Why are few Republican senators supporting drug price negotiation by medicare?

Question

And why would Bush veto it if it passed? The only objection I can read is that it wouldn't help lower prices much...which no evidence supports.
It already passed the House.

1/3 of research is paid by the US Govt. already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health

Answer 1

The insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying against the bill.

The Republicans in the Senate, with a few exceptions, sided with the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. The Democrats didn’t have enough votes to limit debate and move to an actual vote on the bill.

Obviously there is a monetary benefit to the pharmaceutical and the insurance industries that they wish to protect and the Republicans are helping them protect that interest.

Answer 2

Not everything is all black and white. The first think Obama wants to do is do away with medicare advantage because he said only a small percentage of people have it and it's the Cadillac of Medicare. Well I am on advantage. Medicare. The only reason is because I'm 52 years old and terminally ill. On advantage I can have a person come over 16 hours a week and help me out so I can stay out of the nursing home. I would like to spend the last two years in my own home instead of a nursing home plus I guarantee that it will cost a lot more to have part time help 3 hours a day then me in a nursing home 24/7. I don't have anyone else to help me my husband was a combat vet and passed away. There are very few things in this country that are what they seem. It just depends who are the ones trying to look good.

Answer 3

Because "Ethical Drug Company" is an oxymoron. And, because Drug Companies spend more on Lobbying and campaign contributions than any other industry and the last thing they want to see in the US is a free market for their products. It's an enormously profitable industry and most of the profits come from legalized price fixing in the US.

Everywhere else in the world, market forces--including the purchasing clout of National Health Programs determine prices, which is why prices are lower than in the US.

Letting Medicare bargain might not bring prices down of itself, but it would set up a Free Market feeding frenzy that would quickly become a buyer's market. And the pharmaceutical industry would have to accept merely high profits, instead of the obscenely high profits they get now.

Answer 4

Here's some information from Pfizer. It shows the sales from the director and other officers of the company over the last two years. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=PFE By my estimates it totals around one hundred fifty million dollars.

Notice that the director Mr. Steere in 2006 alone pulled out almost sixty eight million dollars by selling shares. This has nothing to do with his salary, it's just part of his perk package. With this kind of money being made by fewer than twenty people, I have a hard time accepting their sob stories about costs. This is one company from the health care industry, one. Now tell me again why our health care and drug costs are sky high in this country.

Answer 5

Richard Armitage - Deputy Secretary of State - invested millions in Pfizer
Tommy Thomson - Secretary of Health and Human Services -was forced to sell his stock in Merck and Abbott Laboratories
Mitchell Daniels - Director of the Office of Management and Budget - former senior VP of Eli Lilly and Co
John Walters - Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy - owns stock in Eli Lilly and Pfizer

I'm sure there are other I don't know about, plus the lobbyists, so money, maybe...

Answer 6

Research and development costs for new prescription drugs and vaccinations are paid for largely by the USA consumers.
Other countries get a large discount 'because' the USA pays most of the cost.

Now I personally think some common drugs could be negotiated for but the fact is if companies were forced into a situation where they could not make as much money from the USA probably do one or both of the following. ..
not do as much R&D on new medications leading to less new and better products... charge more money to other countries therefore dispelling some of the thought of how universal coverage is affordable.
Pharmaceuticals are the one of the two biggest cost drivers of healthcare. Its a major issue. And im sure pharmaceutical lobbies have the ear of some politicians.

Answer 7

negotiation would decrease profits for drug companies.

I was a pharmaceutical salesman a few years ago. I sold a month's cycle of birth control pills to pharmacies for $9.64.
Down the street I sold the same item to teaching hospital for 10 cents. At planned parenthood I sold the same item for 9cents...got the picture?

Answer 8

In order to negotiate price they would have to purchase bulk amounts and distribute them to pharmacies. If they don't buy enough someone does without if they buy to much they go in debt. You really have not given infrastructure a single thought have you? People always want but they never stop to think about all the things that are included with the delivery of their want of the moment or how it will be paid for or even if it is more cost efficient than the method in place.

Answer 9

Because it would help the american consumer and hurt big business.

and to be fair, I am sure while most republicans and Bush oppose it, I am sure that quite a few democrats do as well.

The drug cartel lobby is one of the most powerful...along with the military industrial complex, big oil, and AIPAC.

Answer 10

Ever notice that pharmicuetical companies can outsource their labeor to India and pakistan.

Then they refuse to let the consumer outsource our purchases?


hmm... so they can pay cheap for the product, then sell high to us.

Amazing.