Ha!! You are too naive to think that a CEO would forfeit his bonus because of WHATEVER happens to a company under his watch. There are cases when companies go under, fires thousands of employees, files bankruptcy and yet the CEOs give themselves record bonuses.

They'll just jack up the price on a few items to make up the difference.

Welcome to the new "Police State of America" where only your government knows what is best for you! I actually had to show my ID the other day at Home Depot just to buy some Spray Paint! Land of the Free??? Not any more!!!

Area 52

Welcome to the new "Police State of America" where only your government knows what is best for you! I actually had to show my ID the other day at Home Depot just to buy some Spray Paint! Land of the Free??? Not any more!!!

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

And I'll bet you're one of the complainers about graffitti, meth labs, drugs in America and so on too.

What a loon.

"Corporate Drug Dealers Busted Dealing Drugs to Street Dealers. Fed Gov't reaps $75 Million Profit on Deal" Lmfao

Yeah, Christina.... I'll bet YOU would do the right thing and tell them to keep their lousy bonus.

Oh...wait, before THAT would happen you would have to spend $250,000 PLUS on your education, spend long nights actually studying while in college instead of partying and screwing every guy or girl who winks at you or buys you a cheap drink. Maintain a GPA that would shame a NASA personnel file and make 100% certain that whatever choices you make as a VP or other executive in the lost corner of some company doesn't sink your ship. THEN AND ONLY THEN you may get a shot at being a CEO. When you hit 50 years old or so.

I'll bet the CEO of CVS ends up in deep shiznit with the Stock ownership of CVS. It is after all a public company. And most stock owners don't appreciate $75 million dollar fines...But I am sure your against those evil stock owners too...right?

Here is an idea for those who have some "Issue" with people who get rich by working or studying their ass off. Either do the same thing and enjoy it also... Or go about your business working for the man.... No complaints though...grow up, Christina..... Learn that there is NOTHING WRONG with success. The only reason a person has an issue with success...is because they have not done what it takes to attain it and wish to blame EVERYONE but themselves.

Interesting....I wonder if the the Gov. actually looked at how many people bought medicine for stuffy noses and what the quantity was?

I hear so many people crying about how hard it is to get medicine, but if they did not control the amount given out to what people could physically take with out dying, then this should not be civil, it should be criminal and those involved tried for murder because METH KILLS those stupid enough to try it.

What a loon.

Don't be so Harsh on yourself Former! You know what they say when it hits the Fan?

GYRINE!!!!

They need to stop treating this as a civil court violation and start JAILING every corporate officer responsible for the corrupt and illegal acts of their companies. To easy for the beancounters to shell out a few bucks and keep doing what they are doing

Derek, you are absolutely correct, there is nothing wrong with success. You are absolutely wrong if you think success is measured by making 10K - 15K an hour, on the backs of workers who may make $15.00 an hour. Should they make more? Absolutely! 1000X more, not so much. Stock owners should be outraged! I went to college, I work hard, I have come a very long way in my field. Do others make more or less than I? Yep, and sometimes it's justified and sometimes not, but the disparity between executive pay and the pay of those who actually do the work is NOT. Do you know what the CEO of CVS looks like? Has he ever smiled at you, given you advice on how to care for your cold, or thanked you for your business? I doubt it. CEOs can moan and groan all day long about how hard they have worked and how much responsibility they have, but face, it without the "little" people who keep getting pinched so that the CEO can be "justly" rewarded, there would be no CVS to worry about. No bonuses, no stockholder returns, nada.

And lastly, if you think that CEO will feel even a slight repurcussion for that fine, you are either naive or stupid. Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and go with naive for now.

@ MOS - yes meth does kill those stupid enough to use it so why on earth would you charge the company that makes medicine. If I drink a liter of vodka and die that's my fault, not the liquor store/manufacturer. I don't pity a meth addict who overdoses, I pity the person they kill by accident.

Oh...wait, before THAT would happen you would have to spend $250,000 PLUS on your education, spend long nights actually studying while in college instead of partying and screwing every guy or girl who winks at you or buys you a cheap drink. Maintain a GPA that would shame a NASA personnel file and make 100% certain that whatever choices you make as a VP or other executive in the lost corner of some company doesn't sink your ship. THEN AND ONLY THEN you may get a shot at being a CEO. When you hit 50 years old or so.

Really? Can we vet this high standard you claim? Because it's not hard to find a half-dozen CEO's who are lazy screwoffs who make incredibly bad decisions. I just want to re-highlight this one:

make 100% certain that whatever choices you make as a VP or other executive in the lost corner of some company doesn't sink your ship

What's funny about this statement is that AFTER ya get to be CEO, it doesn't seem to matter if you make good, bad, or indifferent choices. Your off-salary compensation is insane and completely out of proportion to what you actually were capable of doing for the company. Which is the point. I really DO NOT CARE if CEO's think they're the cream of the crop or not. I care if they are held to the same standards for failure that the rest of us are, and it is painfully obvious that THEY ARE FLAT-OUT NOT HELD TO ANY STANDARDS WHATSOEVER.

This fine is stupid and will not help the economy 8( good job A-holes. I wouldn't be surprised if they have to lay off folks so they can cover the costs.

Wow, they have been selling these products for over 30 years and they are now discovering this.

Seems more like another method of taking away meds from the people (old and disabled) under the Obama Care Plan.

30 years ago, meth was not the problem it is today.

And this has NOTHING to do with the Obama administration, as these rules have been in effect for years... (are you just now discovering this?)

Who you wanna try and blame now?

They have $$$$$$millions crossing the border everyday and they fine the drug stores? I suppose you have to do something if you can't stop the real problem.

I love all these idiots that complain about CEO compensation. This is America and if you don't like the way a company operates, don't buy their products and don't invest in them. The thing is that if the CEO is earning big profits for the company, investors don't care what he or she is earning. I would wager that almost, if not all these people that comp[lain about Executive compensation were asked "Hey, wanna be the CEO of CVS for 20 mil a year?" Few if any would turn down the offer. You should be far more upset about the 6 figure incomes of State and Federal employees that literally do not even have to show up for work on any regular basis.

I work hard and earna decent salary, I've made my firm a lot of money. My boss makes six time I do and I will say I would love to one day have his job. The employees in the firm are treated fairly whether they ear $15 per hour or $150.

I am truly disheartened as an American when companies are fined big amounts due to ridiculous rules and legislation. The fines do nothing other than pad government slush funds, jeopardize jobs and increase prices. It's all a sham, they know that you can't keep this stuff off the market, it just goes underground. Sheer lunacy.

And so they bring the Meth in from Mexico. Gov't fails again.

(Heck, at least the money would have stayed in the US, I guess it's all part of the "regulate anything that makes money until it can't make money and has to go overseas to make money, plan")

As far as CEO's, 99% make less than our professional athletes.

Yes, we pay people who play GAMES more than 99% of US CEO's. But then we act like it is outrageous how much they make. A guy catches a ball and makes more money.

Let's just call it what it is, jealousy. When a CEO makes a few million a year, it hurts you just as much as when a football player makes the same amount.

But keep in mind that to liberals, nothing can be earned without taking it from someone else. They have no concept how business has enriched our country.

To them, the only thing that has helped our country be wealthy is the redistribution of that wealth.

Look at their leader, no experience in business. He was a... (punchline)...

"COMMUNITY ORGANIZER"

No really, I'm not kidding. A community organizer.

And for some reason he seems to be toxic to our economy. Maybe he can try to redistribute money from foreign countries back to the US with a worldwide tax.

Oh, wait, that was his plan "A".

And the other countries didn't want their money redistributed? I wonder why?

They make most meth right here and the cold medicines are supposed to be behind the counter. All you have to do is ask for them.

But CVS? I'm laughing because I stopped going there when they started that "have a blessed day" stuff. I just bet the are Dominionists.

These companies have been REPEATEDLY fined, chastised, cajoled, wrist-slapped, back-slapped, glad-handed, encouraged, and looked-the-other-wayed, all the while showing us EXACTLY where their interests and attention are.

SQUARELY and OMNIPOTENTLY on their own DEEP POCKETS

-regardless of the harm, costs, security risks, and deaths to the public interest.

Whether the public be children, mothers, the elderly, the infirm, diseased, healthy, inuterin, living, or dying.

#THEYJUSTDON'TCARE

This stuff can be purchased by the barrels in Mexico so the cartels really could care less 8( This just hurts Americans business and jobs... The sad thing is we punish our companies for this when the real problem is south of the border.

