CMS Proposed Rule Ignores Data & Bipartisan Support for the Value of Copay Assistance Programs

By NCL Director of Health Policy Jeanette Contreras

Americans love getting a discount. As consumers, we like to shop to save without compromising the quality of the products we buy. But in healthcare, the stakes are higher at the checkout counter. Patients not only want a discount, they depend on it to afford necessary, sometimes lifesaving, medication to treat their health condition.

Despite what we know about the value and impact of copay assistance programs, a new policy from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) could put a barrier between these critical programs and the patients who need them most.

Manufacturer copay assistance programs include discounts, coupon cards, and vouchers which many of our friends, family members, and neighbors use to afford their prescriptions. Studies have shown that without these financial support systems, many patients couldn’t afford their medicines.

The CMS proposal, which has yet to be finalized, would require manufacturers to guarantee that this assistance goes directly to patients—and if manufacturers do not, they would be required to include the value of the copay assistance in Medicaid Best Price and Average Manufacturer Price (AMP) calculations. That would be fine but there’s a  problem.

CMS has a separate policy that was already finalized earlier this year: the Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters (NBPP) Rule for 2021. In part, the NBPP allows health insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to use policies that stop copay assistance from counting towards a patient’s out-of-pocket burden—sometimes called copay accumulator adjustment programs.

NCL criticized HHS for permitting health plans to use these so-called copay accumulator adjustment programs.

“Removing this cost-sharing assistance will force those patients to pay thousands of dollars more in unexpected costs at the pharmacy. These new costs could push some to forego those medications, leading to worsened health outcomes. This could compromise medication adherence and will lead to increased health care costs over time.” – NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg

Separate studies conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and IQVIA show that out-of-pocket costs can contribute substantially to reduced adherence or to patients not taking their medication altogether. This is counterproductive because if patients do not take their meds as directed, it means higher costs in other parts of the healthcare system stemming from increased hospitalizations, ER visits, and long-term health issues.

If the data doesn’t convince CMS, voters should. Weeks before the presidential election, we can clearly see widespread support for the value of copay assistance regardless of political affiliation. According to a new National Hemophilia Foundation national survey, more than 80 percent of registered voters believe the government should require copay assistance to be applied to patients’ out-of-pocket costs. Even lawmakers agree that CMS should stop this policy before it launches. A bipartisan group of 36 members of the U.S. House of Representatives sent a letter to CMS urging the agency to not finalize the “contentious line extension section or the Medicaid best price change as currently defined in the notice of proposed rulemaking.”

Clearly, copay assistance is critical to Americans. We hope CMS reevaluates the potentially harmful consequences of this new rule on patients and pulls back this counterproductive proposal.

National Consumers League Expresses Concern Over Amy Coney Barrett Confirmation

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – The next three weeks will be critical for the American people. Amid a global pandemic, a historic presidential election, and the attempt to fill an equally historic Supreme Court vacancy, there’s a lot at stake for health care. On October 26, the Senate will vote on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to succeed the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the US Supreme Court. On November 10, merely a week following the presidential election, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) hear arguments in the case of California v. Texas, the latest challenge to Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), more commonly called Obamacare.

The rush to fill Justice Ginsburg’s seat on the Court on the eve of this election has worried health advocates and consumers alike, as a conservative majority court could potentially overturn the ACA. Conservatives have been hostile to the law, and Coney Barrett, herself an arch-conservative, seems to share that very hostility toward the ACA. This is illustrated by her disapproval of Justice John Roberts Jr.’s support of the ACA in a 2017 essay. In it, Coney Barrett wrote that Justice Roberts had “pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.”

In 2017, the strife between Democrats and conservatives worsened when the individual mandate provision of the ACA was found unconstitutional. Following that ruling, conservatives have tried to grasp at opportunities to repeal the entire law, including arguing for severability. Severability of the individual mandate provision, as explained by Justice Roberts, would allow the Court to excise the provision with “a scalpel rather than a bulldozer.” Severability would still maintain the ACA as the law of the land and would save access to healthcare for over 20 million Americans. But the plaintiffs, all Republican Attorneys General from across the country, have argued that the individual mandate cannot be severed and if it goes down, the whole law falls.

