Posted on 09/09/2004 5:57:52 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, facing political fallout if he vetoes bills helping Californians import cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, pressed pharmaceutical industry leaders Thursday for an alternative plan to cut drug costs for California's poorest residents.
Schwarzenegger called the heads of several pharmaceutical companies Thursday, aide said, and pushed them to back his cost-cutting alternatives, which have already been rejected by state lawmakers. His proposals would establish group discounts, give poor Californians electronic cards that pharmacists could "swipe" to find the cheapest prices and hire an outside vendor to negotiate other price discounts.
Advocates for bills on the governor's desk that make it easier to import drugs said Thursday's telephone calls reveal the political dilemma Schwarzenegger faces if he kills legislation likely to be popular with voters, but opposed by giant pharmaceutical companies that are among his biggest campaign contributors.
Some of the same companies, including Amgen, Pfizer and Abbott Laboratories, helped pay for Schwarzenegger and his staff to travel to the Republican National Convention in New York City this month.
If Schwarzenegger persuaded the drug companies to back his plan, which they previously have not, he could veto the import bills while saying he negotiated cost-cutting alternatives. That compromise could also free drug companies from legislation they fought unsuccessfully all year.
"Right now the ball is in the drug companies' court," said Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Margita Thompson, "but the governor was encouraged by the leaders' reactions."
Thompson declined to name which company heads he called, but said Schwarzenegger outlined proposals "which he believes are better alternatives to the drug importation bills."
Democratic lawmakers rejected those same proposals three weeks ago, saying that even the cheapest prices they might produce would still be far higher than buying drugs from Canadian pharmacies where prices are capped by the government. Instead, they passed bills pushing the state to buy cheaper Canadian drugs for multibillion-dollar state programs that supply state prison inmates and Medi-Cal recipients, while setting up Web sites where consumers of all incomes could shop Canadian pharmacies for cheaper drugs.
Canadian drugs typically cost up to 40 percent less than those sold in U.S. pharmacies.
Schwarzenegger and the Legislature's Republicans have argued that importing drugs from Canada is illegal and makes the state liable for safety issues that might arise. They also said it would do little to make drugs more affordable for the state's poorest residents.
"We just want the (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration to be able to look these drugs coming out of Web sites and say what's safe and what's not," said Bill Bradley, a spokesman for the 5,500-member California Pharmacists Association. Lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry could not be reached for comment, but even some Canadian pharmacists have warned that Internet pharmacies are already draining their nation's drug supplies.
At least four other states - Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota and Maine - have established Web sites to help residents buy cheaper Canadian drugs, and backers of the idea in California say the FDA has not interfered.
"It's clearly not illegal to set up a Web site to say, 'If you are going to do this, here's some pharmacies to work with,'" said Dan Reeves, senior aide to Assemblyman Dario Frommer, a Democrat from Los Angeles who wrote the Web site bill.
Reeves predicted Schwarzenegger will find himself "woefully disappointed" in the response of drug companies.
"They oppose anything that lowers cost," he said. "For the governor, this is his first go-around with these guys and he's going to learn they're not extraordinarily generous."
Drug companies have long defended their prices, arguing that they reflect the years it takes a product to move from research and testing to the market. Pharmaceutical firms maintain that siphoning money from their U.S. products will harm the nation's status as a world leader in medical research and development.
---
On the Net:
Read the bills, AB1957, SB1149, SB1333 and SB1144 at http://www.legislature.ca.gov
Drug manufacturers call Schwarzenegger and ask him limit his payment to $1 for any future movies, and to demand that theaters lower the price of admission on all his films.
Further, they asked him not to spend more than $5 million on any future film projects.
Reeves is the typical whiner politico. Drug companies have no right to run a profit. They are here for the poor masses.
In your perfect world, who pays for R&D Reeves? Who pays for the literally thousands of items that don't pan out? Who pays for the settlements when a drug thought to be safe, causes unforseen side-effects?
Nothing is for free stupid.
State governments continue to believe in the Canadian drug fairy.
This is really the drug company's fault. They sell in the Canadian market at subsidized prices. Either the raise the Canadian prices to market levels, or they shouldn't be surprised that Americans are getting PO'd at the practice.
We pay higher prices here so Canadians can have lower prices.
If Canadians payed the true cost of their drugs, our prices would go down - slightly. Remember, Canada is 10% of the US population so a correction of the distortion would reflect the relative size of it. Our prices would probably fall no more than 7%. But, for those who get the 1/2 price meds via Canada it's a windfall. That the rest of us pay for.
Kindda like insurance fraud. We ALL pay in the end.
Sure, the Canadian government could bar American drug companies from their market if they don't play socialist ball, but which market do you want to piss off?
I'm all for drug companies making a decent profit. But, I don't want to subsidise Canadian people.
I'm the biggest free trader you ever met (love NAFTA, Taiwan, China, Wall Mart, Indians, etc.) but this is wrong and they will either wake up and smell reality or find their profits squeezed.
The latter would be bad because it would stifle drug development. It would be bad for everybody. They need to end the market distortion with Canada immediately.
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.