Opinion Pieces Examine Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Bill Passed By House
- Friday, January 19, 2007, 15:53
- Medicare
- 6 views
- Add a comment
Several newspapers recently published editorials and an opinion piece that discussed a bill passed last week by the House that would require the HHS secretary to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies on prices for medications under the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Summaries appear below. Editorials
- Christian Science Monitor: “Congress is moving to let the government use its mass purchasing power to buy drugs for Medicare recipients and negotiate for lower prices,” but “a better way to reduce costs in this expensive health care plan would be a ‘means test’ for users,” a Monitor editorial states. “Traditionally, liberals have worried that forcing the wealthy to pay more for the same Medicare benefit would erode support for the program,” and conservatives “have argued that means testing is nothing more than a hidden new ’success tax,’” according to the editorial. However, the editorial states, “with Medicare costs about to skyrocket, it’s time to abandon old prejudices and take a fresh look at means testing” (Christian Science Monitor, 1/16).
- Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: “It is important to remember” that “hurdles have to be cleared” before the bill passed in the House becomes law, a Post-Gazette editorial states. “Mr. Bush says he will veto the bill, arguing that it would constrain market forces,” the editorial states, adding, “A more likely basis of his opposition may be the large contributions made to Republican candidates by the drug companies” (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 1/13).
- St. Louis Post-Dispatch: The bill “stops short of what’s really needed” because the “best way to rein in spending is to create a drug plan under the traditional Medicare model,” according to a Post-Dispatch editorial. “The Democrats briefly flirted with that idea last month,” but, “in an acknowledgement of the pharmaceutical industry’s formidable lobbying clout on both sides of the congressional aisle, they abandoned that plan for a more general strategy that could win quick approval,” the editorial states, adding, “Cowards” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1/15).
- Washington Post: The bill is “misguided,” a Post editorial states. “One of the key challenges in health policy is to understand which drugs, tests and therapies are most cost-effective,” and “solutions are most likely to be found by competing private entities,” the editorial states. The editorial concludes, “The better approach is to let each insurer offer its own version of the right balance, see whether it attracts customers — and then adapt flexibility” (Washington Post, 1/13).
Opinion Piece
- Sally Pipes, The Hill: The bill could reduce innovation by pharmaceutical companies and limit the medications available to Medicare beneficiaries, Pipes, president and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute, writes in a Hill opinion piece. “With its enormous purchasing demands — and backed by the overwhelming financial and regulatory power of the federal government — Medicare would simply dictate prices, distorting drug markets on an unprecedented level,” Pipes writes, adding, “As a result, drug manufacturers would be forced to sell drugs at below-market prices.” Pipes writes, “Government intervention has already choked off drug innovation virtually everywhere else,” adding, “If we mandate price controls here, more life-saving breakthroughs will be lost” (Pipes, The Hill, 1/16).
About the Author
admin has written 6390 stories on this site.
Write a Comment
Gravatars are small images that can show your personality. You can get your gravatar for free today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
