The latest roadblock to Trump’s plan to put drug prices in ads: House Republicans

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Kaiser Health News
Nicholas Florko @NicholasFlorko

September 13, 2018

[excerpt]

https://www.statnews.com/2018/09/13/drug-prices-ads-republicans/

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s splashiest idea for lowering the cost of prescription drug prices was to force pharmaceutical companies to include the prices of their products in TV and other advertisements.

But when Capitol Hill had a chance Thursday to help him achieve that goal, lawmakers failed. And counterintuitively, it was House members in the president’s own party who ultimately nixed the provision. In fact, it was a Democrat, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, pushing the measure hardest.

The provision in question is an amendment from Durbin and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that would give the Food and Drug Administration $1 million to help get the ball rolling on Trump’s advertising idea, which he first floated in May. The pair of lawmakers was hoping to include it in a major government funding bill expected to get a vote in the coming weeks.

[thackney]

Why do we want government to make such a requirement of private business?

And what price?  Wholesale?  Retailers charge their own price and insurance companies set their own prices of what they are willing to pay.

[ABX]

Force... there is that word again...

[ABX]

Why do we want government to make such a requirement of private business?

And what price?  Wholesale?  Retailers charge their own price and insurance companies set their own prices of what they are willing to pay.

..and prices can vary depending on market, supply, insurance provider or other coverage, state requirements, location purchased, etc...

What this seems to set the stage for is government control/fixing of prices.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Why do we want government to make such a requirement of private business?

And what price?  Wholesale?  Retailers charge their own price and insurance companies set their own prices of what they are willing to pay.

..and prices can vary depending on market, supply, insurance provider or other coverage, state requirements, location purchased, etc...

What this seems to set the stage for is government control/fixing of prices.

Wrong.

This is not Private Business nor is it Price Fixing of free mkt goods and services.

85% of drug co. sales are through CMS (Center of Medicare Services) which means they're coming out of the Tax Payer's pockets, Not the end consumer/patient.

As the Tax Payer's representative and the steward of the Tax Payer's money the Govt DOES have every right to force drug makers to Tell the Tax Payer how much they are being billed for.

If that causes a lotta phone calls and letters to Congress Critters from angry Tax Payers, then GOOD. It's their money.

[ABX]

Wrong.

This is not Private Business nor is it Price Fixing of free mkt goods and services.

85% of drug co. sales are through CMS (Center of Medicare Services) which means they're coming out of the Tax Payer's pockets, Not the end consumer/patient.

As the Tax Payer's representative and the steward of the Tax Payer's money the Govt DOES have every right to force drug makers to Tell the Tax Payer how much they are being billed for.

If that causes a lotta phone calls and letters to Congress Critters from angry Tax Payers, then GOOD. It's their money.

So the answer is more government? Gotcha..

I can't tell you the last time I heard someone propose getting the government out of it. Get the government and taxpayers out of the system.

This is just continuing the fault of ACA with the same excuses. But now, proposed by someone with an R behind their name.

These aren't 'private businesses' just like Amazon isn't, Google isn't, Facebook isn't, Twitter isn't.. and so on and so on.. Hell, if tax dollars going to a business means they are no longer private, let's nationalize almost everything. Cars to electronics to telecoms, everything gets tax dollars somehow.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

And I don't give a S##t for drug company crying about their heinous R&D costs since that's BS too.

If Drug Makers are getting short sheeted at the ridiculous price gouging they get away with in the US then Why is there such resistance to re-importation of their product in their packaging from other countries at substantially Lower costs to consumers?

They sell the same product outside the US at half the price, or less, than it costs here.

They wouldn't be selling it at those lower prices UNLESS they were still making an attractive profit at those prices.

Just because CMS is TAX MONEY/FREE MONEY is no excuse.

CMS pays out over a $Trillion a year, but we get all yanked out of shape about much smaller amounts than that every day.


Here's your S##t useless money giveaway CMS.

http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2012/02/medicare-fraud-detection-system.html

Medicare Fraud Detection System Disappoints
February 24, 2012 — 12:29pm ET | By Ron Shinkman

A computer initiative to stop fraudulent Medicare billing at the point of claims submission has so far been a disappointment, reported the Associated Press.

To date, the $77 million computer system, which went online in mid-2011, had prevented exactly one bad claim by late last year. That totaled $7,591.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

So the answer is more government? Gotcha..

I can't tell you the last time I heard someone propose getting the government out of it. Get the government and taxpayers out of the system.

This is just continuing the fault of ACA with the same excuses. But now, proposed by someone with an R behind their name.

These aren't 'private businesses' just like Amazon isn't, Google isn't, Facebook isn't, Twitter isn't.. and so on and so on.. Hell, if tax dollars going to a business means they are no longer private, let's nationalize almost everything. Cars to electronics to telecoms, everything gets tax dollars somehow.

