[After Rep. Greg Walden, the biggest recipient of pharmaceutical
campaign cash in the last election cycle, met with Trump, the
president decided to scrap his support for lower drug prices. ]
[[link removed]]

AFTER MEETING WITH PHARMA-BACKED REP, TRUMP FLIP-FLOPS ON DRUG PRICE
NEGOTIATIONS  
[[link removed]]


 

Donald Shaw
November 29, 2019
Sludge
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
* [[link removed]]

_ After Rep. Greg Walden, the biggest recipient of pharmaceutical
campaign cash in the last election cycle, met with Trump, the
president decided to scrap his support for lower drug prices. _

U.S. President Donald Trump (L) meets with House of Representatives
Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) in the
Roosevelt Room at the White House March 10, 2017 in Washington, DC. ,
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

 

Since his 2016 campaign, President Trump has rhetorically stood
against most Republicans by supporting a plan to have the government
negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to achieve lower drug prices.
But last week, Trump suddenly changed his tune. 

“Pelosi and her Do Nothing Democrats drug pricing bill doesn’t do
the trick. FEWER cures! FEWER treatments!” Trump tweeted
[[link removed]] on
Nov. 22, referencing a bill from Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that
would facilitate the price negotiations he had long embraced. “Time
for the Democrats to get serious about bipartisan solutions to
lowering prescription drug prices for families.”

As recently as late September, Trump appeared to support negotiations.
“It’s great to see Speaker Pelosi’s bill today,” Trump tweeted
on Sept. 20, the day after the speaker unveiled her bill. 

So why did Trump suddenly change his mind? The impeachment proceedings
likely played a role, but according to The Hill
[[link removed]],
he has also been talking to a key pharmaceutical industry ally on the
issue. 

Trump’s tweet opposing Pelosi’s bill “came after he met with
Rep. Greg Walden [[link removed]] (R-Ore.), a
leading opponent of Pelosi’s bill,” The Hill reported. Indeed, the
“FEWER Cures” talking point Trump used in his tweet echoes the
hashtag, #FewerCures, that Republicans on the House Energy and
Commerce Committee, led by Walden, have been promoting
[[link removed]]
in their materials opposing the bill.  

Walden is not just a leading opponent of letting the government
negotiate with drug companies—he’s also the House member who
received the most campaign money from the pharmaceutical and health
products industry
[[link removed]]
in the last election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive
Politics. So far this cycle, he has taken the third highest total from
the industry of anyone in the House, despite plans to retire at the
end of this session.  

In 2017 and 2018, Walden received $458,700 from PACs of pharmaceutical
and health products companies, including drug companies Pfizer, Eli
Lilly, and Merck, as well as individuals employed by the companies. So
far in 2019, he has taken $120,150 from pharmaceutical and health
products PACs and employees.

Table: Donald Shaw, SLUDGE Source: Federal Election Commission
[[link removed]] 
Pelosi’s bill, called the Lower Drug Costs Now Act
[[link removed]], would
require the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to
negotiate prices on insulin products and a minimum of 25 of the most
expensive drugs that do not have generic competitors. It would also
penalize companies that increase the cost of drugs faster than the
rate of inflation. The bill, which is expected to be voted on by the
House in December, would save CMS $345 billion
[[link removed]] by 2029,
according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office (CBO).  

The government has been unable to negotiate for lower drug prices
since 2003, when Congress included a provision banning negotiations in
the bill that created the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit.
Walden voted in favor [[link removed]] of
that bill.  

Some of Walden’s pharmaceutical donors make drugs that would likely
be subject to price negotiations under the bill. AbbVie makes
hepatitis C drug Viekira, which has a list price of $27,773 for a
30-day supply and does not have a generic competitor. Cerdelga, a
Gaucher’s disease treatment that retails for $26,000 for a 30-day
supply, is made by Sanofi Genzyme and does not have any generic
competitors.  

Walden’s objection to the bill is similar to that of the
pharmaceutical industry: The reduction in drug company profits from
allowing CMS to negotiate would lead to reduced spending on research
and development. In its report on the bill, CBO states that while
“in the short term, lower prices would increase the use of drugs and
improve people’s health,” over the next 10 years the bill “would
lead to a reduction of approximately 8 to 15 new drugs coming to
market.” 

To join Sludge, relentlessly uncovering corruption, Contact Us at
[email protected]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
* [[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web [[link removed]]
Submit via email
Frequently asked questions [[link removed]]
Manage subscription [[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org [[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]