Drugsters Back On Top

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

What the press refers to as “tweaks” in the new version of health care legislation would appear to hand Big Pharma a sizeable victory, allowing the companies to extend the lifetimes of brand name drugs by selling them at discounted prices within the Medicare drug plan. This is portrayed as a magnanimous gesture by the profitable pharmaceutical makers. And to help the poor guys out a little and lessen the strain on their stockholders’ pocketbooks, the government apparently will come in to pay the companies some of the dough they lose in providing the discounts. Another way of putting this is that it seems the discounts aren’t really discounts at all. In the world of congressional smoke and mirrors, they’ve miraculously become a subsidy.

Government policy ought to push less expensive generic drugs into the marketplace. Mandating their preferred use by Medicare would be one small step in that direction. Generally speaking, the brand-name drugs should be eliminated when their patents run out. The proposed legislation apparently will have the effect of lengthening the company monopoly on brand names, thereby assuring higher, not lower prices.

Although somewhat confusing, this article from the New York Times may help you get a feel for what’s going on.

Bottom line: cost control is sacrificed market monopoly.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend