[Brilliant]

It's a good idea, but it's not like it's new. It's been done before, and I doubt that there is much they can do with generics that hasn't been tried.

If they really want to make some headway, then they should ban pharmaceutical companies from discriminating against the American consumer. If they are selling pharmaceuticals in Canada for 1/2 the price that they are selling them for in the US, then they ought to be told that they must either raise their price in Canada or cut it in the US. The US consumer should not be expected to bear the full cost of R&D.

[TomGuy]

Ironically, Walmart has done more in the last year to provide lesser expensive generic prescriptions than the boondoggle Republican Medicare Prescription Bill.

Walmart now provides many $4-per-month generics in many states. But the boondoggle mandatory Prescription Bill insurance has co-pays at $5 and up and only for 'preferred generics' [that's a list the insurer determined to cover, not all generics].

It will be interesting to see whether other major drug chains (Walgreens, etc.) lower their generic drug prices to compete with the Big W.

[sure_fine]

"If they really want to make some headway, then they should ban pharmaceutical companies from discriminating against the American consumer."



couldn't be said better

[BlazingArizona]

If they really want to make some headway, then they should ban pharmaceutical companies from discriminating against the American consumer

There's no need to ban differential pricing, which occurs in a lot of industries. What we need to do is strip pharma companies of their special right to prevent consumers from shopping around on the worldwide drug market. If the Democrats do nothing else, they could win major points by stopping those FDA seizures of prescriptions being filled in foreign countries.

Years ago, the Clinton administration created a special Right To Shop Around for one of the party's important constituencies, homosexuals. They, and they alone, can legally order drugs by mail from overseas.

[rhombus]

If they really want to make some headway, then they should ban pharmaceutical companies from discriminating against the American consumer.

Sounds like more Free Trade to me.

[Made In The USA]

Would be good to see either party get some traction on this issue, provided the solution isn't contrary to the core values of our country (ie. that the solution isn't socialism).

Absolutely love how Wal-Mart has affected the industry on prescription drugs. Their move to offer low price generic drugs sent local (Western NY) competitors scrambling to similiarly offer low prices. Bring on the price wars! Love it.

[arthurus]

Boost the generics by making it difficult to sell branded drugs. Perhaps we could require that government funded hospitals or pharmacies that have at least one customer who is a Federal Employee or welfare recipient get all their drugs from Canada. That should put the kibosh on the evil profit-hound drug companies and, just incidentally, eliminate drug research and new drugs for heretofore uncured diseases and new drugs for old diseases for which the bugs are now immune. No profit means no development.

[aynrandfreak]

This is fine unless the drug that will save your life hasn't been invented yet.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The US consumer should not be expected to bear the full cost of R&D . . . [that means that] If [Big Pharm is] selling pharmaceuticals in Canada for 1/2 the price that they are selling them for in the US, then they ought to be told that they must either raise their price in Canada or cut it in the US.

Buying meds in Canada reduces the American price to the Canadian price. And reducing the American price to the Canadian price is simply a way of evading the cost of R&D.

Democrats would argue that the R&D cost of today's medicines is a sunk cost, and that is true. But the effect of preventing Merck et. al. from recovering past R&D costs (which include testing all the drugs that didn't pan out) would be to undermine the business model under which Merck et. al. are investing money to develop future drugs.

Socialist policies directly undermine the engines of progress. That's why Big Journalism calls such policies "progressive."

[Kozak]

Brilliant idea. Lets see. The US market is more then 10 times the size of the Canadian. Pass that law and you will-- immediately double the cost of Canadian meds. Drug companies know how to do the math. Even if that means no sales in Canada it will be more important to preserve the price in the US.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Do you have any idea how many lawsuits are filed against the Pharmaceutical industry daily? The hidden expense is the litigation that follows every drug placed on the market.

[mouser]

If they are selling pharmaceuticals in Canada for 1/2 the price that they are selling them for in the US, then they ought to be told that they must either raise their price in Canada or cut it in the US. The US consumer should not be expected to bear the full cost of R&D.



I cannot prove it but i have been told the reasons for this selling to Canada cheaper is because.

1) Canada is only about 2% of their sales and it buys as a country only one sales rep

2) no product liability problems if a Canadian takes a med and grows a horn well either cut it off or have a new conversation piece in Canada you cannot sue for medical malpractice etc socialized medicine you know

If this is wrong could someone please show me a link to prove so.

[Mogollon]

The timing for the rats to come into power and start attacking the Pharmaceutical Industry could not be worse.

Bringing new Biotech drugs onto the market has been slow for years, but Biotech companies are turning the corner and many new miracle treatments should be hitting the market within a year or so. The rats may screw that up.

[Between the Lines]

Anyone who thinks this might be a good idea might want to read this article:

Alberto Mingardi: A drug-price path to avoid (Democrats and drug prices)

[Political Junkie Too]

Wouldn't this only affect established drugs? Aren't companies protected against generics for ten years or so for new drugs?

-PJ

[Tench_Coxe]

Hmmmm. I wonder if these were the same folks touting other generic products?