[Mb-civic] big pharma still escapes either way in calif

[IHHS at aol.com]

Legislature must fix  prescription drug  pricing
By Lynn  Rolston and George Pennebaker 
TWO of the seven measures on  the special election ballot on  
Nov. 8 are proposals that would create drug discount programs for the  
uninsured. While there is no doubt that there is a tremendous need for  programs and 
benefits that reduce the cost of prescription drugs for all  Americans and 
that special consideration must be given to the uninsured,  Propositions 78 and 
79 are not the answer.  
Indeed, the passage of one or both of these measures will only delay  truly 
meaningful efforts to address the problem.  
The reality is that both Props. 78 and 79 are the products of a pitched  
battle between consumer and labor groups on one side and the  pharmaceutical 
industry on the other.  
Prop. 79 is sponsored by consumer groups and organized labor. While  they are 
serious about addressing the problem, they drafted 79 so that it  presented 
the most extreme threat to the pharmaceutical industry with the  promise to 
bring it to the electorate for a vote. The sponsors of Prop. 79  hoped that the 
pharmaceutical industry would see it as so extreme that the  industry would 
negotiate a legislative compromise.  
But the industry response was to propose its own ballot measure ñ Prop.  78, 
a "voluntary" discount program. When the sides could not reach a  compromise, 
the electorate was left to choose between two measures that  never would have 
been the product of a sound policy discussion.  
So what's wrong with the two measures? Let's start with Prop. 78. It  would 
create a discount program based solely on "voluntary" contributions  from 
pharmaceutical companies.  
While we do not favor outright price controls, we do know that the  industry 
has had years to develop discount programs to address the access  problem, and 
that it has failed to do so. Why would this be any different?   
And if it is different, it is probably because community pharmacies  will be 
expected to fill the huge gap left between consumer expectations  and the 
minimum contribution of the pharmaceutical industry.  
In fact, Prop. 78 is modeled after the Ohio Best Rx discount program,  where 
more than 90 percent of the discounts                
____________________________________
 Advertisement     
(http://servedby.advertising.com/click/site=0000709276/mnum=0000299373/genr=1/tkdt=B0P0R1T0/cstr=25018558=_43638e2e,6851042582,709276^299
373_/bnum=25018558)     
____________________________________
    have come directly from pharmacy. The  pharmacists in California are 
willing to do their part to improve access  to prescription drugs.  
However, we cannot and should not be expected to make up for the  failure of 
the pharmaceutical industry to do the right thing.  
The problem with Prop. 79 is that it may never be implemented. While it  
makes sense for the state to use its considerable purchasing power to get  better 
discounts from manufacturers, there is no question that the  mechanisms for 
doing so in Prop. 79 will become mired in litigation  brought by the 
pharmaceutical industry.  
Other states that have taken a very similar approach have seen their  
programs bogged down in the courts.  
Furthermore, if Prop. 79 follows along the lines of the Maine Rx Plus  
program,  
100 percent of the discounts will be shouldered by pharmacy - not from  
pharmaceutical manufacturers!  
The creation of a meaningful, legally and fiscally sound drug discount  
program should not be the subject of the initiative process. The  Legislature must 
take responsibility for fashioning such a program and  must have the ability 
to adjust it to respond to both market conditions  and changes in federal 
programs.  
The very nature of initiatives prevents the Legislature from making  
necessary changes.  
As much as we want to provide the public with necessary medications at  
affordable prices, Propositions 78 and 79 only provide false promises.  Tell the 
Legislature you want it to do its job and to do it right.  
Lynn Rolston is the CEO of the California Pharmacists Association.  
George Pennebaker is president of the  
California Pharmacists Association. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20051029/bb409a81/attachment.htm