Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Showdown: Senate Dems Take on Obama, Baucus Over $80 Billion PhRMA Deal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:02 AM
Original message
Showdown: Senate Dems Take on Obama, Baucus Over $80 Billion PhRMA Deal
Showdown: Senate Dems Take on Obama, Baucus Over $80 Billion PhRMA Deal
By Mike Lillis 9/23/09 9:26 AM


In the middle of June, the White House forged a deal with the nation’s largest drug makers. As part of the bargain — under which the pharmaceutical companies offered $80 billion over 10 years in reduced drug costs to seniors and the government — the administration vowed to withhold support for a proposal allowing state governments to negotiate drug prices on behalf of the nearly 8 million folks who qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid.

It was an arrangement that was immediately and sharply criticized by liberal Democrats in both chambers, who are pushing to empower the states to haggle for lower prices. And last night, near the end of the opening day discussions over an enormous health reform bill in the Senate Finance Committee, we saw just how divisive an issue it is.

When Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) introduced an amendment providing cheaper drugs for the Medicare/Medicaid eligibles — an amendment that would effectively scrap the White House deal with the branded drug lobby — Democrats on the panel couldn’t endorse it fast enough. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) came first, saying the proposal “makes all the sense in the world.” Not to be outdone, Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) quickly followed, the latter arguing that the current arrangement prohibiting negotiation, enacted by Republicans in 2003, was designed “simply to put money in the pharmaceutical companies’ pockets.”

“It’s hard to imagine an argument against {Nelson's amendment} that could be made publicly,” Schumer said.

But that didn’t stop several members of the panel from trying.

Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa), the committee’s senior Republican, said the amendment — which Nelson says would save $86 billion over 10 years — “will raise prices for people with private insurance.”

“There is no free lunch,” said an impatient Grassley. “But these people talk like there is a free lunch.” He was talking about Democrats.

And Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) said it “just doesn’t seem fair” that Democrats would renege on the initial bargain with the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA.

“Whether you like PhRMA or not,” Carper said, “we have a deal.”

That comment brought a backlash of its own, with many Democrats quick to point out that they never agreed to any pact with the drug makers. “Congress has a right,” Kerry said, “to make a different decision.”

Sen. John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), an original sponsor of the Nelson amendment, noted dryly that, “There’s nothing sacred about that deal.”

more...

http://washingtonindependent.com/60582/showdown-senate-dems-take-on-obama-baucus-over-80-billion-phrma-deal

Related:

Reid ‘Guarantees’ Action on Prescription Drug Reimportation Ban
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6608738&mesg_id=6608738
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. That was the quintessential "back room" deal that President Obama
proclaimed we would never have in his administration. Only here it is.

It was negotiated by Baucus in the Finance Committee with the White House's oversight and approval. Not to mention that it's just a crap deal on the face of it. 80 billion over 10 years is not a "negotiation", it's a capitulation.

The Senate and the Congress should do their duty and overthrow this deal that they had no input into anyway. Good for them! The no negotiation part of the Medicare Drug bill was prima facie evidence at that time who Congress was really working for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Sounds like they're working on overthrowing it. That's why nothing
is yet set in stone, and why I'm not hand wringing just yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. congress is not obligated to support obama's sellout to the drug peddlers nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeycola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Bingo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeycola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
5. Congress has a right,” Kerry said, “to make a different decision.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
6. Thank God.I hope this is real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peacetrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-23-09 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
7. Sausage making is not a pretty sight...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC