CA: No on 78, 79

Riverside Press-Enterprise ^ | 10/2/05 | Opinion

[NormsRevenge]

California voters will be in dire need of medicine after trying to sort through the conflicting claims about prescription drug discounts in Props. 78 and 79. When these competing measures call one another flawed, both are right. Neither initiative deserves to pass.

Prop. 79 proposes a prescription drug program that would use the state's health-care plan for the poor and disabled to leverage lower drug prices. The state would negotiate price reductions from drug makers by requiring them to give discounts or face a loss of access to the state's lucrative Medi-Cal market. The discounts would be available to Californians making up to $77,000 a year for a family of four, or 400 percent of the federal poverty level.

Prop. 78 proposes a drug discount program with voluntary participation by drug companies. The state would negotiate with drug manufacturers for discounts for people earning up to $58,000 yearly for a family of four, or 300 percent of the federal poverty level.

Prop. 78 can be quickly dismissed. It exists solely because drug companies want to derail Prop. 79. Drug manufacturers could offer voluntary discounts now; there is no need to put this on the ballot.

Under Prop. 78, drug makers would suffer no penalty for not participating in the discount program, which means there is no guarantee of any price cut. And one provision cancels the program if there are insufficient discounts to make it worthwhile, giving drug companies the power to junk the whole concept.

Prop. 79 has its own set of fatal flaws. The state's legislative analyst notes that linking the discounts to Medi-Cal could result in drug companies offering fewer rebates to the Medi-Cal program, inflating costs to taxpayers.

The measure also would allow private lawsuits against drug companies over "unconscionable price" or "unjust or unreasonable profit." Those terms are never defined, leaving the door wide open to ambitious lawyers whose litigation would only drive up drug costs. But the attorneys will have to get in line behind the drug companies, who promise to sue if Prop. 79 passes. It would likely be tangled in court for years.

Confronting the rising cost of prescription drugs requires careful study and deliberation, not defective plans baying for voters' attentions in noisy initiative campaigns.

Vote no on Props. 78 and 79.

For a list of Press-Enterprise endorsements to date, please visit www.pe.com/localnews/opinion

[DumpsterDiver]

Count me in for a No vote on each of these two propositions.

[stopem]

Marching endlessly towards socialism, but ending in bankrupcy, California.

It appears that not just CA is marching toward socialism. There are federal programs that people earning over $300K can receive, for disabled children. The program will cover housing, medicines, healthcare, even experimental programs. Not just state programs but federal programs that pay for almost every expense related to a disabled child regardless of parents income.

[calcowgirl]

NO on 78!
NO on 79!

Yep.