Congress should not undermine pharmacy benefit companies to appease Big Pharma
Over the past few years, I have made it a personal mission of mine to speak out against the injustices happening and to make sure marginalized groups are seen and represented. This is what has led me to pursue a degree in law. The fact is that many groups, such as Black and Latino populations, are disproportionately affected by affordability problems. This is no different when it comes to prescription drug costs.
A recent report from the U.S. Office the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) found that, “More than 5 million Medicare beneficiaries struggle to afford prescription medications.”
Furthermore, among those 65 and older, “Black and Latino beneficiaries are most likely to experience affordability problems. Medicare beneficiaries with lower incomes and those under age 65 also had above-average rates of not taking needed medications due to cost.”
These same groups are also more likely to need prescriptions due to higher risks of health conditions. And Congress is about to exacerbate these problems by targeting and undermining a key group of entities within the broader pharmaceutical supply chain – pharmacy benefit companies.
Study after study shows how American consumers would suffer under proposal
Proposals that single out just one entity of a complex supply chain will not solve anything – especially focusing on the one actor that is proven to lower costs and help patients and families afford the prescription medications they need. Pharmacy benefit companies help 275 million Americans and save more than $1,000 every year. For families and individuals of vulnerable groups, these savings are life-altering.
The ASPE HHS report examined Medicare, which is how often how older individuals access health coverage. A separate analysis from University of Chicago Professor of Economics Casey Mulligan, Ph.D., looked into the Medicare Part D program and how one of the policies targeting pharmacy benefits by "delinking" how they are currently compensated based off how successful they are in securing price concessions for rebates, and found premiums would increase anywhere from $4 billion to $12.8 billion in Medicare Part D.
That same analysis estimated that Big Pharma would actually win in this situation by getting a $10 billion financial windfall every year. Another recent report from health care economist Alex Brill dove even deeper into the staggering bailout figures, finding that "delinking" in the Medicare Part D and commercial markets combined would actually give big drug companies $32 billion.
Sadly, this is yet another example of leaders in Washington putting the profits of the big pharmaceutical companies above marginalized groups who would be forced to deal with the repercussions of this costly proposal.
More: Pharmacists warn Tennessee patients to protect themselves against benefit managers
Don't take away savings that pharmacy benefit companies provide
Pharmacy benefit companies pass rebates onto health plan sponsors, which use those to improve the lives of their enrollees – the patients and families under that plan – by lowering premiums, cost-sharing, or even offering wellness programs to help improve health outcomes.
We cannot risk undermining these instrumental savings, especially to deliver a big bailout to Big Pharma.
If lawmakers truly want to lower prescription drug costs for the American people, they should be focused on policies we know will drive down costs, not policies that have already been analyzed and found to do the opposite.
Americans, especially marginalized groups, cannot afford for Congress to target our pharmacy benefits. I hope Sens. Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty, along with others elected to represent the Volunteer State don’t let these proposals pass.
Chris Yard is a community activist and pre-law student at the University of Tennessee.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Pharmacy benefit companies: Congress should serve American consumers