Although Coney Barrett was reticent during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, her record serves as a warning about how she will come down on a host of consumer health issues. These include reproductive decisions granting women agency over their bodies and the freedom to choose how they form families. Based on her prior endorsement of the anti-choice organization Right to Life and her public support of overturning Roe v Wade, there is cause for concern that medical interventions like contraception, abortion, and even in-vitro fertilization (IVF), could all be at risk following Judge Barrett’s appointment to the high court.

Aside from reproductive issues, there are countless health care protections on the chopping block pursuant to the ACA deliberation. Below are a few at risk if the ACA is overturned:

The stakes are high. If the ACA is overturned, COVID-19 could be considered to be a pre-existing condition. The pandemic has laid bare deep structural inequities; stripping away coverage during such dire times would be unconscionable.

There are a few ways the Supreme Court could rule on the case come November 10.

  • If Coney Barrett is not sworn in before the oral argument, the Court could vote on the case with an 8-member court, leading to a potential tie. If tied, the case would be returned to the original trial judge for further analysis – meaning that in the interim, the ACA would remain the law of the land, ensuring protections for millions.
  • The Court may still rule in favor of salvaging the ACA. Many scholars deem the plaintiffs’ arguments to be legally weak. This is where the argument of severability comes in.
  • Finally, if a new justice is appointed to the Court and there is a majority vote to overturn the ACA, it may be overturned. The ACA is an extraordinarily complex and comprehensive law, and this result would wreak havoc across virtually every area of health policy.

Over the next few weeks, the health and civil liberties of millions of Americans will hang in the balance. NCL does not support Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination. Justice Ginsburg was a champion of rights and protections for consumers and women and a strong defender of the ACA. Confirming a justice for the Supreme Court with Coney Barrett’s record before the election has the potential to endanger lives already vulnerable during this pandemic. We simply cannot afford to throw consumers’ health care into such chaos and uncertainly during this COVID-19 pandemic.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

New report: COVID-19 pandemic highlights need for White House Consumer Advocacy Office

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – The protection of consumers during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond will require the next Administration to reestablish the White House Office of Consumer Affairs (WHOCA). The National Consumers League is calling for the restoration of the WHOCA to elevate the interests of consumers to the highest levels of government, including access to the Oval Office. For decades, WHOCA gave consumers a voice within the Administration and coordinated consumer protection activities across the U.S. government. Such leadership will be sorely needed to rebuild consumers’ confidence in the government’s ability to protect them from industry abuses.

In a new report, COVID-19 and the Impact on Consumers, the National Consumers League examines how consumers have been harmed by price gouging, fraud targeting stimulus checks, anti-worker practices, and a sharp dip in confidence in testing and vaccines since the COVID-19 pandemic began. The report also highlights legislation from the 116th Congress that advanced consumers’ interest and should be at the top of policymakers’ agendas next year.

“The COVID-19 pandemic has thrown into stark relief the impact of years of hollowing-out of our nation’s consumer protection agencies,” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “With this report, we hope to shine a light of consumer protection policies that should be embraced over the next four years, regardless of which party comes out ahead in November.”

Issues covered in the report include:

  • Price gouging and profiteering – Congress should act to rein in price gouging on personal protective equipment. Refunds for cancelled or postponed flights and live events should be required to be provided quickly to consumers.
  • Scams targeting stimulus funds – An estimated $8 billion in unemployment insurance funds have been lost to scammers since the beginning of the COVID crisis. Many millions more in stimulus checks and other COVID relief may have also been diverted. In any future stimulus legislation, Congress must act to ensure that a second wave of scams targeting such relief funds do not deprive consumers of desperately needed support.
  • Restoring confidence in COVID-related health care – NCL has strongly urged public health agencies to increase and enhance infrastructure regarding vaccine confidence and has called for effective public messaging and strong vaccine recommendations to ensure that the American public feels safe, informed, and empowered in their decisions to vaccinate once a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available.
  • Protecting essential workers – Workers on the front lines of the COVID-19 crisis must receive the personal protective equipment they need to do their jobs safely. They must also be given pandemic premium pay to compensate them for the increased risks they bear keeping our economy functioning during this challenging time. They should also not be barred from seeking justice by overly broad liability protections that some in Congress to seek to attach to future stimulus bills.
  • Accountability for taxpayer funds – Money intended to support struggling small business payrolls should not go to support the super-wealthy. Bailouts targeted at specific industries like the airlines should not be diverted to unrelated purposes, such as lobbying.

