Targeted letter writing or phone calls can be a powerful tool. We will act as a messenger that lets you know what coordinated campaigns need your support. We will also at times launch our own campaigns on any issue that we think needs immediate attention.
 

National Call in Day: Ensure Fair & Balanced Senate Hearings on Iraq.

"A war regarded as inevitable has a very good chance of being fought.” ~ Historian and former U.S. diplomat George Kennan


I. Update - Hearings on Military Plans for Iraq Next Week (July 31) Joseph Biden (D-DE) chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was interviewed over the weekend on “Fox News Sunday.” Biden, who had been critical of the war, now seems to have loosened justification for a military strike. In the interview, Biden was asked if even a mere connection to al-Qaeda with NO proven link to 9/11 would suffice as enough justification to go attack Iraq. Biden said yes. He further suggested that Bush should take his plans to get Congress’ support before military strike “and I think he’d get everybody on board.”

EPIC’s last Alert announced that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee would hold hearings on war plans for Iraq. These hearings have now been scheduled for next week, Wednesday July 31st and Thursday August 1st (just before the Senate takes it's summer recess).

These hearings will be the first public congressional debate on President Bush’s war plans for Iraq. Unfortunately, the hearings could be used to further war plans by only calling pro-invasion witnesses or by those present asking only superficial questions. In order to ensure fair and balanced hearings, Congress needs to hear from you.

II. TAKE ACTION – National Call in Day MONDAY, July 29! CALL the offices of CHAIRMAN JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE) 202-224-5042 and SEN. JESSE HELMS (R-NC) 202-224-6342 and ask that they include witnesses such as former UNSCOM Chief Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter and former UN Humanitarian Coordinator Hans Von Sponeck (see other suggested witnesses below) for next week’s hearings to ensure a balanced representation of perspectives. Urge them not to overlook the expertise of those who know the situation in Iraq firsthand. Far too many American and Iraqi lives are at stake!

If YOUR OWN SENATOR sits on the FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE (check roster below) encourage them to ask questions regarding the risks involved in a U.S. military invasion of Iraq. Be very clear about what your concerns are as a constituent. The following are some questions you may wish to have your Senator ask:

------------------------------------------------

WHY?
What has Iraq done since 1990 to justify risking the lives of hundreds of thousands of American servicemen and women – and millions of Iraqi civilians – in a new war?

What is the hard evidence linking Iraq to the September 11 attacks?

How can we make sure that UNMOVIC and other UN arms control programs will return to Iraq, an action that can both prevent war and lift economic sanctions?

As a signatory to the UN Charter and member of the Security Council, how will a unilateral invasion be justified under international law?

AT WHAT COST?

What will happen once Saddam Hussein is removed?

What are the expected numbers of civilian casualties?

How many troops will be required and what are plans for force protection?

What will be the cost to taxpayers and where
will the money come from?

What will be the impact on the international effort to bring those truly responsible for 9/11 to justice?

Are we prepared to stay and commit resources for 5 or more years for nation building efforts in Iraq?

-----------------------------------------------

Potential Witnesses who could provide critical perspectives of the Administration’s war plans:

Edward Peck - Former Ambassador to Iraq

Tun Myat – Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq (2000-2002)

Hans Von Sponeck – Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq (1998-2000)

Denis Halliday – Former U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq (1997-1998)

Scott Ritter – Former UNSCOM Weapons Inspector in Iraq

David Cortright or Alistair Millar - Fourth Freedom Forum

Richard Falk – Princeton University Professor of International Law

Laith Kubba – Iraqi intellectual, National Endowment for Democracy

Joe Stork - Human Rights Watch/Middle East

-----------------------------------------------

Senate Foriegn Relations Committee Roster:

Chair Joseph Biden (D-DE) 202-224-5042
Ranking Member Jesse Helms (R-NC) 202-224-6342
Alphabetical by state:
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) 202-224-3553
Christopher Dodd (D-CT) 202-224-2823
Bill Nelson (D-FL) 202-224-5274
Richard Lugar (R-IN) 202-224-4814
Sam Brownback (R-KS) 202-224-6521
John Kerry (D-MA) 202-224-2742
Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) 202-224-4524
Paul Wellstone (D-MN) 202-224-5641
Chuck Hagel (R-NE) 202-224-4224
Robert Torricelli (D-NJ) 202-224-3224
Gordon Smith (R-OR) 202-224-3753
Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) 202-224-2921
Bill Frist (R-TN) 202-224-4944
George Allen (R-VA) 202-224-4024
Russ Feingold (D-WI) 202-224-5323
John Rockefeller (D-WV) 202-224-6472
Michael Enzi (R-WY) 202-224-3424

Renounce Unethical Marketing Practices

Contributed by Working Assets

Last month, several dozen Florida residents found a dangerous surprise in their mailboxes -- free samples of the powerful anti-depressant drug, Prozac. The recipients of the drug appear to have been targeted by drug maker Eli Lilly based on information in their medical records that indicated they, at some time, had been prescribed an anti-depressant. Many of the facts are not yet in, but one thing is clear -- although especially appalling, this incident is simply a more aggressive version of the direct marketing of drugs to consumers and not something truly different.

Until a few years ago, drug companies were not allowed to advertise or market their products directly to individuals -- only to doctors and hospitals. While this led to many pleasant junket vacations for doctors, it kept medical professionals in the position of evaluating drug alternatives.

But drug companies wanted to market Prozac like Coca Cola, and after much lobbying and campaign contributions, were allowed to begin marketing directly to consumers. Now, drug advertising is the fastest growing form of advertising (highly valued in a recession), complete with television and magazine ads, coupons for free samples, and even pills mailed direct to you without any form of request or diagnosis.

The intent of this marketing is simple -- to get individuals to ask their doctors for particular name brand drugs for whatever ails them. This cuts the doctor’s recommendation out of the process and has been highly successful.

Why might Lilly have engaged in this kind of super-aggressive marketing? Most likely because their patent has run out on Prozac and generic alternatives are severely hurting the drug's sales and Lilly's profits.

Outrage at this extreme violation of privacy, not to mention the safety concerns raised by mailing unsolicited drugs, has prompted an apology from Lilly. However, the real outrage should be that these practices might be legal! Lilly has not renounced the practice of using a patient's private medical records to market its drugs. It should do so, and halt all consumer marketing until it can create a code of ethics to prevent any such practices in the future.

Call to action

Tell Eli Lilly CEO, Sidney Taurel, that examining patients' medical records is an invasion of privacy and the drug company should immediately cease all such dangerous and unethical marketing practices.

Congress must respond to the exploding problem of predatory lending in lower income and minority communities.

Predatory lenders -- including many mortgage companies and other financial institutions -- prey on these communities with a variety of aggressive and deceptive practices. These lenders charge borrowers interest rates well above what the borrowers' credit records indicate they should receive and load the loans down with a number of hidden fees.

Predatory lenders take advantage of people who don't understand what they are agreeing to and prevent them from enjoying the full benefits of homeownership. Congress needs to curb these predatory practices that unfairly mire consumers in debt.

Part of the solution is improving borrowers' education about the lending process, but we also need to change our country's laws to prohibit predatory practices. Congress went part of the way in passing some protections in the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994, but it still needs to prohibit many predatory practices.

I strongly urge you to support and co-sponsor S. 2438 / HR 1051, which would take needed steps to address the growing problem of predatory lending. Thank you for your time. I look forward to your response and your commitment to protect homeowners and potential homebuyers from these abusive lending practices.