PHARMA CEO WORRIES AMERICANS WILL SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH AND EMBRACE BERNIE SANDERS PLAN

[Donkees]

September 13 2017, 7:04 a.m.

Excerpt:

BRENT SAUNDERS, THE chief executive of Allergan, one of the largest pharmaceutical firms in the world, is concerned that Americans will become fed up and, in an era of increasing political polarization, come to embrace the single-payer health care plan being unveiled Wednesday by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

The candid thoughts were shared last weekend at the Wells Fargo Healthcare Conference in Boston, a gathering for investors and major pharmaceutical and biotech firms.

Americans have lost trust in drug companies, Saunders said, noting the industry consistently ranks lower than oil and tobacco companies in public trust surveys.

“I think we’ve got to do things to bring that trust back,” the executive added. “Because ultimately, someone’s going to be in the White House. Somebody’s going to be in Congress. Someone’s going to be somewhere and going to have to say, ‘Enough’s enough. Let’s just change the whole system. Let’s go to one payer. Let’s do something.'”

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/13/pharma-ceo-worries-americans-will-say-enough-is-enough-and-embrace-bernie-sanders-single-payer-plan/

[Autumn]

1. I think we are at that point.

[Donkees]

2. 'It's Happening' :)

[NurseJackie]

8. No it's not. I'll be long dead before this "happens".

[KPN]

16. Yes it is.

[NurseJackie]

21. Nope. It won't happen for another twenty years.

It's not actually "happening".

[KPN]

33. You be wrong in my view. Later!

[NurseJackie]

34. The track record of success isn't very encouraging. This is all...

... just wishful thinking. Meanwhile nothing is being done to protect what we DO have. It's all very short-sighted to focus on something that's NOT going to happen and to neglect the vulnerable and threatened ACA.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

37. Agree 100%.

The insurance industry and many sectors of the healthcare biz will fight this to their death, along with their thousands of lobbyists. And, all the while pumping millions into right-wing campaign war chests. Over the years, I've watched our healthcare industry go from simple and reasonable to totally out of control by adding layer after layer of unnecessary costs. There was no one there to stop them in our free market system.

This will be a very long and painful slog. R-Wingers will be screaming "socialism" out in the streets. It is refreshing to hear a big-med CEO actually admit he knows the public is sick of our existing system. However, our political system simply is not yet ready to go against Wall Street and our existing healthcare bureaucracy and do the right thing for the general public.

[appal_jack]

44. What a short-sighted conclusion!

"Meanwhile nothing is being done to protect what we DO have."

Playing only defense with regards to the ACA is a losing strategy, and always will be. Even if the push for single-payer fails, it creates a terrifying bogeyman for the insurance industry. Instead of insurance execs scheming to up their profits another 25% next year, they are forced to start scheming how to swindle Americans into keep paying them at all when a viable, public alternative is on the table. As this unfolds, insurance execs become allies of the ACA instead of foes. Why is this a problem at all in your eyes?

We just went through a very close battle to save the ACA. I called my Republican Rep. and two Repub. Senators, and of course they ignored me (and most of their callers). If we play only defense, I doubt we can keep this up for long. Some offensive sorties regarding single payer are a great service to protecting and advancing national health care of any sort.

-app

[guillaumeb]

52. Very well said.

The ACA, for all it accomplished, allows the Insurance companies to restrict healthcare options so they can profit from the restriction. And who gains? The 1% who own the companies and receive the profits.

[zentrum]

50. This does protect the ACA and goes big

It puts an entirely different narrative into the news and into the conversation. Hurts all Republican effort to destroy health care s and draws a red line of difference between Repugs and Dems which we desperately need. It's strategic as well as actual.

The Dems that are signing on are all considering Presidential runs and the consensus seems to be that they are doing his to help Dems in 2018. It's seen as a boon to coming elections.

Dems will never, meantime, not defend the ACA. They are entirely capable of doing two things at the same time. The attack on the ACA is a huge window of opportunity to get this on the table.

Thank god our supporting Dems are showing more forward leaning fortitude than the skeptics.

[Lucky Luciano]

35. 20 years would be great! This is how it starts!! nt

[NurseJackie]

36. Political grandstanding at the expense of losing the ACA isn't something to cheer about...

... in my opinion. We need to protect what we have and not ignore it ... being distracted by a shiny object twenty or more years down the road. We need to be realistic, and "It's Happening!" isn't realistic. It's silly.

[Lucky Luciano]

39. I don't see why this is a threat to the ACA. It can build on the ACA.

[NurseJackie]

40. That's not what I said.

[Madam Mossfern]

47. Actually

it could serve to protect the ACA - think about it...

[GaryCnf]

54. I sure hope this

"political grandstanding" doesn't cost Kamala Harris or Corey Booker the support of the centrists who brought our party to where it stands now.

[Gore1FL]

57. Maybe not. Because Democrats like to play it safe rather than play it right.

there was a time, in my youth, that the Democrats fought for Democratic ideals rather than GOP-Lite Ideals.

I miss the pre-Dukakis Democrats.

[NurseJackie]

60. So we're "GOP-Lite", huh? Oh, how charming.

I miss the pre-Dukakis Democrats.

Back in the day, I'm sure people missed Ford Model T's also. You can keep pining away for the "good old days" or accept reality and move forward. Politics have changed. Time to embrace new ideas and let go of old outdated strategies.

[deminks]

3. Already there, bro.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

[George II]

4. The writer of that article has mis-characterized what Saunders said - there is no hint of "worry"...

...in that. In fact, HERE is what he said:

"ultimately, someone’s going to be in the White House. Somebody’s going to be in Congress. Someone’s going to be somewhere and going to have to say, ‘Enough’s enough. Let’s just change the whole system. Let’s go to one payer. Let’s do something.”

Where is the "worry"? Sounds like he agrees with single payer, doesn't he?

Of course, this is Greenwald's "The Intercept", he never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

[rurallib]

20. actually sounds indifferent and just seeing what is down the road

[Flaleftist]

56. It sounds like he is accepting it.

That must worry some who are in the industry of health for profit.

[Dustlawyer]

5. Their days of "No bulk buying discounts" and charging Americans 5 times more than

in other countries are coming to an end! They are worse than the businesses marking up the price of water and generators after the hurricanes.

Once again we have another example of the corrupting effect of the money in our politics, the root cause of most of our problems! The American people need to have a massive march/protest on this issue and scare the crap out of the wealthy leeches! How many people have DIED because they could not afford their medicine? How many seniors are rationing their medicine right now?

[Expecting Rain]

59. So should we go full-on "nativist" and screw the world's poor?

Because, lest we forget, most Americans are in the global 1%.

Drug companies engage in what they call "differential pricing" to make drugs more affordable in low income countries. Should they knock that off? No more lower prices for the world's 99%ers?

Many of these folks don't make one-fifth of what an American does.

[Scarsdale]

61. I have medicare, plus a supplemental insurance plan.

The supplemental plan (supposedly) covers what medicare doesn't. So, I received a bill from my healthcare provider, with a balance to be paid. I called and was told "Medicare does not cover "Eye refraction", so if medicare does not pay anything, neither does the supplemental insurance" I pay monthly, so that everything would be covered!! I am already upset, since I paid over $3,000 for hearing aides which in the UK are covered for anyone over 60. If other countries take care of their citizens with health coverage, why doesn't this country? $$$$ and the gop greedy scoundrels is the answer to that. They pass their own healthcare plan, but the rest of us can supplement theirs, while we are gouged for our own. WHY do they deserve a special, lifetime plan for themselves and their families??? The very fact that they have passed that is telling. They KNOW the plan for the rest of us is worthless. Time for us to start questioning THAT.

[Dustlawyer]

62. We are being gouged and "our" poor are being screwed now! Do you care about your fellow

countrymen?

There are people DYING here everyday because they could not afford their medicine or they were having to ration it. My uncle died this way and I have represented many people who could not afford their prescriptions! Many of these people don't make one-fifth of what you do. One tenth even, yet their cost of living is much higher than most of the world!

Do you think these pharmaceutical companies with their obscene profits could not take a cut?

[Expecting Rain]

63. To play Devils Advocate, your arguement against differential pricing...

would put the world's poor in the same position your late-Uncle was it (or worse).

Once could counter-argue, don't you care about the world's poor? One can demagogue the pharmaceutical companies for giving a discount to the world's 99%ers, but do understand it carries a nativist-populist taint coming from a very privileged society.

The costs of developing new medications--ones that many of us my rely on to save or improve our lives or the lives of loved ones--are very expensive to develop. Without a return on invest where does future innovation come from?

We seem to be entering an era where many want everything for free. And/or are willing to embrace policies that hurt the world's poor by adopting populist-nativist policies.

[Scarsdale]

64. Nobody "wants to hurt the world's poor"

what we DO want is what other CIVILIZED countries have - universal healthcare. Britain, Canada. France, Netherlands, CUBA (!!) all have their people covered. GREED is the only thing holding back this country from being treated like human beings with healthcare. My son died from lack of coverage. He could not afford the $600 monthly bill. He kept thinking he would be called back to work, then it was too late. His friend died, waiting for diabetes meds that were shipped late. Time we demanded to be treated fairly. Why do politicians feel that THEY deserve coverage, yet the rest of us (who subsidize theirs) do not??

[Expecting Rain]

65. When people criticize Pharmasutical companies for selling medications...

for a lower price in developing counties it can have unintended consequences.

