Toebin, I've been following this story for several weeks now with interest. Frankly, I am surprised that our gov had the brass kahunas (how does one spell that?) to pass the bill.
For the legal-minded folks here in this community, I'd be curious how this bill may create a comparative disadvantage for device makers. E.g., what does "doing business in Mass." really mean? Does Depuy Spine (based in Raynham, Mass.) now have new reporting requirements, but Medtronic and Synthes does not? I find it interesting that the pharma companies are included with the device companies; I am unsure of the consequences for both groups.
And speaking of consequences, how about the law of unintended consequences? Will this result in more reporting and paperwork that is impossible for the consumer access/find? I hope not! If this is truly about "transparency," then let's see how easy it is get the information. If it's buried in a 126-76M-198712-20Z-9998 form on the SEC site, who will take the time to retrieve it?!
Please, not another HIPPA debacle...
I apologize for being cynical. I most certainly believe in the reasoning behind the bill, as TRUE transparency is needed. Almost every day, the news here reports on the Big Dig and how its maintenance (physical & debt) continue to balloon. I've really lost faith in state and federal goverments to execute any program that has more then three moving parts!