Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump opens can of worms with blast at drugmakers
The Hill Extra ^ | 01/13/2017 | RACHEL ROUBEIN AND SARAH CHACKO

Posted on 01/13/2017 6:19:27 AM PST by GIdget2004

President-elect Donald Trump reopened an awkward division over high drug prices with fellow Republicans during his first press briefing this week -- putting lawmakers on defense on an issue they've tried to tamp down.

GOP lawmakers reacted in a way they've become accustomed to over the past year: Sorry, but we haven't seen his comments. Yet, Trump's call to "create new bidding procedures for the drug industry" puts Republicans in a tough spot, since it's a measure they traditionally oppose and Democrats historically support.

"We can agree to disagree at times," Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), a key Trump ally in the House, said. "I am not someone who believes the government should set pricing, as in price controls. I believe in a free market."

Democrats were more gleeful.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) highlighted the comments on the Senate floor and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) suggested Democrats and the president-elect could work together to give the Medicare program bargaining power.

The skyrocketing price of prescription drugs is among the public's top health concerns, as it's hitting them where it hurts -- their pocketbooks. And lawmakers have responded by berating pharmaceutical CEOs in hearings and launching investigations.

Presidential candidates railed against the high costs of drugs on the campaign trail, and both Sanders and Hillary Clinton proposed allowing Medicare to negotiate drugs. So did Trump in the early days of his campaign, although his healthcare platform never included the idea.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: drugmakers; drugmanufacturer; drugmanufacturers; peotustrumppresser; pharma
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: GIdget2004

The first thing Dubya did when he got into office was give the drug companies a sweetheart deal with Medicare Part D.

I suspect Rumsfeld was behind that.


41 posted on 01/13/2017 7:41:27 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (President Trump is coming, and the rule of law is coming with him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mtrott

“Drug development costs are staggering”. Quite true, however why is the American consumer paying those costs for the whole world? Why has our government refused to allow for the reimportation of pharmaceuticals and medical devices at current world prices? Why is the American medical industry not subject to the anti monopoly laws that every other American business has to conform to? Why are Americans continually allowing this situation to rob them financially considering that healthcare expenditures now approach over 1/3 of federal spending and those costs are growing at a 8-9% rate per year?


42 posted on 01/13/2017 7:42:05 AM PST by yadent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: JusPasenThru

How is it then that medical practices such as the Surgical Center of Oklahoma can charge what is does and remain in business? Do you not believe that an increase in such centers would not lower the costs of said medical care significantly, possibly by as much as 80%?


43 posted on 01/13/2017 7:49:43 AM PST by yadent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004
Right now, Medicare drug prices are offered by a system of competing private plans. This includes Medicare advantage and at least 1,000 prescription drug plans available through private plans.Thanks to this competition, the total cost of the Medicare drug plan is half of what it was projected to be when the program was created in 2003.

There are conservatives who believe that the drug companies are ripping people off and that if we allow government to negotiate prices, all of a sudden government will become benevolent and reliable, and we will all enjoy lower costs without any consequences. This is idiocy on parade.

When government talks about "negotiating" drug prices, it means instituting price controls. And what could possibly go wrong with price controls? Why is it that when it comes to this issue, conservatives can't wait to get into bed with the likes of Bernie Sanders?

44 posted on 01/13/2017 7:50:54 AM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JusPasenThru

There’s no free market in drugs. You have monopoly, monopsony, information as symmetries and enormous barriers to entry.


45 posted on 01/13/2017 7:54:31 AM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101
Does anybody know what the stated position is on a replacement other than mouthing more about “free market”?

What's wrong with the free market? What's wrong with a national market for healthcare plans rather than limiting availability to one state? What's wrong with removing all of the mandates forcing you to buy something you don't want or penalizing you financially for not buying what they want you to buy?

Markets work. Government mandates and control do not work. It's really that simple.

46 posted on 01/13/2017 7:56:14 AM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yadent

Well, if you want to take an alternative product manufactured abroad under who knows what sort of quality controls, then go for it. The FDA cannot inspect foreign pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities.

Also, there is a reason why drugs cost less in other parts of the world, i.e., that their per capita income levels are vastly lower and they cannot pay higher prices. Yes, we have a higher standard of living and income levels, so we can and do pay more.

Finally, where are you getting this about a “monopoly”? There is no monopoly. Look how many domestic drug companies there are. You have Lilly, Merck, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, Allergan, Amgen, Amylin, Centocor, Forest, just to name a few.


47 posted on 01/13/2017 7:58:11 AM PST by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: dp0622
Why they aren’t obligated to turn over negative results too is beyond me.

It takes, on average, 13 years and more than a billion dollars to bring a new drug to market. The reason for this is mostly due to FDA regulation. Have you ever listened to an ad for a drug therapy? Most of the time is spent warning you of potential negative side effects. Conservatives calling for more FDA regulation boggles the mind. Hundreds of therapies that could help people right now are languishing in years upon years of trials and conservatives are whining about needing more FDA regulations? Good grief.

When Oxycontin hit the market, pharma promised it would just be use for extreme cases like cancer patients.

Say what? Drug companies control how doctors prescribe their products? Oxycontin is a godsend for anyone suffering chronic pain. That it was abused has nothing to do with the company that created it, or the many suffering people that benefit from it.

48 posted on 01/13/2017 8:04:32 AM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Big Pharma should have to give meds to veterans for free then maybe, just maybe, those who need psych meds won’t be drugged into a stupor or become addicts and end up on the street or worse, dead.


49 posted on 01/13/2017 8:05:01 AM PST by huldah1776 ( Vote Pro-life! Allow God to bless America before He avenges the death of the innocent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dp0622
They Don’t have to and DIDN’T hand in Negative results from antidepressant studies, of which there were many. Why they aren’t obligated to turn over negative results too is beyond me. The FDA has to fix that.

Urban legend. Unless a source is cited. Otherwise fake news.

50 posted on 01/13/2017 8:06:21 AM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mtrott; yadent
Well, if you want to take an alternative product manufactured abroad under who knows what sort of quality controls, then go for it.

Would if I could, but I can't because it is against the law. Best damn law the pharmaceutical industry's lobbyists and campaign contributions can buy.

And Yadent's point was that reimportation of US manufactured drugs and medical devices are not allowed. Why is that? If the drug or device was already manufactured here, under FDA scrutiny and regulation, why can it not be purchased in, say, Canada or Mexico at the MUCH lower price there and shipped to your home here? Why? Because that would seriously cut into Big Pharma's profits. It has NOTHING to do with the safety of the drug or the device.
51 posted on 01/13/2017 8:09:07 AM PST by Garth Tater (What's mine is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Mase

“When government talks about “negotiating” drug prices, it means instituting price controls. And what could possibly go wrong with price controls? Why is it that when it comes to this issue, conservatives can’t wait to get into bed with the likes of Bernie Sanders?”

Thank you. What many fail to realize is that, usually, there is only one company who produces a certain brand name drug. I think some people have the notion that, for example Merck can be “played off” against Pfizer, in order to get them to compete and thereby obtain better pricing. But, since they do not make the same drug, they cannot do that.

If we, as a nation, want to “commoditize” drugs, we can go for it, but realize that the pace and scope of new drug development will slow to a crawl.


52 posted on 01/13/2017 8:09:56 AM PST by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mase
What's wrong with the free market? What's wrong with a national market for healthcare plans...What's wrong with removing all of the mandates...

Freedom is scary. It's not for everyone.
53 posted on 01/13/2017 8:22:22 AM PST by Garth Tater (What's mine is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

if I was at home I would send you it immediately. I guess you’re too lazy to look it up because it appears very quickly. Nothing Like A pompous statement from a person who thinks they know everything. You’re right. Corporations and pharmaceutical companies can do no wrong ever. We’re Republicans damn it.


54 posted on 01/13/2017 8:26:15 AM PST by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: nwrep

I also noticed that you didn’t comment on the true statements i made. That’s a leftist strategy. Ignore the truth.


55 posted on 01/13/2017 8:30:03 AM PST by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust conservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Don’t know that I agree with Trump here. The average cost of developing drugs is large. The Tufts Center reports that $2.6 billion is the average cost to develop “a new prescription medicine that gains marketing approval,” And that’s anything from aspirin to cancer drugs with aspirin coming cheap and more inclusive drugs raising the price. Along with the years to get marketing approval. Cut back on the big brother prices, and it will curtail the expense of the purchase. Too many hoops as the drug companies are just as trapped in an overblown economy as we are.

red


56 posted on 01/13/2017 8:44:39 AM PST by Redwood71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

Have you read Trump’s position paper on the topic?


57 posted on 01/13/2017 9:10:33 AM PST by Cobra64 (Common sense isn't common any more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mtrott
If we, as a nation, want to “commoditize” drugs, we can go for it, but realize that the pace and scope of new drug development will slow to a crawl.

Exactly so. Any country practicing price controls does not innovate new drug therapies. There are only a few countries left that bring new drugs to market. Most new drugs are discovered right here in the USA. Price controls will kill the golden goose. You can have cheap pharmaceuticals or you can have new silver bullets that cure or control diseases that were once a death sentence. You cannot have both.

58 posted on 01/13/2017 9:13:25 AM PST by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: dp0622
Your other statements are quite clear, thank you.

On the non-reporting of negative results, I thought there was a law requiring that, per this source:

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/hhs-take-steps-provide-more-information-about-clinical-trials-public

59 posted on 01/13/2017 9:18:51 AM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

Here’s something to consider in letting Medicare negotiate pricing. To negotiate successfully, you sometimes have to be willing to say no and walk away from the table. Which drugs should Medicare walk away from? You might set up a board to help determine costs and benefits of specific drugs, but then you would be accused of establishing death panels.


60 posted on 01/13/2017 9:26:41 AM PST by oincobx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson