Obama Administration Defends Drug Firms in Lawsuit Against Companies Overcharging for Drugs!

[Better Believe It]

U.S. Backs Drug Firms in Lawsuit Over Prices
By ROBERT PEAR
January 9, 2011

The Obama administration, following a lengthy internal debate, has unexpectedly come down on the side of pharmaceutical companies that are accused of overcharging public hospitals and clinics that care for large numbers of poor people.

The administration has told the Supreme Court that the hospitals and clinics cannot sue drug companies to enforce their right to deep discounts on drugs or to obtain reimbursement from companies that overcharge.

Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health law and policy at George Washington University, said the case raises the question of whether the intended beneficiaries of a government program can enforce their right to assistance that is made available by Congress.

Several Democratic lawmakers expressed surprise at the Justice Department’s position. “The administration had a chance to put health care reform into action by defending the discounted drug program,” said Representative Sam Farr of California. “Instead, it chose to side with the pharmaceutical companies to preserve a loophole that overcharges providers and undermines the president’s efforts to expand access to affordable health care.”

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco ruled in favor of the clinics and hospitals in December 2009. The drug companies appealed, with support from the Justice Department, which is urging the Supreme Court to reverse that decision.

Read the full article at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/us/politics/10drug.html?scp=1&sq=The+Administration+has+told+the+Supreme+Court+that+the+hospitals&st=nyt

[Horse with no Name]

1. Not surprising.

:mad:
You know, I have insurance.
I picked up a prescription the other day for EIGHT pills.
MY copay for 8 pills was $45.

That is ridiculous.

I made a comment about it at the pharmacy and they told me that insurance portion was $145.

Which makes it even more ridiculous.

[RKP5637]

3. My cost for generic prescriptions just went up 30%, just like that ... n/t

[Better Believe It]

4. If President Obama would have supported the cheaper importation of drugs from Canada you'd pay less.

As you may recall, the administration was publicly opposed to including the importation of cheaper drugs in the health insurance and drug industry bill.

[Horse with no Name]

5. Well you know--globablization is good for all companies

Except pharmaceutical companies.

Nobody can ever explain that one....

[FiveGoodMen]

2. "undermines the president’s efforts to expand access to affordable health care"

So Obama is undermining Obama?

Seriously?

Some people just won't face the facts.

He's not on our side.

Never was.

[RKP5637]

6. In this country anymore it's the LW and RW versus corporate America. Differing

parties have more in common than they realize. However, MSM divides and conquers the masses for corporate benefit. Americans need to wake up and see all of the manipulation and propaganda, but I doubt it...

[FiveGoodMen]

20. Divides and conquers the masses but unifies and controls the masses' so-called representatives

[RKP5637]

21. Yes, good point, most representatives today are for the most part agents of

the corporate structure. ... Window dressing to fool the masses into thinking they are like them, their representatives.

[Amonester]

35. Before he got in politic$, he was.

Since then, very little.

[Angry Dragon]

7. I do not know this man in the White House

[RKP5637]

8. The campaigner was far different IMO. n/t

[DJ13]

12. I want HIM back

This new guy sucks.

[Recursion]

9. Why? They want regulation rather than a litigation free-for-all (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

37. you must have missed the part about the existing regulations not being adhered to.

plus, if the government wants to avoid litigation, why are they urging a case that's already been litigated in favor of the hospitals to be overturned by more litigation?

also the part ABOUT WHY THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T ENFORCING ITS OWN REGULATIONS?


The drug-discount program was created in 1992 under the Public Health Service Act. The law directed the secretary of health and human services to sign agreements with the companies that set maximum prices for drugs sold to certain health care providers. They included community health centers; AIDS, tuberculosis and family-planning clinics; hospitals that serve large numbers of poor people; and children’s hospitals.

Federal officials calculate the maximum price for each drug based on data that the manufacturers submit to the government.

The Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general found that drug manufacturers often overcharged clinics and hospitals over the last eight years but were rarely penalized by the government.

[glinda]

14. Agreed. He needs to answer a ton of questions to us.

[Better Believe It]

15. You mean like "whose side" is President Obama on? I think the answer to that question is clear.

It's beyond serious debate.

[glinda]

16. No. Like direct specific questions. He is so contrary that he needs to explain or loose.

If he continues to do these sorts of actions. He will loose.

[Better Believe It]

39. What will President Obama loose if he continues to represent corporate America and Wall Street?

If he doesn't run again and doesn't "win" re-election he will begin on a very lucrative career with Wall Street or some major corporations.

They owe him big time!

I'm sure that most if not all "blue dog" Democrats who "lost" in the 2010 election are now cashing in with those folks.

[BzaDem]

26. I agree that it is indeed beyond serious debate (though perhaps with a different answer than yours).

[BlueIris]

19. None of us do.

And I mean that totally and sincerely. Not one single person on this board has any idea what we put in the Oval Office two years ago.

[BzaDem]

24. Actually, I do, and many others do as well. The fact that a tiny portion of the Democratic party

will never be satisfied with any elected Democratic President (and similarly, a tiny portion of the Republican party will never be satisfied with any elected Republican president) does not mean the much larger portion of the party did not vote for Obama and still approve of his performance.

[Dappleganger]

25. Speak for yourself.

YOu don't speak for me or anyone else. The man I campaigned for and voted for is not the same one who is in the White House.

[BzaDem]

28. Did I ever say I spoke for you?

I was referring to me and many others. The fact that 87% of liberal Democrats approve of Obama's performance means there are necessarily 13% who either don't approve or refuse to respond. I never said you weren't one of that 13%. I didn't even mention your name.

[Dappleganger]

29. Prove it.

[BzaDem]

34. ... sure.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

Scroll down to liberal Democrat. 87% approval.

Now, for some more interesting data, go to "compare Presidents." Plot Obama Democrats, Clinton Democrats, Carter Democrats, LBJ Democrats. You will find that Obama is either tied, above, or way above all these Presidents for nearly all periods of time. The only one who beats Obama slightly for any length of time is Kennedy -- Obama even did better than Truman among Democrats.

[AlabamaLibrul]

27. I would be satisfied with any Democratic President who didn't act like a Republican.

Food for thought.

[Catherina]

10. Kneel down and worship Corporate Profit before all else. Rec'd n/t

[Enrique]

11. how "business friendly" of him

this should please his Chamber of Commerce friends. :puke:

[Better Believe It]

13. It does please his friends in the Chamber of Commerce.

The article pointed out that:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said such lawsuits could “wreak havoc” and would have “dire and sweeping consequences” for other companies that do business with the government. “The scope of federal contracting is enormous,” the chamber said.

[walldude]

17. I saw an interview with John Kyl yesterday

and the interviewer asked him "since businesses are doing so well can't the case be made that Obama is a "good for business" president?

His answer?

"NO. All the improvements in business are due to the vote to extend the tax breaks."

So what he was saying was all the business improvements in 2010 were due to a vote taken in Dec of that year. :rofl: :rofl:

These people have no shame.

[mochajava666]

18. Now that I don't expect anything progressive,

Obama sure becomes much more predictable.

The Big Pharma deal was one of the first things that he did that shocked/disappointed me ("no backroom corporate deals", he said), which started my departure from his band wagon.

I really wanted a good leader, and America desperately needed one. Too bad he fell so short of his promises.

[treestar]

22. What was the legal issue?

Why not link to the opinion itself? So we can see the dull, dry legal issue that is here being dressed up for some new outrage.

[Better Believe It]

23. I'm sure that big Pharma had a good reason to challenge the courts decision. It cuts profits.

And I bet the Obama administration provides an even better legalistic excuse to defend the drug companies.

Dry legalistic reasons are always given by big business to conceal their real objectives when hauled to court. They can't be upfront and honest about their reactionary policies that are directed against consumers and working people. Isn't that right?

[scarletwoman]

30. Well, what else could he do? He'll need those donations from Big Pharma for the 2012 campaign.

He sure as hell won't be getting any from me.

[democracy1st]

31. Keeps getting worse!

[OhioChick]

32. No surprise n/t

[tpsbmam]

33. Thanks a whole hell of a lot, Mr. President.

I have nothing to say that won't get me kicked off DU.

:mad: :grr:

[Hannah Bell]

36. wtf? yeah, good luck on that SC reversal.

[upi402]

38. Yep, Obama is a Republican

This is not news, but the article is still disgusting. Thanks for the link!

[xchrom]

40. recommend

[leeroysphitz]

41. A deal's a deal. n/t

[Solly Mack]

42. k/r

[slipslidingaway]

43. knr nt

[olegramps]

44. It appears that he is running for a multi-million dollar Wall Street job.

He has realized that the presidency doesn't pay dick compared to what he can get on Wall Street. I feel like a damn old fool for tromping around the precinct telling people that Obama was the party' great hope, the new FDR. I tell you one thing I will never vote Republican, but my cane is staying in the closet in 2012. Hell, I will probably need a walker by then anyway. This getting old sucks but it beats the alternative.