No. You do not Got me.

Pay Attention and stop jerking your knee.

[thackney]

Wrong.

This is not Private Business nor is it Price Fixing of free mkt goods and services.

85% of drug co. sales are through CMS (Center of Medicare Services) which means they're coming out of the Tax Payer's pockets, Not the end consumer/patient.

As the Tax Payer's representative and the steward of the Tax Payer's money the Govt DOES have every right to force drug makers to Tell the Tax Payer how much they are being billed for.

If that causes a lotta phone calls and letters to Congress Critters from angry Tax Payers, then GOOD. It's their money.

Are you trying to claim that medicare pays whatever the drug company charges? 

Or does medicare set the price they will pay and leave it between the receiver of the drug and the retailer selling it to work out the difference?

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Are you trying to claim that medicare pays whatever the drug company charges? 

Or does medicare set the price they will pay and leave it between the receiver of the drug and the retailer selling it to work out the difference?

What Medicare pays is an amount negotiated between Govt and the drug maker, so yes, Medicare pays an established by Govt set rate.


http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2013/03/j-fights-327m-risperdal-verdict-saying.html

This excerpt is just for the dollar amounts. At one point 40 out of 50 State AGs were looking at taking the Drug Co. to Court for defrauding their State Medicaid systems. That was pre empted by Holder rigging a $2.5B parking ticket for the Drug Maker and passing out $10M here and there to shut them up.

There are just too many live links in the whole piece to repost them all, and the pdf of the SC Court opinion is no longer available. There's a lot more there. If you want to argue Free Markets and Free Enterprise in the Medical Drug Market please take the time to familiarize yourself with them first.



 Here's the Slip opinion from SC's Justice Crouch characterizing the Risperdal Gang, as he ordered them to Pay $327 Million to the State, as "Detestable".

http://freepdfhosting.com/d4bad152b5.pdf
Below, we've previously shared out that particular 'Detestable'.
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/search/label/South%20Carolina



    "this Court finds the actions of the Defendants, upon this audience, to be detestable."

    "Annual Sales of Risperdal worldwide per annual reports of Johnson & Johnson, Inc.
     1994: $0.172 Billion
     1995: $0.343 Billion
     1996: $0.502 Billion
     1998: $0.588 Billion
     1999: $0.892 Billion
     2000: $1.083 Billion
     2001: $1.845 Billion
     2002: $2.146 Billion
     2003: $2.512 Billion
     2004: $3.05 Billion
     2005: $3.552 Billion
     2006: $4.180 Billion
     2007: $4.697 Billion
     2008: $1.309 Billion
     2009: $1.425 Billion
     2010: $1.50 Billion
     Total for the period: $29.796 Billion
    Testimony at trial indicated that the profit margin for sales of Risperdal was 97% or $28.90 Billion for the period of 1994-2010"

And there's more 'Detestable' from J&J and their Risperdal gang. There's Always More Detestable. Like this Detestable, where 40 State AGs Were, past tense, looking into Joining the Detestable fray, which Never should have been Allowed, BY DC's FDA, to have Detestabled in the First place:
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/08/j-feds-reach-deal-on-one-risperdal.html
After J&J Failed 48% of 161 FDA Inspections in One Year
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/05/congress-deeply-troubled-with-fdaj.html

But Now, J&J says that since "No One Was Harmed" a monetary penalty of $327M is unfair.

[thackney]

What Medicare pays is an amount negotiated between Govt and the drug maker, so yes, Medicare pays an established by Govt set rate.

Then have the government publish what it pays.  No problem.

http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2013/03/j-fights-327m-risperdal-verdict-saying.html

This excerpt is just for the dollar amounts. At one point 40 out of 50 State AGs were looking at taking the Drug Co. to Court for defrauding their State Medicaid systems. That was pre empted by Holder rigging a $2.5B parking ticket for the Drug Maker and passing out $10M here and there to shut them up.

Then sue them for fraud.  One side bad decisions doesn't justify bring the government into private business advertising.

There are just too many live links in the whole piece to repost them all, and the pdf of the SC Court opinion is no longer available. There's a lot more there. If you want to argue Free Markets and Free Enterprise in the Medical Drug Market please take the time to familiarize yourself with them first.

 Here's the Slip opinion from SC's Justice Crouch characterizing the Risperdal Gang, as he ordered them to Pay $327 Million to the State, as "Detestable".

http://freepdfhosting.com/d4bad152b5.pdf
Below, we've previously shared out that particular 'Detestable'.
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/search/label/South%20Carolina



    "this Court finds the actions of the Defendants, upon this audience, to be detestable."

    "Annual Sales of Risperdal worldwide per annual reports of Johnson & Johnson, Inc.
     1994: $0.172 Billion
     1995: $0.343 Billion
     1996: $0.502 Billion
     1998: $0.588 Billion
     1999: $0.892 Billion
     2000: $1.083 Billion
     2001: $1.845 Billion
     2002: $2.146 Billion
     2003: $2.512 Billion
     2004: $3.05 Billion
     2005: $3.552 Billion
     2006: $4.180 Billion
     2007: $4.697 Billion
     2008: $1.309 Billion
     2009: $1.425 Billion
     2010: $1.50 Billion
     Total for the period: $29.796 Billion
    Testimony at trial indicated that the profit margin for sales of Risperdal was 97% or $28.90 Billion for the period of 1994-2010"

And there's more 'Detestable' from J&J and their Risperdal gang. There's Always More Detestable. Like this Detestable, where 40 State AGs Were, past tense, looking into Joining the Detestable fray, which Never should have been Allowed, BY DC's FDA, to have Detestabled in the First place:
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/08/j-feds-reach-deal-on-one-risperdal.html
After J&J Failed 48% of 161 FDA Inspections in One Year
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/05/congress-deeply-troubled-with-fdaj.html

But Now, J&J says that since "No One Was Harmed" a monetary penalty of $327M is unfair.

None of that justifies what was suggested on advertising.  Fix the problems, don't create new problems.  And still doesn't answer "what price?"  Even medicare has different tiers of coverage affecting different pricing to the consumer.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Then have the government publish what it pays.  No problem.


Then sue them for fraud. (?????)  One side bad decisions doesn't justify bring the government into private business advertising.

None of that justifies what was suggested on advertising.  Fix the problems, don't create new problems.  And still doesn't answer "what price?"  Even medicare has different tiers of coverage affecting different pricing to the consumer.

Who do you suggest sues Who?

The Govt sues the Drug Makers?

I just showed you that joke. J&J got away with a slap on the wrist and the tax payers got reamed.

A private party? An end consumer sues a Drug Co?

Why is it OK to have Govt feed OPM hand over fist into this Corporate Welfare con, but it causes outrage when Govt does Anything at all to rein it in?

Trump's proposal wasn't to cut prices, only to let the tax payers who are actually coughing up these prices Know what they are?

[thackney]

....Trump's proposal wasn't to cut prices, only to let the tax payers who are actually coughing up these prices Know what they are?

Why not do that immediately without trying to regulate private advertising?  Should be no problem to put such a list out immediately.  Medicare lists what medicare pays.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Then have the government publish what it pays.  No problem.

No Problem?

Except One.

Who the hell's going to read it, except for the Medicare patient who is greatly relieved that all his neighbors are picking up the multi thousand dollar a month tab on his meds, . . . . the ones Everyone Else is getting billed for without knowing or caring.

[thackney]

No Problem?

Except One.

Who the hell's going to read it, except for the Medicare patient who is greatly relieved that all his neighbors are picking up the multi thousand dollar a month tab on his meds, . . . . the ones Everyone Else is getting billed for without knowing or caring.

So your point is we have to force private business to include prices in advertising that nobody cares about?  To what end if hardly anybody cares about it?

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Why not do that immediately without trying to regulate private advertising?  Should be no problem to put such a list out immediately.  Medicare lists what medicare pays.

Look at what happened with the near universally detested and openly griped about ACA.

Even with all the ACA furor we're still stuck with it. Tax Payers are so used to being gouged by Congress most of them never even consider how badly they're getting it from Drug Makers.

They have to know it's happening before you can expect them to give a hoot.

'Regulations' on private drug advertising.

! No longer available

You think these admissions were made out of the goodness of the Drug Co.'s heart?

[thackney]

Look at what happened with the near universally detested and openly griped about ACA.

Even with all the ACA furor we're still stuck with it. Tax Payers are so used to being gouged by Congress most of them never even consider how badly they're getting it from Drug Makers.

They have to know it's happening before you can expect them to give a hoot.

'Regulations' on private drug advertising.


You think these admissions were made out of the goodness of the Drug Co.'s heart?

Some bad law does not justify more bad law.

Cheers!

[ABX]

Some bad law does not justify more bad law.

Cheers!

What's interesting is this proposal actually originated with Bernie Sanders and Elijah Cummingss bill The Affordable and Safe Prescription Drug Importation Act.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/affordable-and-safe-prescription-drug-importation-act-introduced-to-help-lower-skyrocketing-cost-of-medicine

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

What's interesting is this proposal actually originated with Bernie Sanders and Elijah Cummingss bill The Affordable and Safe Prescription Drug Importation Act.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/affordable-and-safe-prescription-drug-importation-act-introduced-to-help-lower-skyrocketing-cost-of-medicine

Because the GOP are deeper in Big Pharma's pocket than the left. Have been for quite a while.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

Some bad law does not justify more bad law.

Cheers!

Cheers to you too.

I wish someone hadn't edited the DTC AD proof off the front of that 1st commercial.

Here's a 2nd.

! No longer available