’s not like I’ve never been threatened by homophobes before.  I have (though not in a long time).  But I just think… this doesn’t make any sense.  It’s so completely insane to me and I just look at this and I just want to scream out “what the hell is wrong with you people?”

But that’s not just about that murder or that jury.  That’s really about Proposition 8 and the groups that oppose same-sex marriage in Vermont, and about anyone who thinks that they should be enforcing their anti-gay prejudices through the law.  

It’s really about what, to me, is the simplicity of this issue: we are human beings, like anyone else, and we deserve to be treated no better or worse than anyone else as a result of our sexual orientation.

This seems like it should be simple, but it’s also pretty damned clear that not everyone gets it.

And I honestly don’t know what to do other than to just present a real and true face of humanity to these people and hope for the best.

( – promoted by odum)

The Amazing Adventures of Political Jim; Fighting to preserve his political career and promote political amnesia.

You can see Chapter 1 here: http://tinyurl.com/cyuqk9

Join the Facebook group: http://tinyurl.com/dzo82y (There is a rumor I'll where my pants like Jim Douglas if the group gets big enough)

What is not a joke is Jim Douglas' double-speak, hypocrisy, and just plain old bad management of Vermont.

Want to help and have some fun? Get started:

Read the comic, invite some friends to the facebook group, add to the “unfunny” list, vote in the poll and don't let Douglas have an inch.

The UNFUNNY parts of Jim Douglas:

– Is a stooge for Vermont Yankee
– Thinks it is “not time” for Marriage Equality
– Proposes joke budgets with fake accounting example: leasing the lottery
– Loves Sarah Palin, John McCain, and GW Bush
– Think McDonald's jobs are the best Vermont can do
– Raises TONS of out-of-state corporate money
– Never stops campaigning but thinks it is “perverse” when other start planning

More UNFUNNY below the fold and if you have another UNFUNNY please add it to the list!

– Thinks stealing $40 million from teachers retirement is a good idea
– Puts politics before policy when it comes to most issues but especially sexual predators
– Thinks Jim=Jobs except Vermont has higher unemployment now than when he was elected
– Spends $1,000,000 a year of taxpayer money to help him deceive Vermonters
– Raises “fees” instead of taxes to keep his “no new taxes” pledge
– First thinks it is OK for state workers to work in buildings making them sick
– Then gives a contract to a mobile office company who just happens to be a huge campaign donor
– Would rather bailout companies in Louisiana than protect Vermonters
– Never said BOO about the Iraq war to GW Bush
– Thinks Vermont can’t do anything at all to help save polar bears
– Hates Wind for some yet still unexplained reason
– Loves cutting ribbons and taking credit for others good works
– Has politically appointed State Workers run his campaign
– Appoints his campaign workers as State Commissioners regardless of qualifications
– Loved staying in the Lincoln bedroom at the White House with GWB
– Has “undocumented workers” on his family farm which isn’t so bad if he wasn’t such a giant hypocrite about it
– Was “Nixon’s Man on Campus” while attending college
– Has questioned if segregation ever existed

 Loading ...

Just a quick note to say goodbye to friends of Green Mountain Daily as I turn my attention back to business.  I have a humble little start up company, Green Mountain Kitty Litter, that will need at least 60 hours/week to make successful.

It's been a good run for about two years and I'll have to say I found Green Mountain Daily to be a great community and an enlightening place to learn the ins and outs of Vermont politics.  

As my path turns from GMD to GMKL, I tip my hat to all and bid everyone an appreciative farewell.

Respectfully submitted,

Nate Freeman

NateFreeman@gmail.com 

From Green Mountain Daily

Free Press reporter Terri Hallenbeck at the Free Press blog:

Some post-Town Meeting Day thoughts:

– Democrats have come in third in the last two big Vermont races – for governor and mayor of Burlington.

“The last two big Vermont races.” Over a time frame spanning Town Meeting Day to last November’s election.

Of course, within that time frame, there were a few other elections too. Just not “big” ones, like mayor of Burlington. US Congress (won by a Democrat who didn’t even face a serious challenge), Secretary of State (won by a Democrat in a blowout), Attorney General (won by a Democrat in a blowout), Treasurer (won by a Democrat in a blowout), Auditor (won by a Democrat in a blowout) and Lieutenant Governor (where the Democrat came in second).

So these weren’t “big” elections, y’see. Not like mayor of Burlington. And Governor – well, that wouldn’t be a “big” election either, except that the Democrat came in third by 200 votes. That makes it major, y’see, because it supports Hallenbeck’s preconceived point.

I’m sorry, but so many adjectives come to mind, they’re all getting jammed up in my brain, leaving me slack-jawed. Maybe this is just an early April Fool’s post…?

Or maybe she meant to say Democrats have come in third in the last two big Vermont races which they came in third in.

I mean, there is just no other way to salvage such a naked absurdism.

Healthcare is a major issue in our communities, but we believe that if Vermonters work together we can change the system and the way we think about the issue.

The Workers’ Center has been organizing for months, trying to change what is politically possible in Vermont and declare “Healthcare is a Human Right.”  We have held well-attended hearings all over Vermont, where  folks have shared their horror stories about a system that so leaves so many people behind.

.

We hope the campaign will reach a new high point on May 1, outside the State House, when we hold our “call in sick rally” in Montpelier.

The Workers’ Center is asking as many people as possible to sign up to get 10 signatures on a petition that says “I’ll Be There on May 1st” for Healthcare is a Human Right.”

For more information please visit: http://workerscenter.org/node/37

( – promoted by odum)

…using the Obama listserv to scout out supporters.

This was an email sent out by Jason Powell to UVM Students for Obama & Vermonters for Obama:

——————–

Hello UVM for Obama!

Some of you may remember me from the campaign, my name is Jason Powell and I’m contacting you with what I personally think is some exciting news: A great Democrat for Governor in Vermont in 2010 – Secretary of State Deb Markowitz www.debforvermont.com.

For over 10 years as Secretary of State, Deb has been running her office with a sense of accountability and responsibility that has served Vermont well (and reminds me a bit of the way our President operates). This is just part of the reason why I’m proudly supporting her, and helping to organize her exploratory campaign for Governor.

We all helped accomplish a tremendous national victory this past November. However, there is still much to accomplish at the state and local level here in Vermont. Please take a minute to visit Deb’s website at www.debforvermont.com, learn a little about who she is (if you don’t know already!), and sign-up to be a part of this growing organization. As we all saw in 2008, change begins at the local level – so let’s get started now!

Oh, and one more thing – you can email Deb directly with advice or support through her website, or at debmarkowitz@gmail.com

Thanks for your time. I hope we can work together again.

Best,

Jason Powell

———————————–

While it excites me to see Democrats organizing early, using other candidates listserv’s for your own work has always bothered me.  But maybe that’s just a pet peeve of mine.

The Vermont towns, which have a combined population of roughly 55,000, decided to build their own network after failing to convince local phone and cable companies to extend the reach of their services. They partnered with ValleyNet Inc., a local nonprofit group, which in turn hired Mr. Nulty to manage the project. Mr. Nulty, who has done stints at the World Bank and in venture capital and served as chief economist for the Senate Commerce Committee in the late 1970s, has a track record in municipal telecom, having set up a high-speed network for the city of Burlington that went live in 2006.

(The Broadband Hot Potato, Wall Street Journal, 03/04/09)

Overall it seems to be a good article, but I suspect it’s only because the WSJ believes this to be a failing project … I’ll still place my bets on a successful outcome.

Has anyone on the VPIRG staff passed a semester course in nuclear reactor design as I did in 1957, at Columbia University, operated or directed the operation of a reactor, held uranium in their hands, performed work in a radiation field, or know how to design shielding for radiation? Who amongst you has book above your desk from which you can calculate the decay of fission products? Who amongst you would believe a physics textbook?

I am a “cowboy.” That is a term in the nuclear power industry that refers to those of us that pioneered reactors. I assembled my first nuclear reactor within one year of graduating from Columbia University in 1957. Jim Day, another engineer, and I were handed the drawings and informed that we had been selected to put the S3G reactor together. That reactor was a new design by the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory of General Electric. The design had never before been assembled. We had to write the assembly procedures. Admiral Rickover interviewed me, standing on top of the reactor, while I supervised the insertion of a fuel assembly. The reactor vessel was not sealed and had been filled with water. Its reactivity was increasing while the fuel was lowered. I was able to calm the nervousness of some workers by being able to talk to Dr. Luce, the reactor core design physicist who was plotting the inverse of neutron multiplication in the core as it assembled. I understood the chart and could say that it was safe. That reactor ran until the early 1990s.

I repeated that assembly three times while assembling the two S4G reactors in the USS Triton, non-instrumented versions of the prototype S3G, including the disassembly and reassembly of one of the reactors. After assembling the two reactors, I directed one shift of the first simultaneous operation of two reactors, in a wooden shack over top of the reactors. The testing ended with switching off the cooling for each reactor at full power.

Following that work, in 1959, I was assigned responsibility for coordinating nuclear work in the shipyard of Electric Boat.

My first task was assembly of the reactor in the USS George Washington, the first vessel that could fire ballistic missiles from underwater. By pre-assembling the S5W reactor head and the control drive mechanisms in a clean room prior to loading the fuel and assembling the reactor, I reduced the time to assemble the reactor from six to two weeks and delivery of the ship by the same four weeks and reduced the reactor assembly cost by fifty percent. Estimated savings to the taxpayers was 19,879 man-hours for each ship of that class, including shift and overtime premiums but not overhead. The last time I read the procedures I had written for the S5W reactor assembly, they were a chapter in a NavShips Manual. Following that assembly, I taught the technique to representatives of the Navy’s Bureau of Ships and the Portsmouth Naval, Newport News, Pascagoula and Mare Island shipyards. This technique was used to assemble all ships of that class of vessels, and then some.

I assembled the USS George Washington reactor and reactors like that one in the USS Patrick Henry and the USS Scorpion and an S1C reactor in the USS Tullibee in a twelve-month span of time. During one of those assemblies, I trained the lead Rolls Royce engineer for the assembly of the reactor in HMS Dreadnaught, England’s first nuclear submarine. Later after I had been senior engineer for the refueling of the USS Skate, an S4W reactor, I taught a course to representatives of the English Admiralty, Vickers-Armstrong and Rolls Royce in refueling techniques. All told, I had on the job, hands-on, de facto custody of nine reactor cores.

Westinghouse contracted my services from Electric Boat to engineer the disassembly of a steam generator from the S1W reactor at the National Reactor Testing Station, west of Idaho Falls. That reactor was the first reactor built to produce power. After spending three days, plotting the radiation levels surrounding the generator to determine where it could be approached, a lead bonder, from A.O. Smith, and I draped it with three and one half tons of lead. It was then moved to an Expended Core Facility and taken apart. No worker received more than the allowed 300 mrem of radiation while disassembling with the exception of one grinder for whom permission was received for twice the allowed weekly exposure, which he received in a little over two minutes. Eight roentgen fields were measured at the face of the inlet tube sheet. I designed the shielding to reduce the radiation to acceptable working levels. While in Idaho, I assisted in the replacement of a fuel cell in the S1W reactor.

Background radiation at the Idaho site measured as high a five milli-roentgens from atmospheric bomb testing in Nevada and the testing of a proposed nuclear airplane engine at a site to the north of where I worked. Sorry about the use of the term roentgen but I am old school. There are a myriad of other tasks I performed involving radiation, contamination, decontamination and the handling of spent and unspent reactor fuel.

Three of the reactors of submarines in the shipyard during the time that I worked there are permanently disappearing into the mud on the bottom of the ocean. Two were the results of accidents and one, without any fuel, was disposed there. To date, neither the U.S. Navy personnel nor independent researchers have reported any release of the contents or other harm to the environment. The U.S. military does lots of things that they do not talk about. I do not know whether independent researchers have investigated the sites or the results if they have. I left the industry in 1969.

Mud is self-encapsulating waste. There is a vast, deep amount on the bottoms of the oceans; far from human inhabited places. As time goes on, the mud deepens until the rock on which it sets sub ducts under a continent. What’s in the mud is sealed from most living things for geological lengths of time. Only a means of inserting our worst wastes is needed.

About 1964, Westinghouse General Electric and Combustion Engineering Corporations were initiating efforts to market the nuclear experience they had obtained from submarine propulsion to the electric utility industry. I concluded that the turnkey style of contracting and subcontracting was not the way to build nuclear reactors because authority and responsibility are too widely distributed. My experience was that very tight organization was the most efficient, responsible and safe way to construct and operate nuclear power plants. That belief has not changed.

Do not conclude, from what is written above, that I had no realization of the danger of that with which I was working. World War II was my childhood. I remember exactly where I was when it was announced that Pearl Harbor was attacked and when Hiroshima was destroyed. I grew up with buckets of sand in every room of my home with which to extinguish incendiary bombs. War over energy supplies is a greater risk than nuclear power. I once stood in a 20 x 20 foot square room in which all of the fuel for a reactor was in racks on the four walls. It was awesome to consider the energy that surrounded me.

I have not turned green. I do not glow in the dark. I am not covered with tumors. I have been contaminated and irradiated. Alcohol and cigarettes have done me more harm than the radiations and contaminations with which I have worked. Work in a chemical plant was more dangerous. At seventy-six, my health is good.

Skiing, chainsaws, wood burning stoves, horses, automobiles, steam power plants, typhoons, earthquakes, meteors and the sun have all killed more people and, most likely, will continue to do so, than nuclear power generation. It is interesting that there is no amount of radiation that is not harmful and, simultaneously, no way to escape this environmental phenomenon. It is naturally in the air, the food, the water and the soil that we breathe, eat, drink and walk on.

It my belief that as a society, we will need every possible source of energy if we are to maintain a lesser style of life than that of today as our numbers as a species increase. One of the ways to reduce our dependence upon centralized power stations is to make every residence and business as self-sufficient with respect to its energy needs, as is possible.

To accomplish this, a self-financing energy authority, a public utility, is needed in Vermont, similar to the New York Throughway Authority. I realize that statement is capitalist heresy. However, I can think of no other way to create the unified command structure to organize the energy future of the Vermont. Private enterprise is too self-serving to perform such a public task at reasonable cost. Vermont can efficiently wire its energy on its own without the middlemen of corporations.

Let me develop this concept. The State of Vermont would own alternate energy sources built to make each residence slightly more than energy sufficient, individually or as close as reasonable, if collectively. The State would purchase excess power produced from the owner of a property, charge the owner for any excess consumed and charge both the owner and ultimate consumers a fee for the amount of power transacted. A small amount of seed money could initiate financial expansion to all of Vermont.

Distributed generation would provide a more reliable, robust power grid throughout the State and reduce the need for large generation facilities, such as Hydro-Quebec and nuclear reactors. Failure, down time for maintenance or disaster would cripple such a network less than current generation and distribution.

The commission should be chartered to make Vermont energy independent. To do that, it should be empowered to finance it operations by levying charges on the purchase and sale of energy, to purchase sources of energy within Vermont and to create new sources of energy. Private enterprises will always fulfill the financial objectives of their management and owners before those of the public. They will shortchange the public for the cost of nuclear decommissioning responsibilities. Maintenance has priority over something out of service.

That does not mean nuclear power should be abandoned. There is no safe energy. The more concentrated energy is the more dangerous it is. It is irrelevant whether it is a horse, a racecar or a power plant.

Vermont should build a second, identical nuclear plant alongside the existing Vermont Yankee. The design is proved. It can be operated safely. The plant should be as identical to the existing plant as is possible to make use of the existing site, design, spare parts, trained operators, licenses, installed supporting facilities, etc. Sales of its power can finance the decommissioning of the current plant. Vermont should not renew the license for the Vernon nuclear power plant to anyone but itself.

VPIRG is wrong about nuclear power. I’ve been there and done that. It can be safer for the environment than combustion even if its power is used only to power the making of other more environmentally better sources of energy.

Keep up your good work. Knowledgeable, skeptical criticism is essential. Criticism driven by fear has no rational value. The key to survival is to never stop asking questions.

The original story is here.  The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Vermont resident Diana Levine in Wyeth v. Levine, Dkt. 06-1249 (3/4/09).  Levine had won her case in Vermont, but drug company Wyeth had appealed the almost $7 million award all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Levine, a musician, had her arm amputated when an anti-nausea drug was improperly administered in her artery, and sued the manufacturer for failing to warn of the risks on the drug’s label. Wyeth claimed that her case was pre-empted by federal law.

Senator Patrick Leahy filed a “friend-of-the-court” brief to a Vermonter Diana Levine’s U.S. Supreme Court case.  Leahy was joined in his “amicus” legal brief, which was filed in August 2008, by 17 members of Congress, including Vermont Senator Bernard Sanders and Vermont Congressman Peter Welch and Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Sheldon Whitehouse, Tom Harkin, Dianne Feinstein, Richard J. Durbin, and Russell D. Feingold, and Representatives Henry A. Waxman, John Conyers, Jr., John D. Dingell,

Frank Pallone, Jr., Bart Stupak, Zoe Lofgren, Linda Sanchez, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and Maxine Waters.

When an outside party that believes the court’s decision in a specific case may affect its interests files an amicus brief.  Senator Leahy has filed just 10 such briefs in more than 30 years in Congress.  In this case, Wyeth and the Bush administration sought to ascribe to Congress an unfounded intent to displace state tort law.

This nightmare for Diana Levine began in 2000 when she was treated in a Vermont hospital for symptoms associated with migraine headaches.  She was injected with Phenergan, which has been manufactured by Wyeth for almost 50 years and has been used to treat nausea linked to migraine headaches, reactions to pain killers, food poisoning, and a variety of other incidents that cause extensive vomiting.  The drug was injected into Levine’s arm in a manner that caused arterial contact called an IV push.  While there are drugs which are normally administered in this manner in an emergency situation, Wyeth’s own literature noted that this drug could cause a serious infection like gangrene if it is used in an IV push.  While Wyeth has known that there is an incredible risk to an IV push using Phenergan, it failed to revise its warning label to warn of these dangers.

“Levine received two injections of Phenergan in 2002 to treat nausea associated with a migraine headache. The second injection was administered using an intravenous or “IV push” method, which uses a syringe to push the medication directly into the patient’s vein,” according to Bloomburg news.

The drug penetrated Levine’s artery, destroying it and eventually killing much of the tissue in her arm and hand. She underwent two amputations, first losing her right hand and then her arm up to her elbow.  Although Phenergan’s two-page label at the time included a warning about injection into an artery, it didn’t advise not to use the IV push technique.

In his amicus brief, Senator Leahy argued,

“Diana Levine is a successful musician in Vermont, and the tragedy she suffered that has had a profound impact on her career, should have been prevented,” said Leahy.  “A number of recent Supreme Court decisions have stripped protections for every day Americans in favor of shielding large corporations from liability.  The Court’s decision in Ms. Levine’s case could have far-reaching effects on the ability of all Americans to seek justice in their courts when they are injured by a defective pharmaceutical drug.  I hope the Court takes the opportunity to reject the views of Wyeth and of the administration that mere approval from the Food and Drug Administration of a drug label immunizes a drug maker from liability when a consumer is injured or killed.  In over 70 years of enacting and amending the laws governing the regulation of pharmaceutical drugs, Congress never intended this perverse result.”

To me, it is a travesty that Chief Justice Roberts remained on the case even though his most recent financial disclosure form indicates he owns stock in Pfizer, which has announced plans to merge with Wyeth in a $68 Million merger deal.  In my personal opinion, Supreme Court Justices should not be owning stocks.  And, if they do, they should recuse themselves from any cases that come before them involving their portfolio.  It’s no surprise then that Roberts voted against Levine.  Even with that stacked deck Wyeth did not prevail.

According to Bloomburg,

The justices, voting 6-3, said that pharmaceutical companies aren’t shielded from suit by the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of a treatment and its packaging information.

“Congress did not intend FDA oversight to be the exclusive means of ensuring drug safety and effectiveness,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court.

In his opinion for the court, Stevens left open the possibility that suits might be barred in cases where the FDA explicitly considered and rejected a requirement for stronger warnings.

The ruling is a victory for Diana Levine, 63, a children’s musician who says Wyeth should have warned against the injection method that caused gangrene in her right arm, and Levine’s lawyer, David Frederick, called the ruling a “broad victory for consumers.”

Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas joined Stevens in the majority. Thomas wrote separately to say the court should have been even more deferential to state laws.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito dissented. Alito, writing for the three, said state- law product-liability suits would interfere with the federal drug-approval system.

The Bush administration backed the industry, arguing that “jury awards can interfere with the FDA’s work by forcing drugmakers to exaggerate some dangers.”

The case is Wyeth v. Levine, 06-1249.

The original story is here.  The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Vermont resident Diana Levine in Wyeth v. Levine.  Levine had won her case in Vermont, but drug company Wyeth had appealed the almost $7 million award all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Levine, a musician, had her arm amputated when an anti-nausea drug was improperly administered in her artery, and sued the manufacturer for failing to warn of the risks on the drug’s label. Wyeth claimed that her case was pre-empted by federal law.

Senator Patrick Leahy filed a “friend-of-the-court” brief to a Vermonter Diana Levine’s U.S. Supreme Court case.  Leahy was joined in his “amicus” legal brief, which was filed in August 2008, by 17 members of Congress, including Vermont Senator Bernard Sanders and Vermont Congressman Peter Welch and Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Sheldon Whitehouse, Tom Harkin, Dianne Feinstein, Richard J. Durbin, and Russell D. Feingold, and Representatives Henry A. Waxman, John Conyers, Jr., John D. Dingell,

Frank Pallone, Jr., Bart Stupak, Zoe Lofgren, Linda Sanchez, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and Maxine Waters.

When an outside party that believes the court’s decision in a specific case may affect its interests files an amicus brief.  Senator Leahy has filed just 10 such briefs in more than 30 years in Congress.  In this case, Wyeth and the Bush administration sought to ascribe to Congress an unfounded intent to displace state tort law.

This nightmare for Diana Levine began in 2000 when she was treated in a Vermont hospital for symptoms associated with migraine headaches.  She was injected with Phenergan, which has been manufactured by Wyeth for almost 50 years and has been used to treat nausea linked to migraine headaches, reactions to pain killers, food poisoning, and a variety of other incidents that cause extensive vomiting.  The drug was injected into Levine’s arm in a manner that caused arterial contact called an IV push.  While there are drugs which are normally administered in this manner in an emergency situation, Wyeth’s own literature noted that this drug could cause a serious infection like gangrene if it is used in an IV push.  While Wyeth has known that there is an incredible risk to an IV push using Phenergan, it failed to revise its warning label to warn of these dangers.

“Levine received two injections of Phenergan in 2002 to treat nausea associated with a migraine headache. The second injection was administered using an intravenous or “IV push” method, which uses a syringe to push the medication directly into the patient’s vein,” according to Bloomburg news.

The drug penetrated Levine’s artery, destroying it and eventually killing much of the tissue in her arm and hand. She underwent two amputations, first losing her right hand and then her arm up to her elbow.  Although Phenergan’s two-page label at the time included a warning about injection into an artery, it didn’t advise not to use the IV push technique.

In his amicus brief, Senator Leahy argued,

“Diana Levine is a successful musician in Vermont, and the tragedy she suffered that has had a profound impact on her career, should have been prevented,” said Leahy.  “A number of recent Supreme Court decisions have stripped protections for every day Americans in favor of shielding large corporations from liability.  The Court’s decision in Ms. Levine’s case could have far-reaching effects on the ability of all Americans to seek justice in their courts when they are injured by a defective pharmaceutical drug.  I hope the Court takes the opportunity to reject the views of Wyeth and of the administration that mere approval from the Food and Drug Administration of a drug label immunizes a drug maker from liability when a consumer is injured or killed.  In over 70 years of enacting and amending the laws governing the regulation of pharmaceutical drugs, Congress never intended this perverse result.”

To me, it is a travesty that Chief Justice Roberts remained on the case even though his most recent financial disclosure form indicates he owns stock in Pfizer, which has announced plans to merge with Wyeth in a $68 Million merger deal.  In my personal opinion, Supreme Court Justices should not be owning stocks.  And, if they do, they should recuse themselves from any cases that come before them involving there portfolio.  It’s no surprise then that Roberts voted against Levine.  Even with that stacked deck Wyeth did not prevail.

According to Bloomburg,

The justices, voting 6-3, said that pharmaceutical companies aren’t shielded from suit by the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of a treatment and its packaging information.

“Congress did not intend FDA oversight to be the exclusive means of ensuring drug safety and effectiveness,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court.

In his opinion for the court, Stevens left open the possibility that suits might be barred in cases where the FDA explicitly considered and rejected a requirement for stronger warnings.

The ruling is a victory for Diana Levine, 63, a children’s musician who says Wyeth should have warned against the injection method that caused gangrene in her right arm, and Levine’s lawyer, David Frederick, called the ruling a “broad victory for consumers.”

Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas joined Stevens in the majority. Thomas wrote separately to say the court should have been even more deferential to state laws.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito dissented. Alito, writing for the three, said state- law product-liability suits would interfere with the federal drug-approval system.

The Bush administration backed the industry, arguing that “jury awards can interfere with the FDA’s work by forcing drugmakers to exaggerate some dangers.”

The case is Wyeth v. Levine, 06-1249.