Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle is one of four Midwest governors who adamantly believe their constituents should receive affordable prescription drugs through purchasing medicines from foreign countries like Canada.

Earlier this month, Doyle displayed fervor for the cause by meeting with a representative of a coalition of Canadian pharmaceutical companies and discussing the possibility of importing prescription drugs from the United States’ northern neighbor. Doyle also urged Bush administration officials to consider similar alternative means of providing affordable medication.

“It is clear that there is the potential for huge savings for the state, as well as citizens who depend on prescription drugs,” Doyle said of importing drugs after the Nov. 4 meeting.

Despite Doyle’s planning, prescription medicine remains the only legal item that cannot be legally imported into the United States.

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich created an online petition on his gubernatorial website asking U.S. Congress and the Food and Drug Administration to allow Americans to purchase drugs imported from Canada.

Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack asked his constituents to sign Blagojevich’s online petition Nov. 7, in addition to contacting the state’s congressional representatives. Vilsack spoke with Iowa’s Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and a member of the Conference Committee.

Over the weekend, the Conference Committee reached an agreement on pending Medicare legislation but did not approve a proposal included in the bill to allow drug importation.

“Opening the door for re-importing drugs from Canada could mean lower prices for consumers buying prescription drugs,” Grassley said in a statement Nov. 16 after the agreement had been reached. Grassley expressed concern that certain points of the new Medicare bill did not facilitate the most efficient national healthcare.

President Bush said he is pleased with the bill the Conference Committee passed, without the drug importation stipulation.

“I know I will be actively pushing the bill because it conforms to the principles I laid out of prescription drugs for our seniors: choice for seniors, accountability for the Medicare plan,” Bush told reporters at the White House Monday.

However, some Democratic leaders believe the approved bill would be less than beneficial, and governors from both parties continue to criticize Bush’s lack of initiative.

“It keeps drug prices high, causes 2 to 3 million retirees to lose drug coverage and coerces seniors into HMOs,” U.S. Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said in a statement.

“The Bush administration has done nothing to address the crisis in prescription-drug prices,” Doyle said. “Because they haven’t acted, Republican and Democratic governors are taking the initiative to get a better deal for our citizens and taxpayers.”

Doyle also criticized the stance of Food and Drug Administration and Health and Human Services officials who held a press conference at Wisconsin’s Capitol building the day before his meeting with Canadian drug brokers. FDA and HHS officials expressed concern about the safety of imported drugs.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty recently traveled to Canada on a fact-finding mission to further his plans to re-import prescription medicines. His trip included a review of provincial prescription-drug regulation and meetings with Manitoba’s Premier Gary Doer and Canadian pharmacists and wholesalers.

“We’re going to inspect safety measures used in Manitoba and explore re-importation opportunities,” Pawlenty said before his trip. “Just this week, FDA officials were in Wisconsin talking about how re-importation means compromised safety. We want to see firsthand just how safe the Canadian system is.”

Richard Ralston is the executive director of Americans for Free Choice in Medicine and dismissed the FDA and HHS argument that drugs purchased from Canada would be unsafe.

“The FDA’s safety concerns are simply fallacious,” Ralston said. “They’re saying that because their regulations are overdone.”

Ralston said his organization advocated a relaxing of regulations to save companies money on getting drugs approved and, in turn, lowering drug prices.

“Of course we will take all the necessary precautions to ensure we are dealing with legitimate vendors, just as we would for any other contract the state enters,” Doyle said. “We believe there are ways to import prescription drugs from Canada that are both safe and affordable.”

David Kreling, a professor of pharmacy administration at the University of Wisconsin, said whether or not FDA regulations are overbearing in the United States, states and citizens going to Canada to purchase medicines would not have the benefits of such rigorous standards.

“Before you buy a drug [in a Canadian pharmacy or from a Canadian website] you have to sign a waiver that says you will not hold the drug company responsible,” Kreling said. “Now if you think about it, have you ever had to sign a safety waiver at your neighborhood pharmacy?”

Kreling said the re-importation of drugs could ultimately create a huge headache for Canadian officials. Kreling also said he recently attended a conference at the University of Michigan where Canadian pharmacists had already begun to express their concern about how American buyers would affect their business. It has already been the case that Canadian pharmacists could not appropriate the medicines their customers needed because pharmacy wholesalers shipping to the United States were holding surpluses of the drugs.

Doyle has been quick to highlight the fact that often the drugs that would be purchased from Canada at discounted rates would still be American-made pharmaceuticals.

“Many of these drugs are manufactured in the U.S., sent to Canada and then can be shipped right back at substantially reduced prices,” Doyle said. Although the governors from Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois seem determined to find affordable medicines by looking north of the border, some say the price advantage available through such trading would evaporate quickly.

Ralston said his organization was “in favor of free choice, free trade and free markets, so we think a consumer should be able to buy their prescription medicine from where they want.”

Ralston said American pharmaceutical companies selling discounted prescription drugs to Canada would cease this practice if their products were being resold to states in the United States.

“American companies would not keep shipping pharmaceuticals at a negotiated reduced rate,” Ralston said. “That wouldn’t last very long.”

Ralston said it was reasonable to expect American corporations to charge U.S. consumers the same rates as Canadian buyers because of the high cost of manufacturing drugs in the United States.

Ralston attributed the substantially higher cost of drugs in the United States to the rigorous regulation imposed on pharmaceutical companies by federal organizations such as the Food and Drug Administration. A drug manufacturer could spend decades and millions of dollars to getting a newly developed medicine to pass FDA inspection.

American drug companies also spend more money than other countries on research and development every year. Kreling said while consumers may want cheaper drugs, the research money spent in the United States has brought about amazing advancements.

According to Kreling, American consumers often look to the latest drugs developed instead of checking for older and cheaper generic brands that are therapeutically identical.

“Often what we need is the older, tried-and-true prescription drug,” Kreling said.

Ralston said that ultimately, it was the U.S. drug companies themselves would have to be the ones to decide drug pricing.

“If cost is the problem, how can anyone expect the government to be able to fix it?” Ralston said. “The government can’t even control the price of a postage stamp. Some things are better left to the private sector where there are different incentives.”