Trump Wants Drug Makers, Insurers, & Hospitals To Disclose Prices!

[BFritz21]

I posted that thread a while ago about how my doctor told me that this medicine that drug companies were charging hundreds for only cost pennies to make, and it looks like Trump could be doing something to help citizens that are getting screwed by drug companies!

He thinks it's ridiculous that other countries pay so much less for drugs that cost a ridiculous amount in the United States:

Quote:President Donald Trump Tuesday night called on drug companies, health insurers and hospitals to “disclose real prices.”

Without providing details in his State of the Union address to Congress, Trump reiterated his desire to reduce the cost of healthcare in part by increasing transparency in the U.S. healthcare system. Though he didn’t say how he wanted “real prices” to be disclosed, he urged Congress to pass legislation that would make it a requirement for hospitals, health insurers and drug companies.

Trump also said he wanted Congress to take on drug costs and end the disparity in prices with Americans paying much more than residents of other countries around the world. He didn’t cite specific examples or say how he wanted to achieve such a goal, however.

“It is unacceptable that Americans pay vastly more than people in other countries for the exact same drugs, often made in the exact same place,” Trump said in his State of the Union address. “This is wrong, unfair, and together we will stop it. We will stop it fast.”

"I am asking the Congress to pass legislation that finally takes on the problem of global freeloading and delivers fairness and price transparency for American patients,” Trump added. “We should also require drug companies, insurance companies, and hospitals to disclose real prices to foster competition and bring costs down.”

That alone would be a HUGE accomplishment and boost for the country by helping the uninsured or people who just don't have great insurance.

I'm loving this move because it would really help the poor (and even non-poor people without good insurance) and would help boost the country's healthcare to stop falling behind the rest of the world.

I'm sure Democrats will find a way to bash the plan and say that now they're all the sudden against lower prices, but I think this could do great things for our healthcare and our economy overall! It will bring about more competition in drug prices, while also saving Americans money, and I have to think that the advertising for these drugs will see a big increase, which will help bring in money for that field!

Trump with another great move!

[*michaelsean*]

Well it's not exactly true that they cost pennies to make. The actual pill may cost pennies, but they didn't just pick them off a tree outside. But yeah there should be a middle ground between RIO and gouging.

[Belsnickel]

So conservatives are cheering liberal policies. I can get on board. I will only say that this is something that many folks have been trying to work on for years. The issue is that pharma has a stranglehold on Congress. https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=H04

It may only be the 10th highest spending interest group in Congress, but that's a hefty sum. It's also a fairly even 47D/53R split. This is why nothing substantial gets done in this realm.

[Benton]

I don't really understand how that's supposed to reduce costs. It's not like consumers don't know they're getting gouged, there just isn't any alternative.

This will probably just add compliance expenses. On top of it, the companies will point to losses in r&d and those "evil" FDA trials that cost so much. Both sides will argue about it, and in the end the great compromise will be... Reduced FDA restrictions! Because if you lower costs, companies already making 5000 percent profit will share that. Right?

I'm against most government regulation, but this issue isn't going to get ant better until the government steps in and speaks on behalf of consumers with some kind of price control.

[fredtoast]

Government control of free market pricing?

Bless my soul, Brad has finally understood the support for socialized health care.

[BmorePat87]

It only took Trump to make Brad a liberal.


Reducing costs is 100% a good thing. Also a good thing? Expanding access to affordable healthcare so that there aren't as many uninsured Americans.

If you introduced the ACA again to Congress but named it the "Trump Reduces Uninsured and Makes Progress Act", TRUMP-care would become law.

[Benton]

(02-12-2019, 12:32 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It only took Trump to make Brad a liberal.


Reducing costs is 100% a good thing. Also a good thing? Expanding access to affordable healthcare so that there aren't as many uninsured Americans.

If you introduced the ACA again to Congress but named it the "Trump Reduces Uninsured and Makes Progress Act", TRUMP-care would become law.

I'm really kind of surprised something like that didn't come out of the wall standoff. That way Trump could "win" and Republicans would get to pass the healthcare bill they wanted until Obama put his name on it.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-12-2019, 12:45 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm really kind of surprised something like that didn't come out of the wall standoff. That way Trump could "win" and Republicans would get to pass the healthcare bill they wanted until Obama put his name on it.

If I recall, the idea was floated about in the 90s, and was never attempted in Congress.  I'm not sure how something Republicans never attempted to vote on is the bill they always wanted.

[fredtoast]

(02-12-2019, 01:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm not sure how something Republicans never attempted to vote on is the bill they always wanted.

Because in over 20 years they still have not came up with any other plan.

[Benton]

(02-12-2019, 01:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: If I recall, the idea was floated about in the 90s, and was never attempted in Congress.  I'm not sure how something Republicans never attempted to  vote on is the bill they always wanted.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/08/01/set-health-record-straight-republicans-helped-craft-obamacare-ross-baker-column/523952001/

It started with a plan drafted by the GOP in the 90s. Clinton (who got a fair amount of support from Big Pharma) wasn't supportive and it got pushed aside in the whole "Contract with America" fervor. Obama and Democrats dusted it off thinking it would get Republican support. It didn't. At least, not officially. Republicans were a part of it, they just didn't want that being on the surface. You can't take a direction of "socialism is bad and all Democrats are socialists" and then support socialized medicine. They'd have lost all credibility.

It's much like the wall. Many Democrats are in favor of it, but they drew a line of 'no wall, no way.' So they can't support it on the surface. Hence the 'let's debate in private.'

[*Nately120*]

(02-12-2019, 07:37 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: That alone would be a HUGE accomplishment and boost for the country by helping the uninsured or people who just don't have great insurance.  

God forbid the uninsured get better jobs. Great move, Trump! I'd hate to see people actually work harder.

[Dill]

(02-12-2019, 05:16 PM)Benton Wrote: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/08/01/set-health-record-straight-republicans-helped-craft-obamacare-ross-baker-column/523952001/

It started with a plan drafted by the GOP in the 90s. Clinton (who got a fair amount of support from Big Pharma) wasn't supportive and it got pushed aside in the whole "Contract with America" fervor. Obama and Democrats dusted it off thinking it would get Republican support. It didn't. At least, not officially. Republicans were a part of it, they just didn't want that being on the surface. You can't take a direction of "socialism is bad and all Democrats are socialists" and then support socialized medicine. They'd have lost all credibility.

It's much like the wall. Many Democrats are in favor of it, but they drew a line of 'no wall, no way.' So they can't support it on the surface. Hence the 'let's debate in private.'

Yes, Obamacare was Romneycare updated and extended to the nation.  Democrats crossing the aisle to work with Republican ideas.

But give Obama a WIN??? No way. That is how a market competition and free choice plan became "socialism."

You are old enough to remember Bill and Hillary's first go at health care back in 93.  I remember that because I had just moved from Germany, where we'd had real health insurance for 10 years, and now had to pay double the cost of insurance for minimal coverage.  My daughter, a leukemia survivor, could not be covered at all. I was baffled at how easy it was to stifle policy innovation with reference to "big government" and "socialism."  

[Dill]

(02-12-2019, 07:37 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: I'm sure Democrats will find a way to bash the plan and say that now they're all the sudden against lower prices, but I think this could do great things for our healthcare and our economy overall!  It will bring about more competition in drug prices, while also saving Americans money, and I have to think that the advertising for these drugs will see a big increase, which will help bring in money for that field!

Trump with another great move!

Dino! Bpat! How can we stop this?  Outrageous if the price of medicine goes down.  I'll see a thousand aids patients die from lack of access and pay triple on all my prescriptions before I give Trump a win LOL.

Actually BFritz21, I will stop hating Trump and support him 100% if it is not just more talk, like his other great moves.

But I fear this may be like so many of his foreign policy pronouncements--something he has to walk back when his fellow 1%ers realize what he is up to.

It is possible that it may bring about more competition over prices, but I think not directly and not right away. And definitely not with a Republican Senate.

[GMDino]

(02-12-2019, 07:42 PM)Dill Wrote: Dino! Bpat! How can we stop this?  Outrageous if the price of medicine goes down.  I'll see a thousand aids patients die from lack of access and pay triple on all my prescriptions before I give Trump a win LOL.

Actually BFritz21, I will stop hating Trump and support him 100% if it is not just more talk, like his other great moves.

But I fear this may be like so many of his foreign policy pronouncements--something he has to walk back when his fellow 1%ers realize what he is up to.

It is possible that it may bring about more competition over prices, but I think not directly and not right away. And definitely not with a Republican Senate.

It's all part of TDS (Trump Denial Syndrome).  His supporters have to find a way to blame Democrats just in case DJT is lying (again).  In addition they think Democrats could never say he had a good idea when/if he actually has one.

His supports are wee bit delusional....

[Millhouse]

One of the few Bernie ideas that I liked was to completely rework the IP laws concerning patents on prescription drugs.

Normally I am against this for pretty much everything in general, if you create it and patent it, it should be yours to do with as you please. But for medicine though, the patents should be opened up and other companies should be allowed to make and distribute it. This in turn gives competition for that drug driving the price down. Of course the one or ones that came up with the original patent should still get a kickback from all those that make it.

[Benton]

(02-12-2019, 09:39 PM)Millhouse Wrote: One of the few Bernie ideas that I liked was to completely rework the IP laws concerning patents on prescription drugs.

Normally I am against this for pretty much everything in general, if you create it and patent it, it should be yours to do with as you please. But for medicine though, the patents should be opened up and other companies should be allowed to make and distribute it. This in turn gives competition for that drug driving the price down. Of course the one or ones that came up with the original patent should still get a kickback from all those that make it.

Saw a story (maybe on here?) where a country had been giving away a drug for years, but a competitor bought a parent for a similar drug manufactured in another country and was going to charge hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Crazy.

I get the need to recoup losses through a patent, but that's crazy. 

[GMDino]

(02-12-2019, 10:32 PM)Benton Wrote: Saw a story (maybe on here?) where a country had been giving away a drug for years, but a competitor bought a parent for a similar drug manufactured in another country and was going to charge hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Crazy.

I get the need to recoup losses through a patent, but that's crazy. 

Yep.

And the company said it will only cost the patients $10.00 through their insurance. 

Not sure how the insurance company will recoup the $374,880.  

[Belsnickel]

Not for nothing, but one of the ways we could help reduce drug costs would be for the government to have more of a hand in helping to fund scientific research.

Just sayin'.

[Benton]

(02-12-2019, 10:46 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Not for nothing, but one of the ways we could help reduce drug costs would be for the government to have more of a hand in helping to fund scientific research.

Just sayin'.

My only concern there is then it's cure by committee. Common sense and government priorities don't always go hand in hand.

[Vas Deferens]

(02-12-2019, 10:46 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Not for nothing, but one of the ways we could help reduce drug costs would be for the government to have more of a hand in helping to fund scientific research.

Just sayin'.

Considering the amount of R&D done at public universities, seems like we already are.