With a strong likelihood that Nancy Pelosi will take leadership of a Democratic House of Representatives following the midterm elections, she has declared that high drug prices will be among the first targets. Pelosi has already been reported to have marched into PhRMA’s offices this July and to have threatened to strip drug companies of exclusive licenses to some blockbuster medicines. This move is part of her move to give Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices directly. Medicare’s prescription drug benefit spent $90 billion on prescription medicines in 2015. A further push would see the implementation of a Senate-confirmed “price-gouging enforcer,” who would have the power to fine those found to have increased prices unjustifiably. The ability to bring these changes would depend on control of committees and subcommittees overseeing pharma policy. In this respect though, a number of Democrats antagonistic to pharma have already emerged. More remarkable is the prospect of an alliance between President Trump and the Democrats with the sole intention of tackling drug prices, though the prospect remains slim. There is no guarantee of a united front among Democrats however, with a number, including Reps. Frank Pallone (N.J.) and Richard Neal (Mass.), accepting six figure contributions from pharma sources. Indeed, key Pelosi ally, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) who may gain control of the influential House Energy and Commerce Committee’s health panel, has received the second most money from the pharmaceutical and health products industry of members remaining in Congress. While there are many reasons why Pelosi’s bill might not pass, it does at least raise awareness about what can happen when Congress fails to act as intended. The retirement of Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) is a blow given his track record for quashing unfriendly legislation. His replacement may likely be Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) who has a reputation for populist positions on drug pricing, more likely due to his co-authorship of the legislation that enacted Medicare Part D. Joint superiority for the Democrats in House and Senate is the worst possible position for the pharmaceutical industry the chances are incredibly slim. (In its current form, the bill has 100 Democratic co-sponsors.) However, it is clear that the Democrats do not have a shortage of ideas on how to tackle high drug prices no matter what the outcome of the midterms.
With a strong likelihood that Nancy Pelosi will take leadership of a Democratic House of Representatives following the midterm elections, she has declared that high drug prices will be among the first targets. Pelosi has already been reported to have marched into PhRMA’s offices this July and to have threatened to strip drug companies of exclusive licenses to some blockbuster medicines. This move is part of her move to give Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices directly. Medicare’s prescription drug benefit spent $90 billion on prescription medicines in 2015. A further push would see the implementation of a Senate-confirmed “price-gouging enforcer,” who would have the power to fine those found to have increased prices unjustifiably. The ability to bring these changes would depend on control of committees and subcommittees overseeing pharma policy. In this respect though, a number of Democrats antagonistic to pharma have already emerged. More remarkable is the prospect of an alliance between President Trump and the Democrats with the sole intention of tackling drug prices, though the prospect remains slim. There is no guarantee of a united front among Democrats however, with a number, including Reps. Frank Pallone (N.J.) and Richard Neal (Mass.), accepting six figure contributions from pharma sources. Indeed, key Pelosi ally, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) who may gain control of the influential House Energy and Commerce Committee’s health panel, has received the second most money from the pharmaceutical and health products industry of members remaining in Congress. While there are many reasons why Pelosi’s bill might not pass, it does at least raise awareness about what can happen when Congress fails to act as intended. The retirement of Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) is a blow given his track record for quashing unfriendly legislation. His replacement may likely be Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) who has a reputation for populist positions on drug pricing, more likely due to his co-authorship of the legislation that enacted Medicare Part D. Joint superiority for the Democrats in House and Senate is the worst possible position for the pharmaceutical industry the chances are incredibly slim. However, it is clear that the Democrats do not have a shortage of ideas on how to tackle high drug prices no matter what the outcome of the midterms.