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 ...
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.
“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?
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%?
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?
There’s no free market in drugs. You have monopoly, monopsony, information as symmetries and enormous barriers to entry.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Urban legend. Unless a source is cited. Otherwise fake news.
“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.
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.
I also noticed that you didn’t comment on the true statements i made. That’s a leftist strategy. Ignore the truth.
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
Have you read Trump’s position paper on the topic?
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.
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
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.
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.