Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT: Obama Reverses Stand on Drug Industry Deal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:13 AM
Original message
NYT: Obama Reverses Stand on Drug Industry Deal
August 8, 2009
Obama Reverses Stand on Drug Industry Deal

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

WASHINGTON Caught between a pivotal industry ally and the protests of Congressional Democrats, the Obama administration on Friday backed away from what drug industry lobbyists had said this week was a firm White House promise to exclude from a proposed health care overhaul the possibility of allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices under Medicare.

The reversal underscored the delicate balancing act the White House has pursued in its strategy of negotiating behind-the-scenes deals to win industry support without alienating liberal supporters on Capitol Hill.

Pressed by drug industry lobbyists, a White House deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed in an e-mail message on Wednesday that the White House shared the drug lobbyists interpretation of the deal: that any health care overhaul would not include allowing direct government negotiation of drug prices or require certain additional price rebates. Since Wednesday, other representatives of the White House had also stood by Mr. Messinas statement as well.

After reading reports about Mr. Messinas e-mail message, House and Senate Democrats loudly protested that they would not be bound by any such agreement to remove clauses allowing government negotiation of drug prices under Medicare something Democrats have sought for years.

Several Senate Democrats said Friday that, in a private meeting, White House officials had told them there was no such deal, sowing yet more confusion. House Democratic leaders vowed to fight against it.

Then, after contending for two days that the Senate Democrats had misunderstood the White House aides comments, the White House appeared Friday night to back away.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/us/08lobby.html?hp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. GOOD! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
2. knr. oh what a tangled web we weave....!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. ...when first we attempt to negotiate....
or something like that....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. or "when we practice to deceive" (the public)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpartanDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
3. There seems to be a lot confusion about this
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 09:27 AM by SpartanDem
The Huffington Post is running the same story with a headline proclaiming the exact opposite. They both say that drug negotions were not talked about, but the HuffPo story says that they're still off limits for health care bill. But issue could come up at later date


White House Confirms: Deal With Big Pharma Bars Price Negotiations

In closed-door negotiations with President Obama and his top aides throughout the spring, Big Pharma offered its support for comprehensive health care reform and pledged to cut $80 billion in costs over the next ten years. Just exactly what Obama promised in return wasn't made public and was the subject of intense debate on Capitol Hill Thursday, as senators wondered aloud if the White House had tied their legislative hands.

Earlier in the week, there were reports that Obama had promised to oppose any congressional attempt to exact further money from the massive pharmaceutical industry, which would include allowing Medicare to negotiate for lower prices or import cheaper drugs from Canada -- two major priorities for congressional Democrats.

In a Thursday meeting with Senate Democrats, some of those present thought the White House backed off that deal. The administration has now stepped in to clear up its position: Congress can vote to do those things -- just not as part of the health-care overhaul legislation.

The White House said on Friday that drug price negotiations did not specifically come up in talks with Big Pharma. Because such negotiations would take the deal past $80 billion, however, they're off limits, as is reimportation of cheaper drugs from Canada.
.....
The deal only applies to the health care reform bill itself, meaning the White House could back Senate Democratic attempts to push for more savings from drug makers in separate, future legislative attempts, a White House aide said.

The truce over, the two parties will then battle it out. "The only thing I can say is we'll do what we always do. We'll roll up our sleeves and fight them one fight at a time," said Johnson.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/07/white-house-co...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
4. the remainder of the article is also extremely revealing----
and check out the last sentence--someone in the Obama Administration is listening?? If Obama is truly after health CARE reform, they're going about it in a very convoluted and mysterious way. It appears to be more of a protection racket for the insurance extortion corporations and the drug makers. It's a very good thing that these deals are being revealed. It shows more of the dirt that has been swept under the rug.

-----------------------



"As recently as Wednesday, Billy Tauzin, president of the PhRMA, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, had all but threatened to reverse the groups support for the health care overhaul if the White House did not affirm its commitment to cap the industrys costs at the agreed-upon $80 billion. He insisted that adding government price negotiations or additional drug price rebates would both violate the agreement, saying each idea had been discussed and discarded in negotiations with the Senate Finance Committee that the White House later approved.