For those of us that have bad allergies, the drugs that contain Pseudoephedrine are the ONLY drugs that really work well to control our congestion. I personally feel that this is a dumbass way to control criminals. Lets restrict a good product and cause everyone who needs this product more inconvenience so that we can slow down (not stop) a handful of criminal drug makers.

Why should the stores be fined? Why not fine the manufacturers that put that ingredient in their product?

The "ingredient" to which you refer is legal. Have you ever heard of "Sudafed"? That is exactly the product this story is about (as well as similar branded pseudoephedrine products). Did you even read the article?! The law requires that retailers monitor sales of pseudoephedrine to prevent large sales, which are often made by those making meth. The law specifically applies to retailers. Do you also think that a tobacco company should be fined if a store sells cigarettes to an underage kid? The "logic" of your comment would suggest that to be the case.

You see, it would be impossible for the manufacturer to monitor who purchases the product at a point-of-sale retailer; it is far more practical to require the retailer to monitor such sales, and even easier when it's a place like a pharmacy, which is already highly regulated by local, state and federal agencies.

Your feeble attempt to shill your anti-government agenda is undermined even further by your obvious lack of understanding of both the law itself and practicality of administering the law, not to mention clear ignorance of simply "how things work."

Some states (such as Oregon) now require you to have a doctor's prescription in order to purchase these items. In my state, Washington, we don't have to get a prescription (yet) but we do have to have a valid ID and sign a log. I think they put your driver's license number into a database so that you can't just hop around to a bunch of stores loading up. It is a real hassle, but there is nothing that helps my allergies like Claritin D-12 (the regular Claritin 24 hour that you can get over the counter does nothing). I suspect that soon all states will require a prescription to purchase these items.

@ Underwhelmed:

Is it really that difficult for you to stand at the pharmacy counter and say "I need some Sudafed", then sign your name and show an ID?

It's way more than a handful. and it could be worse, they could have made it necessary to get a prescription...

@Underwhelmed

No one is stopping you from going and buying you box of of meds or even 2. But if you go in and buy 10 boxes you arent using it for allergies. They would expire before you used that many. Its still very available for use of allergies. If anything it would be easier to get for the individual since you dont have some meth cook coming in and buying the stores entire supply. Thsts what the law does. But be it to someone to complain about a law that doesnt affect them in the slightest way

They did the same exact thing several years earlier in other states (Oklahoma) but I don't think they were fined. This isn't the first time they've "messed up" this is a pattern.

I think the restriction is too strict - that's my problem with it. Sudafed works best for our family. But I am only allowed to purchase about a 2 week supply each month. Right there is the first problem. Second problem is, my kids are minors, so MY supply has to cover my kids, too, which is absolutely ridiculous. If I could get a prescription, that would be a lot better. It's tracked by my license number, and I can't get a proper amount to make it worthwhile. Shame on you drug addicts for f'ing up the medication that works best for me and my family. And I don't want any meth head family members dumping me.

@tw1sted: Not really. My mom used to buy this in bulk to keep on hand for our family.

Why not also make it harder to buy Clorox and Ammonia? They can be used to create Chlorine gas and other dangerous substances.

This refers to very large purchases only. They aren't being fined for what is sold a few or one at a time. Just Google Sudafed and you'll see a ton of "off shore" sellers of pseudo ephedrine, some which are stings. This is a huge problem unless you are a "cooker", the it's a different problem! There is also a plant called Ephedra, which grows in the southwest, also known as "Mormon Tea", which contains the original version of the drug. Different species of this grow all over the desert world.

Your feeble attempt to shill your anti-government agenda is undermined even further by your obvious lack of understanding of both the law itself and practicality of administering the law, not to mention clear ignorance of simply "how things work."

Thanks for your insight there COMRADE!

Wow, where to begin well first maybe this is just a Darwin test. I'm baffled that the low end of the IQ scale can have such problems buying any of these products yet are able to post here.

First off you can still buy this product if you need it so... for the dumb ones ask at the counter as these products are now behind the counter because they can be abused. No you don't need a prescription.

Second for jmk, if you have passed a drivers test and have a vehicle then....GO TO TWO DIFFERENT STORES. No need to thank me helping the special get through a day is thanks enough.

Meth is a horrible problem and the rules now in place are the least offensive and least inconvenient so how can anyone actually object?

You're right underwhelmed. It is the best allergy medicine on the market. The whole meth thing is a joke. They are legalizing marijuana to be sold even though it is not going through any FDA approval process. In brownies and milkshakes.

If the government were to do this with every product that can make something illegal we'd have to report almost all of our shopping to the government.

They can make it available by perscription only. We all know that when drugs are regulated by perscription, they are never abused. Yeah, right.

Actually, you can't go to two different stores. The database is tied to your driver's license in most states.

The amount you can purchase is so small that it won't even last you 30 days. Add on the fact that if the whole family is sick and needs the stuff you can't buy enough for everyone. During the height of cold season, I have to get my parents to use their driver's license so that I can have enough on hand to take care of the kids, my husband who works the same hours as the pharmacy, and myself.

@Jim-336338 So then your LOGIC would dictate that a gas station should be held liable if someone purchases gas and then commits arson with it, correct? Or surely gun retailers should go the gallows for selling weapons that are later used to commit any number of crimes, wouldn't you think? Maybe someone will be so offended by your point of view, that they will go to work tomorrow and shoot their coworkers and burn the building down, after which we can have the sale of all firearms outlawed, require a license to purchase gasoline, and hit ole Jim-336338 with a hefty civil lawsuit fine of a few MIL for every person involved. This kind of "take no responsibility for your own actions" mentallity has taken over our society. This is the same bureaucratic crap that has people trying to sympathys with criminals of some of the most heinous crimes ever committed. It is used by politicians and the media to distract attention from the fact that nothing of any consequence is being done, or perhaps can even be done, to solve these crime problems. If we are going to use this "go back to the source approach" to crime fighting, the entire reason that we have 99% of all crime is because of our society's common denomenator... MONEY. So it seems that with ole Jim's logic there that the people who make and issue money should be held accountable for all the evil that results.

Mike....you obviously are one of the ones at the low end of the IQ scale. JMK cannot just drive to a different store as the database is linked. If it were not then the system would work even worse than it does now to keep meth from being made. Her point IS valid and your lack of understanding on how the system works should really preclude you from ever commenting again on OTHER people's IQ levels.

Pseudoephedrine should never have been given OTC status in the first place, it is one of the most dangerous and abused substances available. By having it available 'behind the counter' there is some margin of safety added.

Good life,

how much sudafed are you taking? I don't know the exact number limit over time, but during allergy season, which for me is April and May, I go in and buy one 96 pack (with no excessive hassle) and that gets me through the season. Now, if you're taking 96 a week you might have a bigger problem.

Have you tried Claritin or perhaps Zyrtec to combat the histamine reaction, in combination with smaller amounts of Sudafed to take care of the congestion? When I do this I only need one (or rarely two) sudafeds a day.

By the way, too much Sudafed can tend to cause high blood pressure.

Meth is a horrible problem and the rules now in place are the least offensive and least inconvenient so how can anyone actually object?

Well, obviously we are. You know what would be really cool? I know, let's try

ENDING THE WASTEFUL AND TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE WAR ON DRUGS.

Then, when some new substance like Meth becomes a huge problem, people can openly say "I have a problem" without wondering if Johnny Law will come storming down on their head and ruin their lives. And ordinary casual consumers of legal substances don't have to worry about Johny Law coming storming down on their heads and ruining their lives.

I would like, for example, to see a study detailing exactly HOW EFFECTIVE THE SUDAFED CLAMPDOWN IS. It would be fascinating to see a database of meth busts both before and after the clampdown in various regions.

My guess is, since it is still a huge problem, the clampdown on these over the counter, totally legal substances has produced EXACTLY ZERO EFFECT. What do you want to bet?

goodlife - you make it sound like you are one pill popping family. What does your family doctor think of the quantity of meds you consume?

I think goodlife makes a valid point. I have a family member who has the exact same complaint... he works long hours and his wife has to pick up the Sudafed for the family during cold season. It's a definite problem for them... they have 5 teenagers living at home. And of course when one person gets sick, they all do. Try explaining to a pharmacy counter why they need enough for seven people.

Because some people have horrible allergies that are alleviated by these drugs. And if you have an allergic reaction to any one of the drugs prescribed to you that haven't been tested properly or just aren't good for your particular body type, having Benedryl in the house can be a life saver.

