Posted on 11/21/2006 9:30:43 AM PST by SirLinksalot
Nancy Pelosi and her congressional Democrats have a winning sound bite when it comes to Medicare: Let the government negotiate drug prices for seniors. That way, elderly Americans can get cheaper medicine.
That's a tough argument for Republicans to go up against, especially since they just lost control of most everything there is to lose control of in Washington. Putting your party on the side of seniors is always better than appearing to defend the baddies in the drug industry.
But a fundamental point is at stake in this debate over influencing drug prices, one of the Democrats' first "100-hour" priorities for January.
Giving the feds the power to negotiate drug prices for seniors would effectively cede control of the pharmaceutical industry to Washington. While the government negotiates drug prices for Medicaid patients and veterans, the enormous Medicare portfolio of 39 million beneficiaries would give the bureaucracy a veto over drug companies.
That's more power than a domestic agency like the Department of Health and Human Services should possess, and President Bush is right to oppose it. We understand why the Pentagon should have such a say over defense contractors; that industry is vital to our national security. Drug companies don't rise to that threshold.
Better to let private insurance plans continue to negotiate prices. They haven't always been able to get the upper hand, but allowing the various players in the private sector to go head-to-head is better than government control. For instance, prices could go down if pharmaceutical companies were dealing with Washington, but so could profits set aside for research and development.
When congressional Democrats press for this change next year, remember they're pushing for much more than lower prices. They're seeking to move the line where government should stop and the marketplace should start.
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
She get another shot at socialized medicine. And, if she does it, she at least gets a legacy and at most gets the Oval Office.
Seems like I heard that one of the causes for the flu vaccine shortage (last year?) was that the federal government forced the vaccine makers to sell at a certain price...Not sure if that's accurate, but it certainly would cause a shortage.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
That used to cause lots of shortages in The CCCP as well. I wouldn't doubt it for one minute.
Hillary did that with vaccines under Bubba's presidency and look what that got us, shortages, higher prices and overseas suppliers.
from article : " .... When congressional Democrats press for this change next year, remember they're pushing for much more than lower prices.... "
The Dems say they want lower prices, but then they are against walmart.
The Dems want it both ways, they want the spending for public education to go up, but then out of the other side of their mouth they say that working people need tax relief.
They simply do not understand economics.
Supply-demand curves respond to price, every time.
Reduce price, demand remains the same, supplies dry up.
Keep same price, demand rises, supplies STILL dry up.
Let price float, demand rises, supplies keep pace.
Supply grows too much, demand does not change, prices fall.
Supply remains the same, demand drops, prices fall.
Supply decreases, demand falls, price goes to float.
You want me to keep working this equation?
Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...
....or a surplus. Price controls remove the governing mechanism on supply and demand of a free pricing system.
Found this at the National Center for Policy Analysis (?)...Not familiar with them, but the article is interesting.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba493/
How has having the government involved ever lowered prices?
What if the drug companies refuse to negotiate?
My guess is the price would go up. My guess is this will cause the prices to go up, just because the government is meddling in private business.
Good article- that pretty much sums up why flu vaccine makers have dropped out of hte race- this is a scarey scarey deal because as th4e article mentions, if they get the strain of flu wrong when making the vaccines, there are NO backup companies to rely on and millions of 'at risk' individuals (elderly, Chronically sick, children) are then at risk of dying from somethign that could have been easily prevented!
As with every plan, the devil's in the details. What is meant by Government "negotiating", a little friendly "jaw-boning", or some sort of threat? Do "lower drug prices for seniors" mean that the drug companies will be encouraged to recoup their profits by raising drug prices on "non-seniors"? Are we really talking about price controls under an assumed name? In any event, if the GOP stands in opposition to this, they'd better know what they're talking about, and they'd better have the "Harry and Louise" ads on the air when votes are taken.
I think European's are free riding on US pharmaceutical advances. They let the US companies devlelope drugs, then they force those companies to discount their drugs in their countries. One of the reasons people are living longer and healthier lives these days is due to the advances in pharmacueticals. Drugs don't just grow on trees. They require hundreds of millions of dollars each in research to get to the market. If the economic rewards are cut for developing them, there will be fewer new drugs on the market in the future. Why should bright students spend ten years in college getting Phd's if the payoff is going to be radically decreased? It's a lot easier just to go to law school and become an ambulance chaser.
Yep--you're right. The US consumer (and to a lesser extant, the Japanese consumer) has been subsidizing drug development for the world since the Euros imposed price controls (managed care in this country has been a de facto sort of price controls, but it is easier for the pharma companies to negotiate with industry rather than the gummint). This holds true even if a drug is not developed over here (the Japanese have brought forth a significant number of blockbusters over the last 20 years, but license them to American companies).
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.