7 ms·
California governor vetoes bill that would have set a $35 cap for insulin
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 3y agoWhat's the steelman for this?
- justrealist 3y agoThe obvious one is that price controls feel good but will cause shortages if they are below the price at which a company can profitably bring a product to market.
- littlestymaar 3y agoBecause somehow medicine shortage don't exist yet because fortunately there's no price cap… Also, there's no practical difference between an actual shortage and a price rising so high that many people can't afford it, like it's already the case with insulin[1]. [1]: https://www.hrw.org/report/2022/04/12/if-im-out-insulin-im-going-die/united-states-lack-regulation-fuels-crisis https://www.hrw.org/report/2022/04/12/if-im-out-insulin-im-g...
- semireg 3y agoThanks for asking this. I was only recently made aware of this argument technique and it’s a great antidote to division. i.e. No matter your opinions, make your best case for why this is a good idea. See also: strawman
- jononomo 3y agoThe concept of steelmanning comes from Sam Harris.
- spinehacker 3y agoLol. No, it doesn't. And there are great reasons not to 'steelman.' https://thingofthings.wordpress.com/2016/08/09/against-steelmanning/ https://thingofthings.wordpress.com/2016/08/09/against-steel...
- semireg 3y agoSteelmanning in public may as well be mansplaining. But steelmanning inside your own head is a noble exercise.
- Vecr 3y agoI think steelmanning is good, depending on how much time you have for the debate. Obviously if you're going to be working on something for days with this person they should understand your position in detail and vice versa, but if you only have a couple hours or less for a debate it saves time without devolving into a point scoring war.
- jononomo 3y agoThese are not arguments against steelmanning -- these are arguments against doing something else and calling it steelmanning. In other words, this is strawmanning steelmanning.
- vlovich123 3y ago> the California governor, a Democrat, said earlier this year that the state would soon start making its own brand of insulin. California has a $50m contract with the non-profit pharmaceutical company Civica Rx to manufacture the insulin under the brand CalRx. The state would sell a 10-milliliter vial of insulin for $30.
- langsoul-com 3y agoEven then, if they were planning on selling it under the $35 limit. Why would they bother vetoing?
- stouset 3y agoWhy put another law on the books when you believe it will be obviated by other measures? One reason I can think of is that a law might be more politically "durable" than a contract with a third party to produce insulin. But on the whole I think I'd rather one less law.
- csa 3y ago$35 would have been the cap on copay. Costs over that are passed on to the consumer via higher premiums. The CalRx is $30 total. I think insulin specifically and medicines/drugs in general might be another area that CA leads the country in modeling how to manage prices and overall cost.
- kevinventullo 3y agoSo, it’s still under the $35 limit. Seems like that doesn’t answer the grandparent’s question.
- minhazm 3y agoThe $35 is a cap on co-pay, not the actual cost paid out by insurance.
- kevin_thibedeau 3y agoIt's a bill created by big pharma to whitewash their image while changing nothing about their profiteering. We should not have these sort of laws on the books.
- stouset 3y agoThe bill caps the price of the co-pay, but the actual cost is still passed on to the consumer through insurance premiums. Meanwhile, the California government has contracted out with a nonprofit pharmaceutical company to manufacture insulin and sell it at cost, which comes out to $30. This is—in theory at least—more effective, since it forces pharmaceutical companies to compete on price. And if they don't, Californians still have access to a source of cheap insulin.
- littlestymaar 3y agoWhy not both though.
- cameldrv 3y agoPatients/doctors have much less incentive to pick the cheaper brand if the insurance company is forced to provide the expensive insulin for a low copay.
- littlestymaar 3y agoWhat kind of insensitive are you talking about?
- stouset 3y agoIf a patient can get California-produced insulin for $30 or insulin produced by a for-profit pharmaceutical company for $35, many people won't bother to opt for the former. This, despite the latter containing significant hidden costs which are reflected in insurance premiums.
- littlestymaar 3y agoA 20% difference in cost ought to be enough of an incentive to make the consumer chose the nonprofit one especially since there shouldn't be any “bothering” involved. Also, insurers would have incentives to mandate the $30 version since it means lower cost on their side and they don't even have to reflect that in insurance premiums (which they don't since they're competing with each other).
- falcor84 3y agoThis is the meaningful part: > The California governor, a Democrat, said earlier this year that the state would soon start making its own brand of insulin. California has a $50m contract with the non-profit pharmaceutical company Civica Rx to manufacture the insulin under the brand CalRx. The state would sell a 10-milliliter vial of insulin for $30. > “With CalRx, we are getting at the underlying cost, which is the true sustainable solution to high-cost pharmaceuticals,” Newsom wrote in a message explaining why he vetoed the bill on Saturday. “With co-pay caps however, the long-term costs are still passed down to consumers through higher premiums from health plans.”
- Simulacra 3y agoGovernment has a very poor track history of manufacturing products. I am not optimistic about this at all.
- isykt 3y agoIt's good, then, that the non-profit pharmaceutical company called Civica Rx will manufacture the insulin under the brand CalRx.
- henriquez 3y agoCalifornia nonprofits are typically a special breed of corruption.
- refulgentis 3y agoThrowaway quip tripling down on vague aspersions about something good. Sometimes things are good.
- afavour 3y agoI feel like we’re trying very hard to dislike a good thing here
- 3y ago
- monero-xmr 3y agoSetting price caps is a flashing alert that the government has lost anyone with authority that appreciates basic economics. Very common to see this before a slide into collapse (Venezuela, Cuba, etc.).
- standardUser 3y agoThat's a pretty thin pitch given the excessive drama of what you're claiming.
- kolbe 3y agoWhen the government also gives de jure monopolies on production and distribution, they can reasonably call for price caps as well. You're thinking of the way economics work in a free market.
- whatshisface 3y agoInsulin was invented a long enough time ago it is not clear to me why it is not a competitive commodity market by now.
- kolbe 3y agoWelcome to crony capitalism. It's America's specialty.
- RagnarD 3y agoPlenty of countries do it. It's a misnomer to call it capitalism. It's fascism: nominal private ownership with defacto government control in different potential ways (e.g. force backed barriers to competition, regulation boosting costs, etc.)
- kolbe 3y agoI think that's why Crony Capitalism has a very specific meaning different from Capitalism. Modifiers make a difference. For example, National Socialism and Socialism are very dissimilar.
- frellus 3y agoGov. Newsom, as of late, has found his veto pen and hasn't stopped using it. He vetoed one insane law which would have taken parental rights away (AB 957 would have updated California law to clarify that, for the purposes of child custody and visitation decisions, a parent's affirmation of a child's gender identity or gender expression is an essential factor that must be considered in determining the best interest of the child) he also vetoed a bill which would have added caste as a protected class to California’s current anti-discrimination laws, as well as ones to decriminalize psychedelics, and one to require humans in self-driving trucks. I just can't figure this guy out, but he's such a political animal I can't believe any of these have anything to do with any sort of principles on his side.
- BurningFrog 3y agoMy guess is this is preparations for a presidential run.
- ProjectArcturis 3y agoYou'd think he'd lose the Gordon Gekko hairstyle first.
- lazide 3y agoI’m not the only one who can’t believe he still keeps that thing! Woo!
- frellus 3y agoTo me, his smile is more like The Joker, Batman 1989, when Jack puts on flesh colored makeup but has that smile as he's talking into the TV camera. Creeps me out every time I see Newsom smile because I believe he is truly a literal psychopath.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 3y ago
- throwawayqqq11 3y ago[flagged]
- carbocation 3y agoMany people here probably already know this, but there are many types of insulin formulations with varying half lives. It seems that CalRx will be producing several popular ones including a Lantus-like insulin: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2807852 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articl...
- AlbertCory 3y agoNewsom's running for President. Biden's continuing to deteriorate before our eyes, but no one with any power is willing to say so in public. So Newsom is positioning himself for the big event. What will be interesting is if another Democrat starts running/not-running. Then you'll know it's on.
- sircastor 3y agoThis drifts off topic, but you don’t think Harris would be the goto candidate to pick up the ticket?
- shiroiuma 3y agoI feel like Harris isn't exactly going to inspire people to vote. She's a little better than Hillary, maybe, but that's not saying much. It's too bad Democrats have such a terrible time finding candidates with some charisma and likability; Obama's election should have taught them a lesson here, but it seems they never learned it.
- gcanyon 3y agoCites please. Real ones.
- AlbertCory 3y ago> Cites please it's opinion. I don't need any BS "citations." On the good side, you're free to state your own.
- gcanyon 3y ago> Biden's continuing to deteriorate before our eyes So it's a BS opinion, got it.
- AlbertCory 3y agoThis assumes you're following the news. If you're not, one citation, or twenty, won't help any.
- jrflowers 3y agoSome might think that this is a bad thing, but in the bigger picture this demonstration of common-sense governing could endear Newsom to voters on the national stage should he run for president — a position he could use to veto insulin price caps for all Americans.
- tonymet 3y agoHow did insulin become so expensive? It seems relatively straightforward to produce and the inputs are cheap
- wredue 3y agoThe same way that epipen got so expensive: Executives wanted a larger bonus while lacking the ability to otherwise meet unreasonable “infinite growth” demands of the market.
- sircastor 3y agoCheap and easy controlled substances are a manufacturer’s dream. It’s expensive because we have a captive healthcare system and they can do whatever they want.
- silotis 3y agoThe cheap old varieties of insulin are still available and still cheap. What's expensive are the newer analogues which make it much easier for diabetics to manage their insulin levels.
- tonymet 3y agoThanks for explaining. I wasn’t aware that there were newer insulins with different absorption properties.
- lamontcg 3y agoSupply and demand. If you're going to die without insulin then your demand is fairly inelastic to price changes. If the producer doubles the price, then you'll pay it.
- frankreyes 3y agoGovernment regulations. It's as easy as allowing to import it from cross the border from Mexico and Canada.
- sacnoradhq 3y agoPerhaps it would've led to a de facto ban on expensive-to-produce insulin variants. Giving Medicare prescription negotiating authority and requiring that that be the maximum retail price would be the answer.