@maximillo : In Minnesota they put all the Pseudoephedrine behind the counter and put the restrictions on the sale, IE limits and sign your name to get some. The meth lab busts in the state was down about 80% or so. So moving it behind the counter has stopped the small meth labs that showed up, which were in large numbers. So it does make a difference. ANY amount of difference is good considering all the toxic chemicals used making it. Especially considering the places the meth labs started popping up. Also, most of the meth that is found by "JOHNNY LAW" in Minnesota is more than likely comes from outside the US (as most drugs do).

To Derek V-

You've got a little something on your chin there, buddy. Been hanging out with the CEO? CEO salaries are 650x that of their average employee. 650x. I studied in school, got good grades, only screwed some of the pretty girls that winked at me, don't I deserve some pro-rated version of their salary?

If you think that CEO got in ANY TROUBLE AT ALL your either crazy or stupid. He got a bonus, or he got fired and took his golden parachute. Either way, he got PAID where any other employee would have been fired on the spot and arrested! And if he got fired, he's already been rehired at some other company.

You're either a CEO yourself or a fool, or both.

maximillio - All it did was increase the amount of money flowing out of our country (mainly to Mexico in the case of Meth).

But it's not like we need that money here in the US, right?

There has been no impact on price. (No, I don't use meth, I saw a TV show on it, and that's what a cop on a meth task force said.)

It is one of those things where if concentrated, 1,000,000 doses could come in on one big backpack from Mexico. 20-30 million illegal immigrants found a way into this country, so you do the math.

Just more Gov't control. Here's a trivia question for you: name 1 thing that Gov't gave up it's control of in the last 30 years.

Another trivia question: How big was the Mafia before Gov't Prohibition of Alcohol?

Derek - Wow, a bit over the top, wouldn't you say? Why are you get so angry when others criticize the obscene reimbursement that CEOs of some companies make? NO ONE is so important to a company or makes such brilliant decisions to justify the pay and benefits that many CEOs make. It's particularly obscene when CEOs of companies who accepted government bailout money receive huge compensation packages at the expense of taxpayers who are scraping to pay their bills. And what proof do you have that ALL these CEOs spend $250,000 plus on their educations?

Christina was only trying to make the point that CEOs receive ridiculous bonuses regardless of how incompetent they might be.

To MikeyMike

I am happy that you only have allergic reactions during allergy season. However, for those of us that have good ole everyday indoor/outdoor allergies that know no season, the 96 count pack will not last a month. One tablet every 6 hours 24/7 is 120 in a 30 day period. Couple that with the fact that I had 2 teenage sons that also suffered from these allergies, you have a minimum requirement of 360 tablets in any given month. Well above any limits placed on purchases. My sons are, thankfully, now over 18 years of age and can purchase their own, but I understand the dilemma faced by people with multiple allergy sufferers in the same family. We dealt with it as best we could, but it is hardly surprising that allergy sufferers resent having to make do because of meth addicts.

And football players get paid more money than the CEO's even when they are on a losing team.....

Underwhelmed- I agree completely, these medicines are the only ones I have found that open up my lungs and let me expel the mucus. I have severe mold allergy's but am made to feel like a felon every time I go to buy some I have to pull out my drivers license and fill out forms. It is an inconvenience I put up with since I have no other choice. The meth productionis certainly a problem in some areas, but you have to wounder how many millions pharmaceutical companies made of of it during the 50's when it was prescribed by doctors like it was vitamin pills.

Wow, if I was strung out on Allergymedicine like so many people her claim to be, I would move to some other place that doesn't have so many allergens. Texas lady, move to the high mountains or Alaska and see if that helps.

120 allergy pills a month...how do you function?

Actually, most CEO's make most Pro Ball Players look like broke-as$ chumps...

How many Quarterbacks can you think of that are making more than 50mil/yr? (and CEO's don't have to kick 30% down to their agents)

I'm with super_grrrrl78, Claratin-D 12hour is all that works for me. I don't mind signing three times and giving my license over to the pharmacist, but the pharmacists act like I just requested their firstborn, they are lazy and don't want to do it, that's probably were the breakdown was. I wish they would but Claratin back on prescription only, it cost me a lot less then with just a copay.

As far as allergies are concerned, try local honey...its cheaper, tastes great and it helps ur body become unaffected by allergens in your area unlike sudafed which helps just helps you "get through it" and if you ask any doctor they will say the same thing..

If you think there is a pharmacy in the country that doesn't sell products containing pseudoehpederine, you are sadly mistaken. The lawsuit simply states that they sold amounts that can only be logically used to make meth.

There is a meth epidemic in the town I grew up in, although I've never been involved in the manufacture or use of ANY illegal stimulant, it is pretty common knowledge that when California passed these laws (drugs containing this ingredient are all behind the counter now) they simply started getting the raw ingredients from Mexico and Nevada (neither of which regulate or even track large scale purchases).

This story and ones like it are a smoke screen that cover a bigger issue and give the impression that our leaders can do something to slow methamphetamine production. They can't. Not until it is no longer legal or profitable for big pharma to produce mass amounts of the key ingredient here. Think about it, have you seen a shortage of cold medicine because tons of this stuff is being bought up and turned into illegal narcotics? Pharmaceutical companies know what they're doing and they do not care.

I like Walgreens too, but they sell the exact same drugs that contain meth ingredients. All pharmacies sell these products.

A consumer can go and buy there box for allergies and go right ahead and buy another when they run out. Its to prevent someone from buying 10 boxes in 10 locations. When someone is buying multiple boxes a red flag goes up. Pretty simple.

Walgreens has better prices for the things I buy than CVS here in South Florida, as well. I developed allergies after moving here from the North. When I wasn't sure what off-the-shelf stuff might work, I asked the Walgreens pharmacist, knowing in many US States they can often dispense something a little stronger from behind the counter.

Yeah, I had to show my driver's license, and maybe sign a legal form (it was a year ago so I don't recall well), but the price was reasonable and it worked well for me. Fortunately my allergy attacks aren't too frequent (but a bitch when they do), but I'll return to Walgreens pharmacy counter again for the next one.

Pseudo-ephedrine, sold as Sudafed, is legal because it has a valid medical application, relief from congestion, and it works, with few side effects beyond a tendancy to cause elevated blood pressure.

When someone is buying multiple boxes a red flag goes up. Pretty simple.

But does it work? Has the production of methamphetamines decreased because of this intrusion into our private lives?

I mean, it's really simple to require every law-abiding citizen to affix a camera to his shoulder to make sure we know what he's doing at all times, but would that decrease crime? And would it be an utterly violent assault on our civil rights?

@maximillo. See my comments above.

Eric: The article is VERY poorly written esp. by someone who's supposed to be a pro. I too would like to know how they knew they were selling to meth. dealers other than someone coming in & wanting a box full of it. That's not rocket science to figure that one out.

Even on the series "Breaking Bad" on T.V. the dealers know not to have one person buy large. amts. of it at one time. Besides, I thought all stores had put it behind the pharmacy counter & it has to be asked for to monitor its' sales.

So, in short, you just don't think that companies should have to follow the law at all. That sounds really reasonable. Why not let corporations do whatever they want? Furthermore, the CEO himself admitted that the company violated its own protocols, much less the law itself, which further undermines your poor argument.

Wonder if CVS will get sued because they sell candy bars which on the surface are just a tasty treat, but they can and do make people fat...

What does that have to do with anything in the story? Regulatory bodies have per se civil fines for infractions. If you choose to file a suit against someone, the penalties are not per se, nor are the circumstances that give rise to a civil action. This attempt at an argument is patently absurd.

It's really amazing how you people with your anti-government agendas truly push the boundaries of logic and sense when it comes to trying to rationalize your agendas.

Yeah, we'd be much better off in the world you want to live in, where corporations could run amok without regulation and without any accountability (even to its own policies).

Jim

Point out where I said there should be no regulations at all. How did you jump to the conclusion that I have anti-government agendas? Reach much? The candy bar yes was a poor analogy, but think about it. If we were to monitor eveything that was potentially harmful to humans, we'd all be locked up or have to wear a rubber suit.

It's not about monitoring "eveything that was potentially harmful to humans". It's about monitoring a product that is KNOWN TO BE THE MAIN INGREDIENT IN METH PRODUCTION...

Other stores don't seem to have a problem with this regulation, why did CVS?

Point out where I said there should be no regulations at all. How did you jump to the conclusion that I have anti-government agendas? Reach much? ... If we were to monitor eveything that was potentially harmful to humans, we'd all be locked up or have to wear a rubber suit.

Contradict much?

We're not regulating everything that could be potentially harmful. A specific product is being regulated, for very specific reasons, and nobody is asking them to regulate "everything that was potenitally harmful." This is nothing but a straw man argument, and one could take it as an extension of your agenda against government regulation.

I suppose that I misconstrued the idea that you think someone should "benefit" from a fine being levied, as opposed to the fine being a penalty for noncompliance with laws and regulations, to be an anti-government agenda when it is more likely that it simply lacks basic logic and an understanding of "accountability."

Maybe they sent undercover people into the local CVS stores to try and buy the stuff and they weren't carded or maybe it wasn't behind counter like it should've been. Or maybe CVS was keeping sloppy records.

Yes, it's all politics. Nobody controls what goes into cosmetics except the makers. Women wonder why breast cancer is going up. Look up the ingredients of them and most would stop using them! Having women without breast cancer would be bad business. Politics is just jumping on one band wagon to another, so as to look POLITICALLY CORRECT at the time. Rarely does anything get solved, just another business or bureaucracy is created to deal with it, such as the DEA. The DEA, FDA, CIA and on and on have turned into huge money making schemes as has the military. Look at Blackwater and Haliburton. A little off the subject here, but it's all cat and mouse!

@Underwhelmed-488063

I completely agree. I have tried them all over the last 20 years, and pseudophedrine is the only thing that works.

When my allergies hit, they hit hard. To give everyone an idea of what I mean, I'm talking ~20 sneezes per minute, lasting for 5-10 minutes per fit, with 2-3 such fits per hour, which lasts for ~2-3 DAYS. The sinus pressure is so intense that I can't function at all, and have to lie down for two or three days. Nothing helps except psuedophedrine, which allows me to function almost normally, although my sniffling and occasional sneezes make my coworkers too nervous for me to work at the office.

I had to spend 2 hours searching for an open pharmacy last month, because my allergies hit me hard at about 8 PM on a Saturday night, and I used the last of my pseudophedrine a week before. Every place I went was closed. The store was open, mind you, but the pharmacy was closed. I tried Walgreens, CVS, Wal-Mart, Eckerd, Rite-Aid, Target, etc. I was furious after my 5th store. The clerks kept telling me that they couldn't go back to the pharmacy and get me the medicine due to legal regulations. Why can't a clerk just do this? All they need to do is look at my driver's license, record some info, and let me purchase the medicine. Eventually, a clerk was kind enough to call around and found a CVS with an open pharmacy, about 30 minutes away. This is in the suburbs, close to a major city. By the time I got there, my windshield was covered with spray from my sneezes. It was a miracle I didn't get into a wreck at some point.

Make up your mind Mandy! First you say there are too many regulations on things then you suggest making this a prescription drug (more regulations!)

Lets make everything prescription!!! That way I, as a physician can get my cut. I hate it when those pharmacies get around giving me my cut by selling tylenol with9out chicking with me first. They are just making money off the sick without regard for what those people might do with the drug. Tylenol in very large quantities can kill you. If perscriptions were required for tylenol then there would be far fewer durg overdoses on that substance cause i would only alloow folks to have 6 or 12 at a time before they had to come see me for another scrip. And after all maybe the co-pay would be 20 dollars and the insurance company would pick up the other 130 dollars. Noibody gets hurt and it is free money for me and the patient is better protected.

Wow, water can also kill you in very large quantities. Lets regulate that too so people won't drown.

@Joe D. Glenn First of all, you are the kind of doctor that drive people to self medicating. Trying to give people only 6 or 12 Tylenol at a time and expecting them to come back every time they have a headache or anything. That is ridiculous espeially at $20-$30 for each visit. Second of all if you have spent the time in school to become a doctor shouldn't you have learned to spell correctly along the way?

Good luck finding anyone who will listen. But I couldn't agree more!!

Wow, do so many people NEED to get high? I mean, having an alcoholic drink does in no way get you as high as one bong hit. Why do we need to get blasted.

Because a lot of people use it as an escape from their normal, crappy lives...

"having an alcoholic drink does in no way get you as high as one bong hit."

Are you kidding? Or are you simply that ignorant about marijuana? Drinking gets you MORE intoxicated than a bong hit will. Alcohol is FAR more impairing than cannabis is by any measurable standard.

You can literally kill yourself with alcohol (it is technically a poison you know), you CANNOT with pot.

Just don't shop at CVS. The government isn't forcing you to pay anything. Why blame the government if CVS chooses to pass the cost on to the people still dumb enough to shop there after they potentially increase prices? I wouldn't think that this idea is all that complex, but some comments here indicate otherwise.

I guess you're another one of those who think that corporations should simply not have to pay fines or have to be accountable to any laws because some people are dumb enough to continue to patronize those businesses after they pass on the costs of violating the law.

No Bruce, what you are saying is nonsense. The law was put in place to prevent unscrupulous OTC pharmaceutical retailers from profiting by selling massive amounts of pseudoephedrine to illegal drug manufacturers. If a retailer sells larger quantities that exceed legal limits, it can be reasonably assumed that the retailer is knowingly profiting from a sale that supports criminal activity. Therefore the retailer doesn't just get to walk away with the profits they made from those sales. The fine takes back those profits and penalizes the retailer in order to discourage unlawful activity. While I agree the cost will be passed on to consumers, blame CVS not law enforcement.

CVS deservs its profit selling ingredients to make meth. This is America! Why should all of the illegal, non-productive drug dealers make all of that money. As a CEO of a large Pharmacy chain I am in sympathy with CVS. Actually the government should, in the interest of its citizens, just cut out the middleman and allow CVS and other pharmacys to simply sell meth itself and better protect the people by running the illegal drug dealers out of business. Everybody would benefit including the durg users themselves having a higher quality product sold to them by people they can trust.

OK another comment without much thought behind it. Mr. Carter in a open market place if CVS passes the fine on to the customers by raising prices... guess what will happen. I know Mr Carter that you want to believe in an abusive big brother government but if CVS does what you suggest we will simply shop at... Walgrens, Sav-on or any of the others.

deleted

The Corporation OWNS all the stores. CVS is not a franchise.

Thank you for that clarification...

My prescriptions won't be going up at all. I don't shop at CVS. Are you saying you have no other pharmacy where you live?

I'm saying that my insurance company either makes us use their mail order (who wants their 'scripts' delivered in the mail?) or CVS to fill our prescriptions and it has to be for a 90 day supply. Of course you can get a 30 day supply if you want but that will cost you also. No other options, unless you want to pay much higher prices, then you can go to any pharmacy you desire. The cost of that makes it nearly impossible. I think you would be surprised to find that these companies are more intertwined than you think. And CVS sucks, at least in my opinion anyway. They seem to regularly mess up my order even though I have been going there for two years now. And they still don't know me personally.

omg another one who posts without thinking.... it's a competitive market place truthspeaks so shop somewhere else if that happens. Do you really think that CVS doesn't know that their price structures must be competitive to earn our business.

omg another moron who can't read and comprehend what is written...MY insurance makes me use CVS or mail order or pay more. get it yet? Go back to sleep moron. They don't have to be competitive when I have only one choice. geezz......get over yourself already

@truth

So they will just raise YOUR prices? What about the millions of others who actually have a choice where they shop?

Who's a moron now?

Wahhh! They did go after the store, which is owned by the corp which owns all the other stores that sold the drug withouf folllowing CA law.

But FedUp has a point here.... I have an analogy.... Let's say cops send a decoy into a convenience store to do a compliance check on carding before the sale of tobacco products, and the store fails the check.... The whole chain wouldn't get fined, just the location.

And sure, we can all whine aboiut the hassel to get the product, but bottomn line is, you STILL GET the product don't you? So I think some people are whinning a bit much and blowing it out of proportion. In relation to getting a supply for an entire sick family, though, that CAN be difficult, but not impossible. It's the only thing that helps my husband and we always have a box in our home and we have yet to be refused.... He just buys it the one time, I buy it the next, and so on..... It works just fine.

No, people who work in a drug store have to follow federal rules, not enforce them.

U a foo!

sooo.... gaveup, you think Meth should be derugulated? Just try to imagine the crime rate and health care costs after that? Anarchists for Freedom?

Got dang librels always trin to get the govnment in my pockets, i think everyone should be able to make meth, with the convinence of a corner farmacy. we donts need no laws, unless they help me uf corse. GO TEA!!! ya ;)

Alright Richard! I admire a man who sticks to his priciples. You sir are a true American. I salute you and in your honor I too will never shop at a CVS store again. Chicken lovers of America unite!

My cat used to love chicken. So i named him Chicken. I don't think he shopped at CVS either.

I like cats too. I have two but they don't like chicken that much. I still think they are American though because they shop at Walgreens.

Literally laughing out loud!

My cat loves ham... does CVS ever sell any ham??? and will they get fined if they sell too much.. what with all the salt and nitrates in it...