To read the full report, click here.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.
[/av_textblock]

Facebook’s banning of Holocaust denial content is a win for consumers

Facebook’s banning of Holocaust denial content is a win for consumers

October 13, 2020

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – The decision by Facebook to ban Holocaust denial content from the platform is a welcome, if belated, move by the social media giant, according to the National Consumers League. The action, which comes after significant criticism by civil and human rights organizations, will help make Facebook a safer platform for all users, said the League.

The following statement is attributable to National Consumers League Executive Director Sally Greenberg:

“For far too long, Holocaust denial content was allowed to flourish on Facebook, a platform which reaches billions of users. We appreciate the statements from the company and its leaders, including Mark Zuckerberg, that they personally find such content abhorrent. However, words can only do so much without action to address the problem. Banning Holocaust denial content from Facebook will help create a safer and more welcoming platform for all consumers.

It will be a challenge for Facebook to enforce this ban at scale. We expect that the purveyors of hate will continually look for ways to get around the ban. That is why we will continue to work with the company to ensure that this ban has real teeth, so that consumers can be confident that they and their families will not be subjected to such hateful content.”

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Consumer, environmental groups ask Congress to press DOJ and EPA to expedite ongoing Mercedes diesel emissions investigations

April 3, 2019

Nearly three years have passed since investigation of Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz diesel emissions systems; consumers left without recourse on their vehicles

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – Leading consumer and environmental groups today sent letters to U.S. House Energy & Commerce and Senate Commerce Committees’ leadership, urging them to inquire about the status of pending Department of Justice and Environmental Protection Agency investigations into the diesel emissions systems of Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz.

Mercedes-Benz marketed its BlueTEC diesel vehicles as “the world’s cleanest and most advanced diesel,” but has been accused of equipping them with cheat devices that result in dangerously high levels of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions, far exceeding what is legal under U.S. federal and state regulations. The DOJ and EPA have held Volkswagen and Fiat Chrysler accountable for similar allegations, but there has been no update on their investigation into Mercedes since it reportedly began in 2016.

VW and Fiat have instituted buybacks and repairs to address the pollution, while compensating owners and lessees. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Daimler vehicles are potentially polluting the environment while their owners await the outcome of the DOJ and EPA investigation.

The letter was signed by Center for Auto Safety, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, National Consumers League, Safe Climate Campaign and Sierra Club.

“Compared to the repercussions Volkswagen faced after admitting to strikingly similar allegations, which included severe fines and mandatory buybacks or repairs to tainted diesel vehicles, nothing has been done to hold Mercedes-Benz accountable in the U.S.,” wrote the groups. “Just as Congress played an important oversight role in Volkswagen’s dieselgate, it can do the same in bringing Mercedes-Benz to justice. We urge you to aid U.S. consumers by compelling the DOJ and EPA to provide an update into their nearly three-year-old investigation and, if appropriate, take action against Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz for violating U.S. law.”

The groups also referred to a letter Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) sent to the DOJ in February last year; the groups’ letter noted that no update has been provided and no action has been taken.

A full copy of the letter can be found here.

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Consumer group applauds launch of DOT investigation of 737 MAX safety

March 20, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League (NCL) today applauded the Department of Transportation (DOT) decision to initiate an investigation of the safety of the Boeing 737 MAX 8 series of aircraft. In the wake of two deadly accidents involving the aircraft in less than six months, this investigation is urgently needed to protect the safety of the flying public.

The following statement is attributable to John Breyault, NCL vice president of public policy, telecommunications and fraud:

“The safety of the millions of consumers who fly every year should be the highest priority of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The flying public’s faith in the agency has been badly shaken by two deadly crashes and media reports of other near-misses involving the Boeing 737 MAX 8. By initiating an investigation of the FAA’s certification of the aircraft, DOT Secretary Elaine Chao is reasserting the leadership that has made U.S. airspace one of the safest places to fly in the world.

“The investigation ordered by Secretary Chao appears to be limited to the process used to certify the 737 MAX 8. We urge the DOT not to limit its investigation to one category or model of aircraft. Instead, the Department should conduct a comprehensive review of its 2005 decision to outsource aircraft safety certification to the very manufacturers who stand to reap billions of dollars in profits from regulatory approval of their aircrafts’ airworthiness. The flying public must be assured that its safety in the air has not been compromised by the profit motives of aircraft manufacturers and their airline customers.”

