Posted on 06/11/2023 6:57:09 PM PDT by lasereye
She's not talking about just the Inflation Reduction Act. If it is constitutional to force someone to sell at a certain price in this specific instance, then they have set a precedent that would apply to any business. Why wouldn't it?
No idea what this has to do with the constitutionality of forcing someone to sell at an arbitrary price (and also being forced to publicly agree that it was "fair" in an Orwellian fashion).
Patenting a new variation would not prevent the existing generic version from being sold. But again, I don't know what this has to do with this bizarre legislation.
This legislation may be an effort to get their foot in the door.
For example, you don’t need the government to ‘allow’ you to breathe the air. That sounds like something you would really want!
However you should be VERY WARY of a new bill that would ‘allow’ you to breathe the air... because as soon as they give themselves the authority to ‘allow’ something, they can use it to NOT allow you do do it.
Depends on the wording of this bill. If it applies only to drug companies then that’s that. A precedent maybe but more bills would have to expand it.
Besides, with as much money as big pharma has, expect this to go all the way to the SC when they fight it. They would likely slap it down and congress would have to come up with a watered down version or go about it another way.
All I am saying is that some things Congress could do to improve the situation OTHER THAN sitting back and letting one agency dictate the selling price for private entities. More open markets, less regulation and less protectionism will all result in more competition and lower prices. Drug companies have patent protection on their drugs and their novel delivery systems from the Patent Office; those could be looked at. FDA also has, I think, a method to extend patent protection an additional 5-7 years under a regulatory scheme. That, Congress can revisit too.
The DOJ can also look at whether there is a pricing conspiracy among drug makers and the major pharmacies and distributors and hospitals (there is - they negotiate whole list pricing to exclude competitors), and the FTC can look at whether these companies are acting as a cartel or otherwise monopolistic manners. It’s been a few years - decades - when several companies did “division swaps” e.g. one consumer staples company swapped its drug division with a competitor, making one of them dominant in consumer goods and the other dominant in pharmaceuticals and neither of them in competition with each other. Smart business; but predatory? Given the ever shrinking lack of choices for shoppers - fewer pharmacies, fewer supermarkets, etc - and fewer suppliers... it inhibits competition. Maybe some divestitures are in order.
Or letting patents go back to 7 years and no exceptions.
Also fund basic research at universities and put that in the public domain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.