Pubdate: Fri, 04 Jan 2002
Source: Courier-Journal, The (KY)
Copyright: 2002 The Courier-Journal
Contact:  http://www.courier-journal.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/97
Author: James R Carroll
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?186 (Oxycontin)

ROGERS RETURNS CONTRIBUTIONS TO DRUG-COMPANY OFFICIALS

Gifts Came Weeks Before Hearing On OxyContin

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Harold "Hal" Rogers, a leading critic in Congress of how 
OxyContin's manufacturer has marketed the powerful painkiller, returned 
what he called improper campaign gifts from three company officials.

The $750 in contributions came six weeks before one of the officials 
testified before a subcommittee about OxyContin abuse and was lectured by 
Rogers, who organized the hearing.

Rogers, a Republican who represents Kentucky's 5th District, said he did 
not know of the contributions at the time of the Dec. 11 hearing because 
the officials didn't disclose their connections to the company when the 
donations were made. Rogers' campaign discovered the link two days later 
and returned the money.

"It was highly improper," Rogers said of the contributions in an interview 
Friday night. Asked why he believes the donations went to him but not to 
other panel members, he said, "I don't know."

But James Heins, a spokesman for OxyContin manufacturer Purdue Pharma, said 
the donations were made after the company's Washington lobbyist was invited 
to an October fundraising dinner for Rogers and was asked by the 
congressman for a contribution.

"We understand that Congressman Rogers does not want to accept this money, 
and that is his prerogative," Heins said. "We wish him well."

Dan Dubray, Rogers' press secretary, denied that Rogers asked for a 
contribution.

Rogers, a member of a House subcommittee that has direct oversight over 
health-related law-enforcement issues such as OxyContin abuse and 
addiction, clashed repeatedly at the Dec. 11 hearing with Dr. Paul 
Goldenheim, Purdue Pharma's executive vice president.

Rogers charged that the company, based in Stamford, Conn., was too 
aggressive in marketing OxyContin, a prescription painkiller sold in 
time-release pills, and has failed to act to stem abuse of the drug.

In Eastern Kentucky, much of which is represented by Rogers, OxyContin has 
been linked to at least 70 overdose deaths in the past two years. 
Nationally, the Drug Enforcement Administration has blamed 117 deaths in 31 
states during that time on OxyContin.

At the hearing, Rogers told Goldenheim, "Your company did nothing, and 
people were dying!"

Goldenheim testified that combating OxyContin abuse was the company's 
"highest priority" and defended Purdue Pharma's promotion efforts to make 
doctors aware of the drug's benefits.

Rogers and Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., asked the General Accounting Office to 
investigate Purdue Pharma's marketing. The probe is under way.

Six weeks before the hearing, on Oct. 29, Rogers' congressional campaign 
received $250 from Goldenheim, according to Federal Election Commission 
records. The same day, Rogers' campaign also received $250 each from 
Michael Friedman, chief operating officer of Purdue Pharma, and Howard 
Udell, executive vice president and general counsel for the company, the 
FEC records show.

"They are certainly not large contributions, but it is curious how the 
three were bundled together and came unsolicited right before" the hearing, 
Dubray said.

A check by the Courier-Journal of FEC records found no other donations from 
the Purdue Pharma officials to the 12 other Democratic and Republican 
members of the subcommittee that conducted the hearing.

Goldenheim and Friedman are not major political givers, FEC records 
indicate. Goldenheim gave a total of $1,500 in 1998 and 1999 to his 
homestate senators, Connecticut Democrats Joseph Lieberman and Christopher 
Dodd, and Friedman gave $2,000 to Dodd in 1997 and 1998.

Udell did not show up in the records as a donor to federal candidates, 
although complete House and Senate contribution records for the most recent 
six-month filing period could not be checked Friday because of computer 
problems at the FEC. The six-month reports were due Thursday.

How the contributions to Rogers came about and how they got to his campaign 
are a matter of dispute.

Purdue Pharma says Dan Cohen, the company's lobbyist, told Udell that 
Rogers had invited the lobbyist to the fund-raising dinner "and had 
requested a donation."

"Dan Cohen told Howard Udell that Hal Rogers is a good congressman who is 
worthy of re-election," Heins said. "Mr. Udell accepted Mr. Cohen's 
judgment regarding the congressman and asked some of his colleagues to join 
with him in supporting Congressman Rogers, which they agreed to do. "The 
checks were personal donations sent to Dan Cohen," Heins said. "Mr. Cohen 
attended the fund-raising dinner and gave the checks to someone on 
Congressman Rogers' staff."

Cohen, who said he has known Rogers for 21 years, largely backed up that 
account. Although he did not recall how he was invited to the Oct. 16 
dinner, of which the American Trucking Association was the host, he said 
that he understood that it was for Rogers and that he brought the checks 
from the Purdue Pharma officials to the event.

But Dubray said that Rogers did not ask Cohen or anyone else from Purdue 
Pharma for a contribution and was not involved in handling invitations to 
the dinner, and that Rogers' campaign did not receive the checks at the 
dinner. They were mailed later and were recorded by the campaign on Oct. 
29, he said.

"Neither Hal Rogers nor his campaign solicited contributions from Purdue 
Pharma, its executives or its lobbyist," Dubray said.

When the Dec. 11 hearing started and Goldenheim testified, a Rogers aide 
who was watching the proceedings on television recalled seeing a check with 
that name on it, according to Rogers' office.

A review of records determined that it was the same Goldenheim and also 
turned up the checks from the other Purdue Pharma officials. Rogers 
directed that the donations be returned, and three $250 checks were sent to 
Goldenheim, Friedman and Udell on Dec. 13, records show.

Although federal election law requires identifying the employer of campaign 
donors, Dubray acknowledged that donations from individuals often are 
received without that information. Campaigns are required to make 
good-faith efforts to track down contributors for missing information.

Heins said the checks were not identified as being from Purdue Pharma 
officials because they were "personal donations" for Rogers' campaign. "No 
intent was made to conceal who the money came from," Heins said. "The names 
and addresses of the executives were on the checks. It is Mr. Udell's 
understanding that it is the campaign's obligation to determine the 
employment of the contributor."

Heins said no other subcommittee members were given donations because "no 
one else asked."

Rogers said he hasn't heard from Purdue Pharma since the contributions were 
returned. "I don't suspect they'll be contributing to me any more," he said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth