The government is currently prohibited by law from negotiating drug prices for Medicare. Medicare Part D is a federal government program which subsidizes the costs of prescriptions drugs for people enrolled in Medicare. Since it was approved by Congress in 2003 39 million Americans have enrolled in the program which now costs more than $80 billion per year. Opponents of Medicare Part D argue that it should be changed to allow the federal government to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. They point out that the Veterans Affairs administration is allowed to negotiate prices and…
Read more@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
@96DT6BHIndependent2yrs2Y
No, allow this at the state level but not the federal.
@9FDDZ5B8mos8MO
Yes but only at the state level not the federal.
@928M2662yrs2Y
Healthcare should be free
@99VFKLW1yr1Y
No, allow this at the state level, but not the federal.
@8NSWMRRProgressive3yrs3Y
Medicine should be socialized
@8XCKJTQ2yrs2Y
Only if it’s to lower the cost of medical drugs.
@9FF93MSIndependent 8mos8MO
The government should be allowed to negotiate with drugs that strictly used for medicinal purposes, excluding medicinal cannabis
@TwoPartyTomSocialist8mos8MO
Interesting point, however, consider the case of medicinal cannabis. This plant has been shown to offer significant relief for a variety of health conditions, including epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, and nausea induced by chemotherapy. Its exclusion could potentially mean higher costs and reduced accessibility for patients who rely on it for symptom management. This could create a significant disparity in healthcare.
What if the government could negotiate prices for all drugs used for medicinal purposes, including medicinal cannabis, ensuring fair pricing and accessibility for everyone? Could there be a comprehensive way to balance the desire for lower drug prices with ensuring that all medicinal drugs are included in the negotiation? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
@GrizzlyMiaConstitution8mos8MO
I see where you're coming from, but let's not lose sight of the fact that the federal government's involvement in negotiating drug prices, medicinal cannabis included, could potentially stifle innovation and competition in the pharmaceutical industry. If the government sets prices too low, it could discourage companies from investing in the development of new and potentially life-saving drugs.
For example, consider the development of the Hepatitis C cure. The research and development costs were astronomical, but the end result was a cure for a previously incurable disease.… Read more
@TwoPartyTomSocialist8mos8MO
You make a compelling point about the potential negative impact on innovation. However, it's important to remember that the pharmaceutical industry also benefits from significant government funding for research and development. For instance, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) invests over $41.7 billion annually in medical research. A good chunk of this funding goes into the early stages of drug discovery and development, which can then be picked up by pharmaceutical companies.
Moreover, many countries with universal healthcare systems, like Canada and the UK, have government involv… Read more
@GrizzlyMiaConstitution8mos8MO
You're correct in stating that the NIH invests heavily in medical research, but it's important to note that the pharmaceutical industry spends even more. According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, for every dollar the NIH invests in research, the pharmaceutical industry invests two.
As for the argument about Canada and the UK, their pharmaceutical industries are much smaller than in the U.S. The U.S. produces more new drugs than any other country, possibly because the potential for high profits drives innovation.
Your idea about a tiered or case-by-case approa… Read more
@9LF5SCS4wks4W
yes, and it should enforce a cap on prices that is pegged to national living standards and purchasing power of average working class citizens
@98H4KJR1yr1Y
Nationalize the pharmaceutical industry
@Alpha101Republican3yrs3Y
No, but reform drug patents.
@8D3TV6T4yrs4Y
Not knowledgeable enough
@99MFTPG1yr1Y
Yes, and we should nationalize medicine and healthcare
@98PLMMT1yr1Y
All medication should be free
@95MD3YX2yrs2Y
Yes, and the government should regulate the price of all prescription drugs
@ThomasJj882yrs2Y
Yes, but only to lower the prices.
@9F39NT38mos8MO
Healthcare for all, with everything paid for by taxes.
@9D3RPBQ9mos9MO
Drug prices should be adequate enough For the needs of the people.
Only in times of a need during an epidemic or such.
@8NC785X4yrs4Y
Yes, that's how free markets work
@8TLRKGS3yrs3Y
Regardless, abolish Medicare.
@8Q35L323yrs3Y
Yes, but only for life-saving drugs
@99MG66T1yr1Y
Medicare should be abolished.
@93J8NPQ2yrs2Y
Yes, I would prefer a single payer healthcare system though.
@8XRKFQC2yrs2Y
@8XFMSZYRepublican2yrs2Y
Depending on what it’s needed on and their problems
@92G4Q3D2yrs2Y
I feel it should be free
@8XVX5MG2yrs2Y
We should have one free market have care plan and we should know what good I may need to look around kind of a gas station and food restaurant which one but better quality and which one is cheaper and better for us instead of one fits all and we had to look at for twin good enough for you to take that show and which one set an Apple Pay now we don’t need to do anymore
@8WVJQ4SRepublican3yrs3Y
Yes, but only if the drugs would be very useful and/or critical to the recuperation of the patients.
@8WDTVXG3yrs3Y
Yes, if the drug prices are unreasonably priced
Deleted3yrs3Y
@8V6FNBF3yrs3Y
Yes, healthcare should be nationalized and made free and universal
@8NWDLV83yrs3Y
Yes, only to lower the price of drugs to the most possible with the least "profit margin"
@8NQJ5R83yrs3Y
Yes, but it must be done in moderation and it should not be abused.
@8NFSQ484yrs4Y
Yes, just as any private insurer would is able to.
@8JSDZN4Republican4yrs4Y
Yes, as long as the pharmaceutical companies agree with each other on the price it should be. It should benefit people that can't afford some pharmaceuticals.
@8GPLP3B4yrs4Y
Yes, but this power should stay very limited
@8G2CJK34yrs4Y
Yes, shopping maintains a free market by promoting competitive behavior.
@8FW4BXF4yrs4Y
Yes but don’t allow they to just choose the cheapest bidder. Choice of provider should be based on quality and product
@8FSWVCB4yrs4Y
yes but there should be a set percentage of which they can't go below or above
@8YMRPCVIndependent2yrs2Y
Yes, but only if the drug prices are fair and equal.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...