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Consumer group welcomes grounding of 737 MAX 8 fleet, urges U.S. airlines to waive cancellation fees to mitigate impact on flying public

March 14, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – Within months of each other, two new Boeing 737 MAX 8s crashed minutes after take-off, causing the deaths of 346 passengers and crew. Wednesday, following the lead of regulators in more than 45 countries, the Trump Administration ordered the grounding of all 737 MAX 8s in service in the United States. This is a common-sense step that will help protect the flying public while the Federal Aviation Administration investigates the safety of the 737 MAX 8 fleet.

The grounding of all 737 MAX 8s will likely lead to significant schedule disruptions and cancellations for consumers who were scheduled to fly on routes using those aircrafts. NCL is calling on U.S. airlines to waive any cancellation or change fees that may be incurred by consumers whose travel plans are affected and who need to book new flights.

The following statement is attributable to John Breyault, vice president of public policy, telecommunications and fraud at the National Consumers League:

“In the wake of two fatal 737 MAX 8 crashes, the Trump Administration took the right step to ensure that the flying public is not put at unnecessary risk. Until it can be conclusively determined that all Boeing 737 MAX 8s are safe, the Federal Aviation Administration should keep these planes on the ground. American lives are far too valuable to risk in the name of airlines’ and Boeing’s profits.

Unfortunately, this move will likely significantly inconvenience customers and may require rebooking on alternate flights. In a normal environment, customers needing to make such changes would incur outrageous $250 change fees or other cancellation penalties. We call on all airlines whose flights are affected to waive change and cancellation fees or other penalties for any passenger that needs to rebook on a different flight.”

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

NCL Statement on the Resignation of FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb – National Consumers League

March 6, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League (NCL) is saddened by yesterday’s announcement of the resignation of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Scott Gottlieb. Since his appointment, Commissioner Gottlieb has championed the public health, tackling tough issues like the teen vaping epidemic, the opioid crisis, and counterfeit drugs, among others.

He is also credited with accelerating FDA’s approval of generic drugs and modernizing the FDA’s review and approval process.

NCL had welcomed Gottlieb’s appointment, and was fortunate to have had the opportunity to sit down with him for a fireside chat at our December 2017 Health Advisory Council meeting. At the meeting, Gottlieb discussed how his experience as a cancer patient influenced his approach as a physician and policymaker, enhancing his understanding of the patient perspective.

Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director, said: “Commissioner Gottlieb will be greatly missed. We wish him all the best, and hope that the next FDA Commissioner will put the interests of consumers first by maintaining the agency’s strong oversight of the safety and effectiveness of drugs and medical devices.”

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

National Consumers League statement on today’s U.S. Supreme Court argument on Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association – National Consumers League

January 11, 2016

Contact: Cindy Hoang, National Consumers League, cindyh@nclnet.org or (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC–The National Consumers League, the nation’s pioneering consumer and worker advocacy group, has released the following statement about Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, scheduled to be argued before the Supreme Court today.

Friedrichs v California Teachers Association is a case handpicked by special, powerful anti-worker interests asking the Supreme Court to overrule a longstanding precedent established under Abood v. Detroit Board of Education.

Last fall, NCL joined a Friend of The Court brief, signing on with the Leadership Conference for Civil Rights and the National Women’s Law Center, arguing that the Court should uphold Abood v. Detroit Bd of Ed (1977), holding that public sector collective bargaining agreements may include “fair share” provisions. The brief details how unions provide one of the most successful vehicles for providing economic and professional opportunities for women, people of color, and LGBT individuals, including lowering the income gap and increasing access to basic benefits like health insurance and parental leave, and providing important protections against discrimination.

The National Consumers League believes that Abood is based on the constitutional principle that those covered by a union contract should be required to pay their share of fees. When employees elect a union to represent them, everyone who benefits from a negotiated contract should contribute to the costs of securing that contract, even those who might not agree with every union position.

Indeed, there are communities right here in Washington that work within this current fair share regime to very positive effect. In Montgomery County, MD, the superintendent, along with the three unions in the county, actually all sit at the table together each year to create a budget that aims to keep necessary cuts away from directly affecting students.

“It’s unfortunate that the Supreme Court is revisiting Abood, a case that has stood for 35 years. Since our founding in 1899, the NCL has supported the rights of workers to organize, be represented by a union, and have a communal voice that allows them to have an equal say over working conditions, benefits, and health and safety,” said NCL’s Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “That means that those benefitting from these contracts should contribute their fair share in dues and fees. The current system benefits the whole community because it brings better public services, stronger public schools, and more vibrant communities. If the Court bans fair share, it will make it more difficult for teachers, firefighters, and nurses to negotiate for wages, benefits, and improved public services. We call on the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutionality of Abood v. Detroit Board of Education and affirm the obligation of all covered by union contracts to pay their fair share.”

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

NCL, injury victims call on CPSC to mandate new national safety performance standard for table saws – National Consumers League

May 25, 2011

Contact: NCL Communications, (202) 835-3323, media@nclnet.org

Washington, DC — The National Consumers League and victims of brutal table saw injuries today called on the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to take immediate, decisive steps to set a new, more protective national safety performance standard for table saws.

The move comes as a new CPSC report documents the number of annual table saw injuries is up by 10,000 a year since 2001[1]. Meanwhile, a petition asking CPSC to set a national safety performance standard has been languishing at the Commission since 2003[2].

“Table saws present an unacceptable risk of severe injury,” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “Each year, tens of thousands of people are brutally injured by table saws – including 4,000 amputations – at a cost of more than $2 billion a year to treat victims. This is a major public health and safety issue that cries out for a public policy response.”

Several victims of life-altering injuries and amputations joined NCL in issuing the call to action on CPSC, saying government has a responsibility to mandate that new, safer technologies be used on table saws. To learn more about these victims, the impact of their injuries on their livelihoods and families, and view photos of their injuries, visit www.nclnet.org

Table saws are inherently dangerous and most table saws on the market lack an adequate safety system to protect consumers from accidental contact with the blade, said Greenberg. “The vast majority of table saw manufacturers haven’t changed their technology in 50 years, despite the 40,000 injuries each year. Current safety technology basically consists of plastic guards, which are usually removed because they make it difficult to use the saws effectively.” In a 2006 report, CPSC staff said the current table saw safety standard does not adequately address blade contact hazard[3].

“Safer-saw technology is available on the market today,” said Greenberg. “Made by a company called SawStop, this technology stops the saw from operating in milliseconds if the blade comes into contact with human flesh by sensing an electrical impulse, preventing serious accidents and often resulting in the user getting nothing more than a nick.

“If a start-up company like SawStop can do it, why can’t well-heeled top manufacturers such as Craftsman, Black & Decker, Ryobi and Dewalt adopt or develop new technologies to prevent grave injuries and amputations from table saws? According to the CPSC, the SawStop technology would increase the cost of table saws by about $100 per saw — a small price to pay to save a finger.”

This cost stands in stark contrast to the cost of injuries for a victim of a table saw accident. A group of doctors led by hand surgeon Dr. Alexander Shin at the Mayo Clinic conducted a study in 2009 of 134 patients who suffered table saw injuries. They found the mean cost of medical expenses for all patients was $30,754 per injury, including lost wages[4]. The state of Utah thought it was so important for teenagers in woodworking classes to use safer technology saws that it purchased the safer SawStop saws for all public schools.

“We are urging CPSC to begin the process to set a national safety standard for table saws,” said Greenberg. “The standard should require industry to adopt current technology or develop new technology to prevent grave injuries and amputations from table saws.”

A petition asking CPSC to set a performance standard has been stalled since 2003. A 2006 CPSC staff report to the Commission in response to the petition shows a positive cost-benefit analysis to setting a national performance standard for table saws, and recommends granting the petition and proceeding with a rulemaking process that could result in a mandatory safety standard for table saws to reduce the risk of blade contact injury[5]. CPSC voted in 2006 to start the regulatory process, but no action was ever taken. In early 2011, manufacturers of safer saw technologies were invited to present their positions at a CPSC public meeting, but no additional action has been taken.

“Each day we wait for CPSC to act, 10 new amputations occur,” said Greenberg. “We’re throwing away 4,000 fingers each year when safer-saw technology exists. The time for action is now.”

# # #

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

[1] www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOIA11/os/statsaws.pdf

[2] www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia03/petition/Bladesawpt1.pdf ; www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOIA03/petition/Bladesawpt2.pdf

[3] www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOIA06/brief/tablesaw.pdf

[4] www.jhandsurg.org/article/S0363-5023(09)00111-7/abstract

[5] www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOIA06/brief/tablesaw.pdf