The House Passed a Modest Bill To Lower Drug Prices-- Yesterday, Thanks To Conservative Greed, Moscow Mitch And Trump, Drugs Prices Went Up Across The Board
>
 |
| What Blows Up Must Come Down by Nancy Ohanian |
In the last cycle, here are the dozen currently-serving House members who took the most in bribes from Big PhRMA in just that 2 year period. In a just world they would all be rotting in prison instead of keeping the cost of medicine high. Do you ever vote for any of these criminal characters? (The number in brackets is the amount each has taken since 1990.)
• Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)- $214,150 ($839,550)Although Fred Upton (R-MI) didn’t make it into the top 12 last cycle, since 1990 he’s taken the biggest share of PhRMA bribes of anyone currently serving in the House-- and is the single biggest culprit in the efforts to keep drug prices high for the American people. The 10 worst currently serving senators, each of whom has gobbled up some of the biggest portions in PhRMA bribes in their political careers are Mitt Romney (R-UT- $899,718), Moscow Mitch (R-KY- $860,313), Richard Burr (R-NC- $855,451), Robert Melendez (D-NJ- $727,573), Roy Blunt (R-MO- $659,140), Patty Murray (D-WA- $592,527), Bob Casey (D-PA- $572,534), Tom Carper (D-DE- $515,809), Chuck Schumer (D-NY- $485,779) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN- $467,402). If these politicians-- and the executives and lobbyists on the other side of the transactions-- were in prison, American drug prices would be less than half of what they are now.
• Greg Walden (R-OR)- $207,500 ($650,603)
• Kevin Brady (R-TX)- $163,550 ($457,201)
• Richard Neal (D-MA)- $127,000 ($399,600)
• Linda Sanchez (D-CA)- $123,004 ($335,281)
• Frank Pallone (D-NJ)- $117,200 ($698,170)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)- $111,556 ($305,206)
• Steny Hoyer (D-MD)- $96,000 ($720,572)
• Brett Guthrie (R-KY)- $95,000 ($401,862)
• John Shimkus (R-IL)- $94,500 ($616,485)
• Brad Schneider (New Dem-IL)- $94,268 ($211,133)
• Anna Eshoo (D-CA)- 90,950 ($893,315)
I take a drug called Vimpat for neuropathy, a common side effect after chemotherapy cancer treatments. Most insurance plans, including Medicare Part-D, do not cover it and it costs, on average $1,126.19 a month. Dick Gephardt has made certain that there are no generic versions available. I bought some in Thailand recently, via Abbott Labs for around $300 a month. Big saving, although that’s still $3,600 year.
Reporters Michael Erman and Carl O’Donnell, writing for Reuters Tuesday, broke an exclusive story: Drugmakers from Pfizer to GlaxoSmithKline to hike U.S. prices on over 200 drugs. In fact most of the big drug firms that bribe American politicians “are planning to hike U.S. list prices on more than 200 drugs in the United States on Wednesday, according to drugmakers and data analyzed by healthcare research firm 3 Axis Advisors. Nearly all of the price increases will be below 10%, and around half of them are in the range of 4 to 6%, said 3 Axis co-founder Eric Pachman. The median price increase is around 5%, he said. More price increases are expected to be announced later this week, which could affect the median and range.”
Soaring U.S. prescription drug prices are expected to again be a central issue in the presidential election. President Donald Trump, who made bringing them down a core pledge of his 2016 campaign, is running for re-election in 2020.Trump won’t have to veto it since Moscow Mitch has refused to allow it— or even more modest plans to be debated, let alone voted on. Michael Owens is running for a congressional seat in the suburbs south and southwest of Atlanta. The current congressman, corrupt Blue Dog David Scott, is perfectly content to see drug prices go up and up-- as long as he gets his cut. Owens, who is campaigning on Medicare-for-All, noted recently that he is personally allergic to shellfish and very aware of the surging prices of an Epipen-- from $94 in 2007 to $700 today. A few weeks ago he told me about his own life or death decision. “Do I pay $2,100 dollars (one for home, one for work and one for my backpack) or do I just try my luck with a $13.00 pack of Benadryl and hope that it gets into my bloodstream in time?… I need Epipens, but I also need a place to live… It’s time to stop the greed, and stand firmly on the side of saving more lives. Our tax money is used by highly profitable, private drug companies to research and develop medicines, and it is time our investment goes back into PROVIDING PUBLIC HEALTHCARE!
…Pfizer will hike prices on more than 50 drugs, including its cancer treatment Ibrance, which is on track to bring in nearly $5 billion in revenue this year, and rheumatoid arthritis drug Xeljanz.
Pfizer spokeswoman Amy Rose confirmed the company’s planned price increases. She said the company plans to increase the list prices on around 27% of its portfolio in the United States by an average of 5.6%.
Of the medicines with increases, she said 43% of them are sterile injectibles, and many of those increases are less than $1 per product.
GlaxoSmithKline said it will raise prices on more than 30 drugs. The company will raise prices on the blockbuster respiratory treatments it delivers through its Ellipta inhaler, its recently acquired cancer drug Zejula and on several products in its HIV-focused ViiV joint venture, according to 3 Axis Advisors. Price increases ranged between 1% and 5%.
Sanofi said it will raise prices on around 10 of its drugs, with hikes ranging between 1% and 5%. The drugmaker noted the increases are in line with its commitment to not raise prices above medical inflation.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd raised prices on more than 15 drugs, in some cases by more than 6%, according to 3 Axis Advisors. A Teva spokesperson said the company regularly reviews prices in the context of market conditions, availability and cost of production.
…Ian Spatz, a senior adviser at consulting firm Manatt Health, said that drugmakers could be holding to relatively low price hikes in an attempt to stay out of politicians’ crosshairs. Trump, for instance, targeted Pfizer after a proposed round of price increases in 2018, saying in a tweet that the drugmaker “should be ashamed.”
“I’m sure many manufacturers are interested in making sure they are not called out on a large list price increase,” Spatz said.
The United States, which leaves drug pricing to market competition, has higher prices than in other countries where governments directly or indirectly control the costs, making it the world’s most lucrative market for manufacturers.
Trump, a Republican, has struggled to deliver on a pledge to lower drug prices before the November 2020 election. His administration recently proposed a rule to allow states to import prescription drugs from Canada.
The administration had previously scrapped an ambitious policy that would have required health insurers to pass billions of dollars in rebates they receive from drugmakers to Medicare patients.
The House of Representatives, controlled by Democrats, passed a bill earlier in December that would cap prices for the country’s most expensive drugs based on international prices and penalize drugmakers that do not negotiate with the Medicare insurance program for seniors. Trump has threatened to veto the bill, saying it would undermine access to lifesaving medicines.
Heidi Sloan, a Democratic Socialist, running for a central Texas congressional seat against anti-healthcare crooked Republican Roger Williams, took a less specific point of view, expanding it out to cover a broader range of issues important to the people she seeks to represent in Congress. "I think a lot of the resistance to socialists versus progressives stems from a resentment about purity-- that when socialists insist on a framework that addresses structural issues, when we won't settle for half-measures, we're engaging in purity politics and hurting the left. That critique ignores history, as we would not currently have Donald Trump in office if the Democratic Party had not sent a corporate neoliberal to beat him. Centrists who have troublingly scarce ties or adversarial relationships with working people, labor, and marginalized communities should be criticized because we as a party must have high standards for leadership. We insist on high standards because it is what the working class deserves, and because we recognize that we cannot win unless we have the courage to demand what we actually want instead of what we think they will let us have."Labels: drug prices, Heidi Sloan, Michael Owens, Trump and drugs
posted by DownWithTyranny @ 5:00 AM
6 comments
|
Reddit
6 Comments:
What will the industry do when they price their drugs too high? I have already stopped taking one drug because of its cost. I am prepared to stop others if that happens. I am not going to bankrupt myself in order for their toxic waste to extend my life a year or two.
@6:02
If the Democrat-led house passes a bill which would lower the prices on some drugs and the GOP-led Senate won't even bring it up for a vote, I don't think it's wholly unfair to blame the GOP for at least that slight relief not even coming to pass. The headline of the article mentions "modest relief", nothing about "Dems want to save the world but that nasty old GOP won't let them!"
Because you reject "lesser of two evils" voting, it's difficult for you to process a lot of what's written on this blog. Considering that you also think the human race is doomed (I'm thinking about a recent reply to Ted Rall over at Smirking Chimp), I'm stumped as to why you can't wrap your head around other voters choosing "lesser of two evils" - we're doomed anyway, may as well vote for the "slightly less repulsive" party. Besides that, there's no emergent third/alternative party to vote for anyway. Certainly not in local races. People can stay home all they want. Either Dems or Repubs are going to end up in office no matter how few people turn up to vote. Tamp down Dem votes and all office-holders will be Republicans who, no matter what you may believe, are genuinely more dangerous than Democrats. Contrary to what you may expect, no new national progressive party is going to magically spring into existence if people stop supporting the Democrats. Waiting for that to happen is VASTLY STUPIDER than trying to reform the Democratic party.
Certainly you should understand that your arguments have at their core a fundamental incoherence. There really is no national alternative to the Dems and Repubs as long as third parties restrict their activities to doomed presidential bids every four years. If you're arguing that a 3rd party needs to put in the long-term work of establishing itself in various states local races (admittedly not something I've heard or seen you saying) - what's the point? By the time one is established and can launch a nationwide bid for power backed with a significant number of credible candidates for Congress and the Senate, humanity will likely be in a death spiral. On the other hand, if the whole point is to convince everyone that the correct thing to do is NOTHING (I haven't heard much from you other than "stop voting for Democrats"), good luck, but you are bound to be disappointed by how your efforts in that regard are rewarded. Just because YOU'VE given up, yo can't expect everyone else to follow your lead.
Happy new year, by the way.
Steve 1/2/2020.
perhaps, Steve, Pelosi only allowed the bill to be passed BECAUSE she was assured that MM would never allow a vote.
If the democraps wanted to do something about Rx pricing, they had ACA to do it with. they refused. In fact, they mandated that NO pricing constraints were to be done, a total affirmation of the bush part D neoliberal abomination.
Proof that the democraps don't want to impede their phrma donors' ability and duty to gouge americans as much as they can.
As far as advocating 3rd party, I've kind of surrendered there. It's clear that americans don't give a shit about "better" when it's just soooo much easier to do the 'lesser evil' thing. You know all about that.
I'll just be pointing out that continuing the 40-year 'lesser evil' vector will NEVER help in any way whatsoever. I believe you have agreed with that already.
whenever I see DWT obviously sheepdogging, I'll point that out, even though they are at times being deleted. it needs to be said.
whenever I read 'it's all the fault of the Nazis', I'll make corrections since only blaming half the shithole for the deeds of the whole shithole is a lie.
Whenever I see an opportunity wasted, as when Bernie took the easy way out and endorsed the anti-Bernie in '16, I will also point that out.
God forbid americans ever decide that its time to do the right thing no matter how hard it is. leaders never do. voters never do. Bernie didn't. you won't.
kind of defines a shithole, don't it?
Well Steve, since the Republicans are 99% evil, and the Democrats are 80% evil, I guess we'll all ride at no charge on unicorns to the end of the rainbow and collect our share of the pot of gold if we vote the lesser of evils.
This is not an acceptable situation no matter what your defense of the status quo.
"Certainly you should understand that your arguments have at their core a fundamental incoherence."
No, that flies right over his head.
The more I read about Greta Thunberg, the more I grow to admire her.
She started her "strike for climate" solo, sitting alone with her sign in front of her nation's capitol building. When typically vapid govt. morons noted that she might be damaging her future by skipping school, she said something like: 'since you people don't give a damn about my future, I won't either'.
Everyone who continues to vote for the lesser evil rather than trying anything else they can think of to actually make "better" happen is a typically vapid moron for you really don't give a flying zeptofuck about anyone's future. All you care about is taking the easiest possible route to the end of your day.
Post a Comment
<< Home