On Friday night, however, the drug industry lobby appeared to line up once again with the White House, perhaps satisfied that the White House had at least ruled out the price rebates in the House bill.

Asked about the White House statements, Ken Johnson, a senior PhRMA official, said, All of the questions about what was in the agreement distract from our shared goal of making sure everyone has access to health care coverage.

Several people involved in the negotiations of the original drug industry deal with the White House said there had been some ambiguity in the original discussions, conducted primarily through the Senate Finance Committee, over whether the overhaul might include the government negotiations of drug prices.

Because the Congressional Budget Office has questioned whether government price negotiation would, in fact, save the government or cost the drug industry much money in any event, White House officials might have intended to argue that the $80 billion cap still left room for such a provision.

The full terms of the White House agreement with the drug makers, like a similar deal with the hospital industry, have never been disclosed.

Perhaps capitalizing on his leverage as the political battle heated up over the health care measure, Mr. Tauzin insisted early this week that the deal clearly precluded drug price negotiations as well as any other additional costs. Drug companies have long opposed government price negotiations on the grounds that they would effectively set prices and cripple the industry.

As Mr. Tauzin spoke up, the White House initially chose not to argue. But faced with a chorus of Congressional complaints, the administration appears to have recalibrated its position."

---------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
5. There is so much disinformation out there AND the plan isn't complete yet.
Any 'news' coming from the drug and insurance industries about deals with the Obama Administration should be read as propoganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. scary to hear about the deals which have apparently been made, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. No. Unless you have knee-jerk reactions to every rumor you read, it's not scary.
Just wait for the facts, then respond. Simple, really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. sounds to me like more IS being revealed...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Yeah, sounds like the insurance companies
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 04:06 PM by ProSense
are being shafted or are lying. Either way, good.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I agree. Now if we could just drown the corporations in a bathtub....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. This was not a rumor, this was confirmed by the deputy White House chief of staff
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 03:43 PM by flyarm
so by what you are saying, should we read everything out of this White House as propaganda???????? Because that is what you are essentially saying! This was confirmed by deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina!



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insur ...

August 6, 2009
White House Affirms Deal on Drug Cost
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

snip:
In response, the industry successfully demanded that the White House explicitly acknowledge for the first time that it had committed to protect drug makers from bearing further costs in the overhaul. The Obama administration had never spelled out the details of the agreement.

We were assured: We need somebody to come in first. If you come in first, you will have a rock-solid deal, Billy Tauzin, the former Republican House member from Louisiana who now leads the pharmaceutical trade group, said Wednesday. Who is ever going to go into a deal with the White House again if they dont keep their word? You are just going to duke it out instead.


snip:
A deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed Mr. Tauzins account of the deal in an e-mail message on Wednesday night.

The president encouraged this approach, Mr. Messina wrote. He wanted to bring all the parties to the table to discuss health insurance reform.

The new attention to the agreement could prove embarrassing to the White House, which has sought to keep lobbyists at a distance, including by refusing to hire them to work in the administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. BS
That's the NYT spinning everything out of context. From all those little snippets, how the hell can anyone tell whether or not they were talking about the original deal or the bogus claim that the Obama promised something he couldn't deliver?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. Exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #21
34. read the OP post..it is all there..
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 05:17 PM by flyarm
so either this writer is a liar..or this white house is a liar..which is it ? Do you know for fact who is the liar??????? Did White House Deputy Chief of staff Jim Messina lie?? if he did will he be fired immediately? if not why not?????????? How about the others in this White House that confirmed it ..will they be fired????????
Why is the White House fighting a FOIA by Crew to see the White House secret service entry logs???????? Is Crew lying??????

how about the LATIMES ..are they Lying too?????????

I only care to know the damn truth..so lets get to the truth shall we??????????

from the OP's post...........

August 8, 2009
Obama Reverses Stand on Drug Industry Deal

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

WASHINGTON Caught between a pivotal industry ally and the protests of Congressional Democrats, the Obama administration on Friday backed away from what drug industry lobbyists had said this week was a firm White House promise to exclude from a proposed health care overhaul the possibility of allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices under Medicare.

The reversal underscored the delicate balancing act the White House has pursued in its strategy of negotiating behind-the-scenes deals to win industry support without alienating liberal supporters on Capitol Hill.

Pressed by drug industry lobbyists, a White House deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed in an e-mail message on Wednesday that the White House shared the drug lobbyists interpretation of the deal: that any health care overhaul would not include allowing direct government negotiation of drug prices or require certain additional price rebates. Since Wednesday, other representatives of the White House had also stood by Mr. Messinas statement as well.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/41552

CREW V. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (WHITE HOUSE VISITOR LOGS - HEALTH CARE EXECS)

22 Jul 2009 // Washington, D.C. - Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is filing a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security based on the refusal of the Secret Service to provide CREW with White House visitor records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). CREW is seeking records of visits by top health care executives in an effort to learn the extent to which these industry players may have influenced the administrations health care policy. Simultaneously, CREW is requesting emergency relief in the form of a preliminary injunction compelling the Secret Service to process the request on an expedited basis, in view of the great public interest and debate on health care policy and the pressure on Congress to pass legislation before the August recess.

In response to CREWs FOIA request, the Obama administration has taken the same position as the Bush administration that the records are presidential, not agency records, and that they are exempt from release because of the possibility in some instances they could reveal information protected by the presidential communications privilege. Although the White House suggested it was reviewing its policy on the release of visitor logs last month when CREW filed a similar complaint based on its request for records of visits by top coal company executives, it has to date refused to make even a discretionary release of any of the requested records. Every court to rule on the issue so far has concluded the visitor records are agency records that must be disclosed under the FOIA.


White house visitors summary in response to the CREW FOIA...
2 page pdf
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/20090722%20-%20L ...



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Obama gives powerful drug lobby a seat at healthcare table

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-na-healthcare ...

"...At the same time, Tauzin said the industry he represents was offering political and financial support for the president's healthcare initiative, a remarkable shift considering that drug companies vigorously opposed a national overhaul the last time it was proposed, when Bill Clinton was president...

The benefits to the White House go beyond budget savings. Tauzin's trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, is helping to underwrite a multimillion-dollar TV advertising campaign touting comprehensive healthcare legislation.

One ad resurrects Harry and Louise, the fictional couple whose caustic kitchen-table comments in ads sponsored by the health insurance industry helped sink Clinton's plan in 1994. This time, with the drug companies paying the bill, Harry and Louise have changed their view...

Tauzin, a Democrat who helped found the conservative Blue Dog coalition in the House before switching to the Republican Party in 1995, was chairman of the House committee that helped shepherd Medicare drug legislation through Congress, including the provision that the government not interfere with price negotiations..."


AHIP also is running commercials in support of health care reform...insurance companies will cover pre-existing conditions if there is a mandate that everyone purchase insurance.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Has Bill Moyers lied as well??????????

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07242009/watch.html

TRUDY LIEBERMAN: I feel the American people need to know what is in that bill. And what's in the bill is an individual mandate that is going to require all Americans with a few exceptions, to carry health insurance. And that means if you do not get insurance from Medicare or Medicaid or your employer. You're going to have to go out and buy health insurance.

And that is a lot of money for most people because most of them would buy it now if they could afford it. About 85 percent of the uninsured require subsidies, because they can't afford it. And I think this is going to come up as a big surprise to people to realize they're going to have to buy insurance from private insurance companies or face a tax penalty.

MARCIA ANGELL: Well, that goes to the cause of the problem. We are the only advanced country in the world that has chosen to leave health care to the tender mercies of a panoply of for-profit businesses, whose purpose is to maximize income and not to provide health. And that's exactly what they do.

BILL MOYERS: The President, as you were saying a moment ago, is saying to everybody who's not covered, we're going to mandate that you exercise that right. We're going to mandate that you buy some form--

MARCIA ANGELL: We're going to deliver the private insurance companies a captive market. That's right. And they love that.

BILL MOYERS: Say that again.

MARCIA ANGELL: They love that.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

lets get some truth for a change shall we??????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. No, it's not all there. All I see is spin and BS.
There is no deal. That's the point of the OP. Now you bring up CREW?

Ludicrous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #14
33. At present, we have no way of verifying who said what when to whom
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 05:04 PM by Kaleko
and whether everything was reported accurately after the fact. Neither do you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. my point no one does! so lets get some truths here shall we
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 05:27 PM by flyarm
it is not a rumor when the Deputy Chief of staff confirms it..if he confirmed it either he has to come out and say he was wrong or Obama does..but that is not a rumor..the deputy chief of staff confirmed it..no one is disputing that.

So that does not make a rumor..he is representing this Administration when he makes a statement or confirms a statement.


That does not mean it can not be corrected.

but do not say it is a rumor..that does not qualify as a rumor!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. You are basing your opinion on an article that didn't even get the story right
and ignoring the follow-up article that obviously shows that the story wasn't accurate, at the very least sloppy reporting.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. It is not saying it was inaccurate at all..
and i have no opinions other than i want the damn truth if what has gone on, and what if any deals have been made on the backs of the American people's right to health care! So please do not put words in my mouth.

Someone else claimed it was a rumor..it was no damn rumor.
It was initially confirmed by


go read the op again..where does it say it was a rumor???????? or propaganda as infered in somneone else's post..where does it say it was propaganda?????????

now this sentnece leaves me questioning..why has the deal never been fully disclosed? That is my health insurance and that of my family..why do i not have the right to know what has "NOT BEEN DISCLOSED"????????

The full terms of the White House agreement with the drug makers, like a similar deal with the hospital industry, have never been disclosed.

why not????????????????????????????????????????

here ..check out what was in the op..

Several people involved in the negotiations of the original drug industry deal with the White House said there had been some ambiguity in the original discussions, conducted primarily through the Senate Finance Committee, over whether the overhaul might include the government negotiations of drug prices.

Because the Congressional Budget Office has questioned whether government price negotiation would, in fact, save the government or cost the drug industry much money in any event, White House officials might have intended to argue that the $80 billion cap still left room for such a provision.

The full terms of the White House agreement with the drug makers, like a similar deal with the hospital industry, have never been disclosed.

Perhaps capitalizing on his leverage as the political battle heated up over the health care measure, Mr. Tauzin insisted early this week that the deal clearly precluded drug price negotiations as well as any other additional costs. Drug companies have long opposed government price negotiations on the grounds that they would effectively set prices and cripple the industry.

As Mr. Tauzin spoke up, the White House initially chose not to argue.

But faced with a chorus of Congressional complaints, the administration appears to have recalibrated its position.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I am damned glad they are recalibrating their Postion...but don't we the people have the right to know exactly what their postion is or what is being done behind closed doors????????

after all..it effects all our health care.....maybe you don't care..but i sure as hell do!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. The reporting has been sloppy and whack
"The full terms of the White House agreement with the drug makers, like a similar deal with the hospital industry, have never been disclosed."

As for the administrations recent break with the insurance industry, Mr. Tauzin said, The insurers never made any deal.

link


And that's from the first NYT story.

It amazes me how people are unwilling to face the fact that media reports can be inaccurate when inconsistencies are staring them in the face, simply because they want to believe the story. The rest of the time the media is complicit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. and the reverse could also be true, that the story is accurate, and some
are unwilling to face the fact that sometimes the media does report accurately. Given the high level of the WH staff making the comments, and I haven't seen any retractions today, it seems likely that the NYT got it correctly.

Of course, we might find out differently tomorrow.

This was supposed to be a transparent process, and it's turned into quite a mess. Would have been better if it all had been done in the open. Quite an error. I hope Obama learns from this experience and recovers well.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. This was also in the first article
This was also in the first article..and then was affirmed by the LATIMES..this was in an Email sent as confirmation..if it was wrong by the deputy White House Chief of staff ..why not say that ? Make it public and make it quick..
By not stating it was a mistake, or error..it makes it all suspicious ..and makes it appear that someone is getting conned..and that conning may be to We the people..or there is alot of ass covering going on..either way..we deserve to know the truth..the whole truth and nothing but the truth..health insurance and medication is nothing to shirk off..or get fucked over!

This is not to go into effect until 2013..i don't want to wake up in 2013 and find out we have been conned..or totally fucked..