I'm sorry about your son. Putting other people's families in the same position of not being able to afford medications by eliminating differential pricing only exacerbates a problem.

I'm sure we agree that no one should parish due to the personal inability to pay for life-saving medications.

Again, I'm sorry for you loss.

[Dustlawyer]

66. My argument is not directly against differential pricing, I understand the concept.

But there has been huge profit taking by the pharmaceutical industry in general, along with rampant speculation. The Big Pharma companies were upset at the young greedy Pharma Bro for exposing their practice of insane mark ups. So did the Epi-Pen manufacturer who's CEO had to testify before a Congressional committee.

I know R&D for new drugs is expensive, but at the same time their Lobbyists get the generic drug manufacturers immunity from lawsuits, tax breaks like almost no other industry... the perks go on and on.

There is room to make this much more affordable for Americans without prejudicing any other country's population. Currently the medical field and pharmaceuticals pricing is not tied to any metric such as an average profit percentage of 20 or 30%, they just set the price as high as they believe the market they want (insurance payments + co-pays) will bear.

I do not want anyone to go without and I know that there is enough profit worldwide to cover their R&D for most drugs, without the cost being exorbitantly high.

[BigmanPigman]

6. SIngle payer or Medicare for All won't be happening yet.

Last edited Wed Sep 13, 2017, 10:22 AM - Edit history (1)

They are getting more Dems to sign up which is great. The entire Dem Party needs to be behind this though and run with it as the party consensus. Pelosi hasn't supported it for now since she is focusing her efforts on saving the ACA.

Today they are going to try to repeal the ACA again while they still have two weeks on the calendar. I was on a conference call with Congressmember Barbara Lee (D-CA) who said they will be announcing it today so once again we have to fight to save the ACA! Call your rep. [phone]. This time they are introducing the Graham Cassidy Bill and they have a very good chance of passing it since Senator McCain is already on board as well as a few other fence sitters (Heller and Collins I believe). The GOP is "buying their votes" and all they need are the three that voted against repeal and they have won. They will be able to claim victory for passing some legislation. Kicking Grandmom out of the nursing home and gutting Medicaid to allow them to make tax cuts for the rich is what they live for. If anyone needs medical assistance it is the GOP since they are truly sick, sick, SICK!

[ehrnst]

7. Not for 20 years at least. (nt)

[KPN]

24. Hmmmm ... OK. So let's start pushing it now.

It will never happen if we don't start fighting for it. The sooner the better, no?

[shanny]

27. so we should wait to get to work on it?

[global1]

14. My Guess Is That The Repugs Wouldn't Bring This Up Again If They Didn't Think They Had The Votes....

Why would they risk more negative press if they lost this again? We need to get on the phones now and fast!!!!!

[disillusioned73]

9. Oh, now they want to PR us into submission...

"“I think we’ve got to do things to bring that trust back,”"

That ship has sailed buddy boy...

[pangaia]

23. What trust?

[disillusioned73]

25. Good point..

it never existed..

[Le Gaucher]

11. Has Cory Booker taken a stance on this yet. I will believe when he is for it.

[Nanjeanne]

12. He is supporting it.

[Le Gaucher]

15. Oh wow ! That is a surprise... But skeptic in me says that

He is only doing to burnish his lefty creds and secure in the knowledge that it will not become law.

Much like the Republican vote to repeal Obamacare.

[shanny]

30. I agree.

But even if it is just playing for the cameras, it says a lot that he is willing to do even that. He is a very ambitious man, no doubt he will be running for pres, and this could come back to bite him.

[mountain grammy]

18. He's a sponsor.

[PatrickforO]

13. You're damned right! Let's go to one-payer!

Medicare for all Americans, with the government able to step in and negotiate costs down. You get dirtbag freaks like Shkreli bumping up prices on lifesaving stuff so people who can't afford it die? That might be the way of capitalism, and increasing earnings for shareholders, but it is NOT the way of common decency. It's not right.

And, if they can't get it right, then we can.

Healthcare is a basic right in a society as advanced as this one - there is NO excuse for the shit we have to endure. Crappy, rationed healthcare plans with financially crippling copays. Healthcare providers more interested in making a profit or in cutting costs than in providing the right care for us, the patients. There's a built in conflict of interest between for profit and patient care.

In this capitalist utopia, profit wins and patient care suffers.

Let's get behind Bernie, Franken, Harris and others, and make this happen!

[mountain grammy]

17. +1000

Yes, yes, yes.

[Dem2]

19. Does big pharma help people or want to see them die?

What a terrible message these idiot CEOs are putting forth.

[jalan48]

22. What the nay sayers seem to not get is that proposals like this help generate voter interest.

Whether or not it can pass at the moment is not the issue-let's give the public something to hope for. Telling voters it can't happen accomplishes what? It really tells them the insurance and pharmaceutical companies are in control and there is nothing to be done about it. Change begins with small steps...

[disillusioned73]

29. & that is exactly why the nay-sayers..

are naying..

To silence the majority of Americans that support it so they can continue the charade of governing FOR the people, while taking care of their true interests.. too many folks have awoken to the BS..

[shanny]

32. +1

[leftstreet]

26. "Wells Fargo Healthcare Conference" there's the problem right there

[Initech]

28. Fuck the pharmaceutical companies. It's about damn time!

[Renew Deal]

31. Medicare for all/Single Payer/Universal Care is the next plan

It's going to happen. It's just a matter of time.

[DK504]

38. I think weve got to do things to bring that trust back, the executive added."

HA! Dude, you assholes would have to give every drug ever made away for free for the rest of your grandchildrens lives brfore we would EVER think about trusting you piles of toxic waste.

[Vinca]

41. Let's hope.

If the pharma CEO wasn't a part of screwing us all over, he wouldn't have this to worry about.

[karynnj]

42. One question he should be asking himself is how should that industry work with medicine

being paid via a government program.

In the current more open market, drug manufactors argue that they risk enormous capital in the years spent developing a set of potential drugs, only some of which will be viable. They argue that they should be allowed very high profits on the drugs that become valuable. This is done through patents which give the company a monopoly for a period of time,which lets them set the price in a market where many (most) buyers have no negotiation power -- and Congress actually legislated away some program's ability to do so! The drug companies would argue that this is fair as they also took all the risk.

I wonder if under a single payer system, if someone like Saunders or the financial people working for him working with HHS could effectively develop a system that would allow drug companies a reliable stream of income from their successful drugs to fund the research of tomorrow's drugs. It might be possible that they could get an agreement that the prices reimbursed on their drugs include a reasonable rate of return for the company to allow them the financial security to risk large sums of money developing drugs - most of which will not succeed.

In abstract, this is somewhat similar to the Bell System becoming a regulated monopoly - at the suggestion of an early AT&T President. In rerturn for agreeing to allow smaller companies that provided local connections to connect to their network and to have their costs regulated allowing them a rate of return over acceptable costs, they were allowed for decades their near monopoly

This enviable financial situation led to the development of Bell Laboratories, which had the steady funding to not just do "research" into components of the system that had near term payoff, but pure research into related areas which - along with IBM - at its heyday kept the US as the number one country in terms of patents.

As expected in the simpler world nearly a century ago, it is far more complicated now as their are multiple drug companies, each with their own monopolies on drugs and many of the companies are international.

[KT2000]

43. Duh -

Business models post Welch do not consider the intangibles such as trust, loyalty etc. They are now shocked.

[Blue Owl]

45. Phuck Big Pharma

Profiting off manufactured illness -- despicable!

[2naSalit]

46. [phone]!!!

[beam me up scottie]

48. OH NOES! PHARMABROS HATE BERNIE'S BILL!

What will Martin Shkreli say about the bill? Or *GASP* the REPUBLICANS?



Thanks, Donkees! That was priceless.

[irisblue]

49. Shkrelis' bail got revoked today, he's in jail tonight

for offering $5K to one of his followers for a hair from HRC w/ a follicle attached. That dumbass is likely discussing the economic values of the Wu Tang Clan with other fans.
I like that Oh Noes clip

[beam me up scottie]

53. I saw that earlier, what a shame.

[stuffmatters]

51. Yes. Even under Medicare now, many prescribed drugs are not a right but an unaffordable luxury

This uncontrollable profit center in our national healthcare MUST be controlled. Hopefully Medicare for All expands to stop PHarma's egregious freedom to gouge, brings cost proportionate price controls, supports reimportation of drugs, eliminates exploitation of patent loopholes to suppress generics.

Beside saving providers and ultimately taxpayers a huge amount in eliminating administrative costs, as Medicare does now pretty spectacularly, another glaring first step would be controlling PHarma's outright looting of our Country.

The best healthcare system in the world can't work if people cannot afford the drugs that system prescribes. Even Medicare
patients with expensive Medigap supplements have no protection from this current PHarma plunder. I don't think people realize
how many essential drugs are "tiered" out of affordability or simply not included in coverage.

BTW Medicare for All w PHarma controls could free us from the depressing, 24/7 saturation advertising of PHarma. Watching regular tv has simply become a gruesome, fear inducing experience thanks to big PHarma's advertising. Paid for by us.

[cliffside]

55. +1000 nt

[C Moon]

58. He's set for life. He's only worried because he wants more and more.

And doesn't give a shit about what America really needs.
And that is the epitome of a Republican.
It's not about the U.S., it's about "us."

[shanti]

67. Yeah

Worried that his cash cow could be going tits up very soon!