5 ms·

How do you explain big Pharma lobbying to stop reducing drug prices? For example, Democrats who held up drug pricing reforms were the largest beneficiaries of l

How do you explain big Pharma lobbying to stop reducing drug prices? For example, Democrats who held up drug pricing reforms were the largest beneficiaries of lobbyist money. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/capitol-hill-drug-pricing-reform-opponents-among-biggest-beneficiaries-pharma-2021-10-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...

zakary 3y ago
Everyone has a price, and drug companies can usually find a way to meet it for even the most steadfast
- eddtries 3y ago
  Yeah I agree, I was responding to > If legislators feel strongly ideologically about an issue, no amount of lobbying will make them vote the other way.
- JoshTriplett 3y ago
  > Everyone has a price Some people really do have principles they won't violate. We just don't get enough people in politics who don't have a price.
  - verisimi 3y ago
    Not politicians. Not many normal people either. And that presumes that most people even know what 'principles' are - which they do not.
eigenket 3y ago
The short answer is that we're talking about the EU. Thats a US thing. As far as I can tell looking from the outside the US system is set up so that if you aren't ridiculously wealthy yourself you pretty much need lobbyist money to fund your campaign to get elected.
- eddtries 3y ago
  That's probably true, there is lobbying in the UK so I assume countries within Europe have similar issues but I don't truly know.
  - qwytw 3y ago
    Generally political advertisements, campaign spending and especially donations are strongly limited. E.g. where I am a only private individuals can only donate and only up to 10k per year. The downside of that is that most funding parties receive comes from the state and it's based on their previous election performance (which is problematic due to very obvious reasons...). Also if everyone can give/spend as much as they want legally it at least stays semi transparent so in theory voters can base their decisions on that. Illegal bribes, kickbacks etc. are a bit harder to track.
- drstewart 3y ago
  >As far as I can tell looking from the outside Out of curiosity, how accurately do you feel are the opinions of outsiders with no experience living in your country who comment on your country's state of affairs?
  - Timwi 3y ago
    Well, on the one hand of course you could argue that outsiders are less experienced with living in your country. But outsiders have no emotional stakes in convincing themselves that your country is the best on earth. Consequently, I feel the non-US media are freer than US mass media to discuss the true state of American healthcare. Outsiders are less susceptible to your country's patriotic propaganda. This does go both (or all) ways. The US are an example here, not a singular special case. Every country tries to convince its citizens that it's better than everywhere else.
  - eigenket 3y ago
    I have previously lived in the USA, I'm not sure why you assumed I have no experience of that. In general I would expect someone who speaks the language of the country I live in now at roughly the same level I speak English to have a pretty accurate understanding of what is going on here. It would, frankly, be quite weird to speak the language and have no idea of what is happening here. Of course America is a special case because of how the internet is dominated by US media, commentary and content.
madeofpalk 3y ago
They don't feel strongly ideologically about an issue
- eddtries 3y ago
  You might be right, but having politicians who are not ideologically pro-affordable healthcare is a really sad state of affairs
  - eigenket 3y ago
    Well one of these guys is Bob Menendez, who is currently indicted on his second federal corruption charges and who happily accepts cash and gold bars from Egyptian nationals.
- qwytw 3y ago
  Some do, unfortunately oftentimes it's the crazy ones that feel the strongest about things.
martin8412 3y ago
That's a US problem. The prices of all medicines in for example Denmark are publicly available. The medicine is purchased by a single entity(and there are proposals to combine the entities within the Nordic countries to form a single large purchaser), so to sell medicine in Denmark you'll have to play ball. The prices are therefore quite reasonable. Insulin which is a commonly used example of overpriced medicine in the US is around 40-50 USD in Denmark. That is the brand version from Novo Nordisk. The prices are available at https://www.medicinpriser.dk/?lng=2 https://www.medicinpriser.dk/?lng=2
nonameiguess 3y ago
I think the explanation is these legislators are not the ones who feel ideologically strong about cutting drug prices. Of the three people listed in this article, Kyrsten Sinema is no longer a Democrat and Bob Menendez is currently under indicment on federal corruption charges, which is now the second time for him.
rsynnott 3y ago
Lobbying is likely easier in a polarised two-party system where you really only have to swing a few people on the edges to deadlock things. The European Parliament has 6 large parties (>50 seats), and they're not particularly cohesive, so cases where the pre-ordained decision can be swayed by getting to this six people would be much rarer.
- Lutger 3y ago
  That is likely true, though there is still extensive lobbying going on in the EU and within EU countries. It is just done in a different way, with different mechanics.

zakary 3y ago

Everyone has a price, and drug companies can usually find a way to meet it for even the most steadfast

eddtries 3y ago
Yeah I agree, I was responding to > If legislators feel strongly ideologically about an issue, no amount of lobbying will make them vote the other way.
JoshTriplett 3y ago
> Everyone has a price Some people really do have principles they won't violate. We just don't get enough people in politics who don't have a price.
- verisimi 3y ago
  Not politicians. Not many normal people either. And that presumes that most people even know what 'principles' are - which they do not.

eigenket 3y ago

The short answer is that we're talking about the EU. Thats a US thing. As far as I can tell looking from the outside the US system is set up so that if you aren't ridiculously wealthy yourself you pretty much need lobbyist money to fund your campaign to get elected.

eddtries 3y ago
That's probably true, there is lobbying in the UK so I assume countries within Europe have similar issues but I don't truly know.
- qwytw 3y ago
  Generally political advertisements, campaign spending and especially donations are strongly limited. E.g. where I am a only private individuals can only donate and only up to 10k per year. The downside of that is that most funding parties receive comes from the state and it's based on their previous election performance (which is problematic due to very obvious reasons...). Also if everyone can give/spend as much as they want legally it at least stays semi transparent so in theory voters can base their decisions on that. Illegal bribes, kickbacks etc. are a bit harder to track.
drstewart 3y ago
>As far as I can tell looking from the outside Out of curiosity, how accurately do you feel are the opinions of outsiders with no experience living in your country who comment on your country's state of affairs?
- Timwi 3y ago
  Well, on the one hand of course you could argue that outsiders are less experienced with living in your country. But outsiders have no emotional stakes in convincing themselves that your country is the best on earth. Consequently, I feel the non-US media are freer than US mass media to discuss the true state of American healthcare. Outsiders are less susceptible to your country's patriotic propaganda. This does go both (or all) ways. The US are an example here, not a singular special case. Every country tries to convince its citizens that it's better than everywhere else.
- eigenket 3y ago
  I have previously lived in the USA, I'm not sure why you assumed I have no experience of that. In general I would expect someone who speaks the language of the country I live in now at roughly the same level I speak English to have a pretty accurate understanding of what is going on here. It would, frankly, be quite weird to speak the language and have no idea of what is happening here. Of course America is a special case because of how the internet is dominated by US media, commentary and content.

madeofpalk 3y ago

They don't feel strongly ideologically about an issue

eddtries 3y ago
You might be right, but having politicians who are not ideologically pro-affordable healthcare is a really sad state of affairs
- eigenket 3y ago
  Well one of these guys is Bob Menendez, who is currently indicted on his second federal corruption charges and who happily accepts cash and gold bars from Egyptian nationals.
qwytw 3y ago
Some do, unfortunately oftentimes it's the crazy ones that feel the strongest about things.

martin8412 3y ago

That's a US problem. The prices of all medicines in for example Denmark are publicly available. The medicine is purchased by a single entity(and there are proposals to combine the entities within the Nordic countries to form a single large purchaser), so to sell medicine in Denmark you'll have to play ball. The prices are therefore quite reasonable. Insulin which is a commonly used example of overpriced medicine in the US is around 40-50 USD in Denmark. That is the brand version from Novo Nordisk. The prices are available at https://www.medicinpriser.dk/?lng=2 https://www.medicinpriser.dk/?lng=2

nonameiguess 3y ago

I think the explanation is these legislators are not the ones who feel ideologically strong about cutting drug prices. Of the three people listed in this article, Kyrsten Sinema is no longer a Democrat and Bob Menendez is currently under indicment on federal corruption charges, which is now the second time for him.

rsynnott 3y ago

Lobbying is likely easier in a polarised two-party system where you really only have to swing a few people on the edges to deadlock things. The European Parliament has 6 large parties (>50 seats), and they're not particularly cohesive, so cases where the pre-ordained decision can be swayed by getting to this six people would be much rarer.

Lutger 3y ago
That is likely true, though there is still extensive lobbying going on in the EU and within EU countries. It is just done in a different way, with different mechanics.