Do it right the first time..take the time to do it right and disclose to the American people what we are supporting or not supporting..give us the damn option..and when people say..well the plan is not complete..then why are congresspeople going into town hall meetings trying to sell something to the American people of what they don't know what the fuck they are selling??????????

would you buy a freaking car without knowing the make , or model or color ?????????? or even brand????????

wtf happened to transparency??????

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insur ...

August 6, 2009
White House Affirms Deal on Drug Cost
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK


snip:
A deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed Mr. Tauzins account of the deal in an e-mail message on Wednesday night.

The president encouraged this approach, Mr. Messina wrote. He wanted to bring all the parties to the table to discuss health insurance reform.

The new attention to the agreement could prove embarrassing to the White House, which has sought to keep lobbyists at a distance, including by refusing to hire them to work in the administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
40. The Obama White House has confirmed WHAT???
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 06:57 PM by rocktivity
The president encouraged this approach, Mr. Messina wrote. He wanted to bring all the parties to the table to discuss health insurance reform.

WHAT approach? Who was Messina writing to? And how does this translate into ANY kind of a deal?

Is this story actually a retraction is disguise?

:headbang:
rocktivity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #5
45. +1
Exactly...they are just fueling the fire with all the different stories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. The times claimed he made a deal, and the white house said they didnt
Now the times is claiming that they have backed away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. THe WhoreTimes..the judy miller pimp the
War rag? hmmm? I never trust the media ..why should I?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Exactly,
The claim was beyond ridiculous. The gist of it was that the deal announced in June had a secret component: a guarantee to the insurance companies negotiated by the WH. Of course the story also added that if Congress decides otherwise, they'll do it without the WH support. OK, let's look at that.

Congress is writing the bill that will become law. Even Bush needed the complicit Republicans to pass legislation to screw with Medicare. Why would Obama make a promise he can't keep (because Congress has no intention of honoring such a bogus deal)? And what are the chances that Obama was going to make a deal that would result in him having to veto the health care bill Congress passes because it included even more rebates and government negotiaton on drug prices?

From the current NYT piece:

But the industry reacted with alarm when, despite its deal the White House, a House version of the health care measure included both new price rebates and government price negotiations. House leaders talked of trying to extract far more.


Seems to me the insurance companies were pushing the claim to try to gain leverage in the negotiations.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. sounds about right to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
12. The public always gets the shaft in 'behind the scenes deals.'
This is what used to be called smoke-filled rooms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Bingo. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #12
27. looks more like RW lies to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
16. White House should simply release ALL of the details on any and all closed door deals made ....

with health care industry reps.

Why not do that?

I suppose they could claim that no deals were made .... the meetings were just wine and cheese social functions.

Sure.

I'll believe that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. "I suppose they could claim that no deals were made"
They just did. It doesn't matter whether you believe it or not.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. wait, wait.... weren't these meetings on c-span?? someone here claimed they were....
oh, they weren't.


transparency?

too complicated.


<sarcasm off>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. right. And you want to see his BC as well dont you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. what's a bc?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. oh.... I got it... "birth certificate"... How wrong you are. It's not
necessary to go ad hominem. Check out my journal if you think I'm not a Dem.

Learn some better debating skills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
25. I'm not buying that there was ever a "deal," as such. If there were, would the pharm co. rep....
actually talk about the deal to the public, like Tauzin did? Nah...that would kill the deal.

But he WOULD talk about a deal, if there weren't one.

I'm guessing there was some sort of discussion, but not really a so-called deal. And Tauzin was unhappy about that, and wanted the t-baggers to start yelling about the cancelled "deal" at the town hall meetings, or something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
28. In his address today, Obama said...
"Drug companies have agreed to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

???

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Nice, but those are the name-brands, not generics. Check out the differences
in prices. This has to do with an attempt to close the doughnut hole in Medicare D.

My mother's care reached the doughnut hole quickly last year, and it cost thousands privately as a result. This is a huge windfall for the drug makers, and a sop to regular people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
38. OR could this be retaliation for when the drug companies did the same thing. Promised one thing
in a meeting with the White House, when it was publicized they came out and said, we didn't make that deal. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
43. Medicare/government should be allowed to negotiate prices of drugs . . .
and if American suppliers don't cooperate, we should move on to buying from Canada!!

How many here sent comments to the White House on this unfortunate agreement?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 22nd 2014, 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC