United States: In a bold policy development, President Trump issued a sweeping executive order aimed at severely curbing prescription drug costs—an aggressive directive that now places Republican lawmakers, long averse to state-driven pricing mechanisms, in an uncomfortable ideological bind.
Veteran GOP figures such as Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and Senate Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming have persistently argued that empowering the federal government to dictate drug prices would dampen innovation and restrict patient access to crucial treatments.
Now, those same lawmakers find themselves navigating choppy waters, as Trump’s recent directive threatens the pharmaceutical sector’s fiscal lifeline.
The pharmaceutical lobby—well-heeled and bipartisan in its influence—has raised alarms, warning that Trump’s pricing overhaul could imperil vast sums earmarked for medical breakthroughs. Executives caution that the proposed recalibrations could fracture the financial bedrock of global R&D initiatives, according to The Hill.
Thune conceded Monday that, if transformed into formal legislation, Trump’s directive would ignite heated deliberation in Congress. He nodded to his party’s entrenched resistance toward leveraging Medicare’s substantial purchasing clout to coerce pricing concessions from Big Pharma.
“My expectation is that this would spark serious contention if we were addressing it as legislation,” Thune observed, signaling the fissures emerging within conservative ranks.
Trump’s executive action tasks the Secretary of Health and Human Services with collaborating alongside the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to establish and convey “most-favored-nation pricing thresholds” to pharmaceutical manufacturers, aiming to realign US drug costs with those seen in peer nations.
This ambitious framework would encompass medications dispensed through Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers alike.
Meanwhile, Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley of Iowa sidestepped endorsing the Trump plan, championing instead his legislative bid to outlaw what he dubs “exploitative and misleading price structures” orchestrated by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)—industry intermediaries accused of inflating prices, as reported by The Hill.
“All Congress needs to do is enact my PBM bill,” he insisted. “That alone will bring drug costs tumbling, and that’s where I’m putting my energy.”
Grassley’s posture mirrors the pharmaceutical sector’s narrative, which often points to PBMs, insurers, and hospital networks as the true culprits behind price surges.
Stephen J. Ubl, chief of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), rebuked Trump’s plan in a Sunday communiqué, asserting that middlemen “absorb half of every pharmaceutical dollar spent” in the US—a share frequently eclipsing European counterparts’ price tags.
Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma, seated on the Senate Finance Committee, withheld judgment, citing the need for granular analysis of the executive blueprint.
“I haven’t reviewed all the minutiae yet,” he said. “The specifics are critical because we must ensure American R&D continues to thrive.”
Despite longstanding Republican rebukes of what they term bureaucratic “price meddling,” Thune acknowledged Trump’s fervor for making prescriptions more accessible, even at the cost of traditional conservative orthodoxy.
“It’s clear this is an issue he’s deeply invested in. Like with other topics, his conviction here is palpable,” Thune remarked.
In a press event, Trump derided the pharmaceutical lobby as the nation’s most formidable, yet asserted that the US would no longer “bankroll health care in foreign lands,” nor allow “predatory profiteering” by domestic drug conglomerates.
In 2024 alone, pharmaceutical entities channeled $387 billion into lobbying efforts—an extraordinary figure emblematic of their sway.
Trump contended that aggressive European bargaining tactics have offloaded costs onto American patients, citing a supporter’s tale of paying merely $88 for a weight-loss drug in the UK versus $1,300 stateside, according to reports by The Hill.
He vowed via Truth Social that his directive would slash prices by an astonishing 30% to 80%.
Trump has urged Speaker Mike Johnson and Senator Thune to integrate the projected Medicare savings from renegotiated drug rates into budget reconciliation calculations—a fiscal package intended to advance tax cuts and other Trumpian priorities.
“When you do the math,” Trump said, “you’ll need to count not just the tariff windfalls, but the massive drop in drug expenses—unprecedented in scale.”
Yet, a chorus of GOP voices remains wary. Many still argue that empowering Health and Human Services to apply pricing pressure could stymie medical innovation and limit the pipeline of future cures.
Back in 2019, Thune took to the Senate floor to excoriate a Democratic proposal mandating price negotiations—a provision that ultimately morphed into the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law by President Biden in 2022.
Thune slammed the bill as another salvo in Democrats’ quest for “government-controlled health care.” While acknowledging soaring drug costs as a legitimate concern, he warned that systemic upheaval was an overcorrection.
Citing comparative data, Thune emphasized that American patients enjoy access to 96% of newly developed cancer drugs, a stark contrast to nations like Germany and Japan, where price caps correspond with diminished drug availability.
He underscored how European pharmaceutical investments nosedived after 1986, when state-imposed pricing constraints took hold.
Senator Barrasso echoed similar trepidations at a recent Finance Committee hearing, warning that Biden’s IRA had endangered certain rare disease drugs by subjecting them to Medicare’s price negotiation regime.
“The safeguard supposedly protecting rare disease medications is flimsy,” Barrasso warned. “If a drug addresses multiple conditions, it’s fair game—and could vanish from the marketplace.”
He underscored that such disincentives already echo through the research corridors, chilling innovation.
Pressed on Trump’s directive, Barrasso remained circumspect. “I need to examine the fine print before drawing conclusions,” he noted, as reported by The Hill.
PhRMA’s Ubl doubled down in a stark Sunday missive, branding Trump’s approach as “importing socialist price structures,” which he claimed would be calamitous for American patients and workers alike.
“It threatens future treatments, destabilizes economic investments, and increases our dependency on foreign, especially Chinese, pharmaceutical innovation,” he warned grimly.
“Startups in edtech use GDPR-compliant LMS – protect student data across the EU.”
Yazdığınız yazıdaki bilgiler altın değerinde çok teşekkürler bi kenara not aldım.
I very delighted to find this internet site on bing, just what I was searching for as well saved to fav