Senators draw on own experiences to chastise drug companies
Channeling the ire of constituents and drawing from personal experience, senators chastised drug company executives Tuesday over the high cost of prescription medications, while the CEOs warned that government price controls could stifle breakthroughs on diseases like Alzheimer’s. The Senate Finance Committee hearing marked the first time lawmakers have called the industry’s top executives to account for rising prices, which are a drain on Medicare and Medicaid and a burden to millions of Americans. The extraordinary public accounting was a sign that Congress and the White House are moving toward legislation this year to curb costs. Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., who has Parkinson’s, said the cost of one of his longtime medications had jumped by $90 when he went to refill it recently. “I can’t explain it,” said Isakson, who credits prescription drugs for allowing him to keep working. He started making calls and found a whole range of prices for the medication. The second-ranking Senate Republican, John Cornyn of Texas, expressed disbelief that Humira, a blockbuster drug for immune system conditions from AbbVie, is protected by more than 130 patents that cumulatively translate to decades of roadblocks for generic competitors. AbbVie CEO Richard Gonzalez responded that each new FDA-approved use of the drug represents an investment by the company in research, even if the medication is the same. “At some point that patent has to end so that the patient can get access to that drug at much cheaper cost,” Cornyn said. Drug costs are squeezing Americans in a number of ways: New medicines for cancer and other diseases often launch with prices exceeding $100,000 per year even as employers are shifting more pharmacy costs onto workers. Less expensive drugs for common ailments like diabetes and asthma often see price hikes of around 10 percent annually. Meanwhile some drugmakers have been buying up once-cheap medicines and hiking prices by 1,000 percent or more. The pharmaceutical executives expressed a general desire to lower costs for patients, but made no firm commitments. Merck CEO Kenneth Frazier warned that “outrageous solutions” could sacrifice industry innovation. He said lung cancer patients in the United Kingdom are still waiting for a drug available here that can cut deaths in half among those newly diagnosed. Sanofi CEO Olivier Brandicourt said using government “price controls” would not be enough to make medicines affordable. Senators seemed to be looking for a balance between protecting innovation and closing off legal and policy loopholes that have enabled savvy companies to game the markets. New Jersey Democrat Bob Menendez, considered an ally of the industry, delivered what he called a friendly warning: “If you don’t undertake meaningful action to reduce pharmaceutical costs, policymakers are going to do it for you.” Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said Congress intends to respond to the drug price problem in a “measured and effective way” and he is planning to question other industry actors including health insurance companies and middlemen called pharmacy benefit managers. The CEOs said drug development is a risky and costly undertaking and that prices reflect investment in research and development. But under questioning from Grassley they also acknowledged other factors affecting how they set prices, including public perception and what Medicare and Medicaid pay. In addition to Merck, Sanofi and AbbVie, other companies represented at the hearing included AstraZeneca, which makes the cholesterol drug Crestor, Bristol-Myers Squibb, maker of the blood thinner Eliquis; Johnson & Johnson, maker of Xarelto to prevent blood clots; and Pfizer, maker of Lyrica for nerve pain. “All you who are here are here because the way you’ve been doing business is unacceptable and unsustainable,” ranking Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon told the CEOs. Democrats say it’s time for Medicare to leverage its purchasing power and directly negotiate prices with the industry, a step most Republicans oppose. The pharmaceutical industry is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington. Drugmakers’ top lobbying arm, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, spent a record $27.9 million last year to sway federal decision-makers, according to records tallied by the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics. But Tuesday’s hearing seemed to mark a change in direction. President Donald Trump’s recurring blasts at drugmakers appear to be closer to finding a pathway to legislation. Drugmakers pointed a finger at other industry players. Rebates paid to pharmacy benefit managers help assure favorable treatment for a medication on an insurer’s list of covered drugs and help keep premiums lower. But the rebates are not passed on to consumers who use the particular medication, and they can face high copays based on the drug’s list price, not the discounted one. The companies offered solutions of their own, some of which echo proposals from the administration or awmakers. Among them: — Allow patients to share in rebates when they buy their medication, proposed by the Trump administration. — Place a hard limit on cost-sharing and copays for Medicare beneficiaries in the popular Part D prescription program, supported by Wyden. — Make greater use of value-based contracts that tie payments to how well a medication works. — Promote the introduction of lower-cost generics and biosimilars, competition that brand manufacturers are often accused of impeding. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Martha Roby invites VA Secretary to Alabama to see veterans’ experience firsthand
Alabama 2nd District U.S. Rep. Martha Roby, a member of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee, on Tuesday invited Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie to visit Alabama to visit the VA so that he could firsthand what is happening. Wilkie was participating in an oversight hearing when Roby extended the invitation. “We should want every single VA health care system in this nation to be the very best it can be for our veterans. But, at CAVHCS, we are unable to get simple things right, and it extends on to very egregious behavior… We should be giving veterans the best care in a timely fashion, and it just isn’t working,” said Roby “I am tired of getting status quo answers as to why CAVHCS continues to be one of the worst in the nation.” She continued, “I would like to invite you to Alabama to visit the VA so you can see firsthand what is happening. This is not working. It is not the way it should be, and it is a huge disservice to our men and women who have served our country.” Roby has been a longtime advocate for improving VA services and health care. During the committee hearing, she expressed her concerns with failing VA medical facilities, including the Central Alabama Veterans Health Care System (CAVHCS) in Montgomery. Find Roby’s full remarks, as prepared, below: Good morning, Mr. Secretary, Dr. Stone. I’m not really sure where to begin other than to say that I am grateful for the opportunity to have you here today, and I’m grateful to be back on this subcommittee for this Congress. The Central Alabama VA has continued to be one of the worst in the country. We had your Under Secretary for Clinical Health, Dr. Teresa Boyd, here two weeks ago. I’m not sure if you have had a chance to talk to her about our discussion. But, it was specifically about VISN 7 and Central Alabama Veterans Health Care System, known as CAVHCS, and the facility’s current state. I’m not sure, Madame Chair, that my five minutes is enough for you to fully appreciate what’s been going on there for many years. During my time in Congress, I have worked diligently with leadership at CAVHCS and VISN 7 to make sure that our veterans are receiving the best care we can give them. As I said to Dr. Boyd, we don’t know each other well, but you will learn that I am very passionate about this issue, and I am very frustrated. I don’t understand why the VA works on a bell curve and why somebody always has to be at the bottom of the barrel with a one-star rating. We should want every single VA health care system in this nation to be the very best it can be for our veterans. But, we’re unable to get simple things right, like just saying “hello” and greeting a veteran when they come in for their appointment to make them feel valued and like someone cares. This extends to very egregious behavior, and I can give you some really specific examples, and I’d like the opportunity to do that so you can fully appreciate what has been going on in this health care system for many years. There’s a culture of complacency and gross mismanagement. I want to be in the grocery store and have a veteran come up to me and tell me how wonderful their experience was at the VA – not to have to look into a man or woman’s eyes who has served our country honorably and see tears in their eyes because they have just flat out given up because they cannot get appropriate care. We should be giving them the best care in a timely fashion, and it just isn’t working. So, I’m grateful for the opportunity, again, to be here with you today, but I am tired of getting status quo answers as to why CAVHCS continues to be one of the worst in the nation. I am hopeful that you and I can cultivate a relationship so that you can fully appreciate and understand what is going on. I would like to invite you to Alabama to visit the VA so you can see firsthand what is happening. This is not working. It is not the way it should be, and it is a huge disservice to our men and women who have served our country.
Mo Brooks blasts Socialist Democrats’ open border policies for helping kill Americans
Alabama 5th District U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks isn’t holding back — in a fiery floor speech in front of his House colleagues, he blasted Socialist Democrats’ open borders policies “that help to kill 33,000 Americans each year.” “The President’s legal authority to declare a national emergency under the National Emergencies Act of 1976 and build a wall on the southern border under 10 United States Code 2808 (and numerous other statutes) is crystal clear. Open-borders Socialists Democrats who brought this resolution to the House floor don’t have a legal leg to stand on,” Brooks said on Tuesday. “I trust President Trump will veto this resolution if it makes it to his desk, and I will vote in the House to sustain President Trump’s veto if given the opportunity.” He continued, “Protecting American lives from illegal alien homicides and deaths from overdoses on poisonous drug trafficked across America’s porous southern border should be a bipartisan issue… It is tragic Socialist Democrats don’t care for American lives as much as President Trump does. The hatred and hostility Socialist Democrats harbor for President Trump, who is trying to protect American lives, is beyond the pale.” Brooks purports America’s porous southern border is responsible for nearly 33,000 deaths a year. “By any measure, a national emergency exists at America’s porous southern border. According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement data, roughly 2,000 illegal aliens are apprehended each year by federal agents for homicides committed on American soil,” Brooks explained. “Worse yet, National Institutes of Health data reveals that roughly 31,000 Americans die each year from heroin and cocaine overdoses, 90% of which floods across our porous southern border. On average, at least 50 Americans die each day from illegal alien homicides or overdoses on poisonous drugs shipped through our porous southern border.” On Tuesday the House will vote on a resolution to block President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border. The resolution will undoubtedly pass the House with Democrats in control of the chamber, and may garner enough votes of support in the Senate to pass as well, which could result in Trump’s first veto. Earlier this month Trump declared a national emergency along the border in order to fund his long-sought wall along the U.S-Mexico border. Watch Brooks’ speech below: The full text of Brooks’ speech follows: Mr. Speaker, in FY 2018, more than 2,000 illegal aliens were apprehended by federal agents for homicides committed on American soil. [1] Worse yet, roughly 31,000 Americans die each year from heroin and cocaine overdoses, [2] 90% of which floods across America’s porous southern border. [3] Hence, we can expect at least 33,000 dead Americans each year until America secures our porous southern border. For perspective, the 9/11 terrorist attacks killed roughly 3,000 people. In response, America invaded Iraq and Afghanistan at a cost trillions of dollars and roughly seven thousand lost military personnel lives! Saving Americans should be a bipartisan issue. Yet, here we are. Republicans seek to prevent another 33,000 dead Americans this year while partisan Democrats seek to embarrass and stop President Trump from securing America’s porous southern border and saving American lives. For emphasis, no, no national emergency in history has been prompted by more dead Americans than President Trump’s national emergency declaration. As such, I support President Trump’s national emergency declaration and will vote accordingly. Mr. Speaker, how many dead Americans does it take for open border advocates to support border security? How much American blood must be on guilty hands before Congress recognizes the national emergency we face at America’s southern border? America’s military protects the borders of, and lives in, South Korea, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Europe, and many other countries. I thank President Trump, as commander-in chief, for understanding that America, and Americans, deserve no less protection! Mr. Speaker, let me conclude by noting that dead Americans, Americans killed by illegal aliens and as a consequence of porous borders, had dreams too! And, we as a Congress, should remember and honor those dreams and act accordingly, and protect this national emergency to protect American lives by securing our porous southern border. Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
Kay Ivey to announce infrastructure plan, expected gas tax hike
With just a week to go before the 2019 Legislative session begins, Gov. Kay Ivey is scheduled to announce her plan to improve Alabama’s infrastructure system on Wednesday, which is expected to include a gas tax hike. Ivey will hold a press conference on County Road 17 in Maplesville, Ala. to discuss the details of her plan. Many presume a bill on the gas tax and to fund infrastructure improvements will be a key component of her plan. “I support the legislature’s bold move to invest in infrastructure upgrades and public safety. Road and bridges are an essential service of government, and investing in them will bring more jobs and businesses to our state, creating opportunities for everyone,” Ivey said in 2017 in support of a then-proposed gas tax adjustment. The gas tax was last raised in 1992.
Michael Cohen expected to claim lying, racism and cheating by Donald Trump
President Donald Trump‘s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, is expected to give a behind-the-scenes account of what he will claim is Trump’s lying, racism and cheating, and possibly even criminal conduct, when he testifies publicly before a House committee on Wednesday, according to a person with knowledge of the matter. Cohen is expected to provide what he will claim is evidence, in the form of documents, of Trump’s conduct, said the person, who requested anonymity to discuss the confidential testimony. Trump’s former personal “fixer” arrived on Capitol Hill Tuesday to begin three days of congressional appearances, starting with a closed-door interview with the Senate intelligence committee. The public won’t have a chance to hear from him until Wednesday, when he testifies before the House Oversight and Reform Committee. He will go behind closed doors again when he talks to the House intelligence committee on Thursday. Lawmakers are alternately suspicious of Cohen, who is set to serve time in prison for lying to the House and Senate intelligence committees in 2017, and eager to hear what Cohen has to say after he turned on his longtime boss. Senators on the intelligence panel are expected to attend Tuesday’s meeting, a departure from the committee’s usual practice, where witness interviews are conducted by staff only. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr told The Associated Press that senators will have staff ask questions but will be in the room to observe. He said no topics will be off limits and Cohen “should expect to get any question from anywhere about anything.” Burr said committee members know a lot more than they did when they first interviewed Cohen, who later pleaded guilty to lying to the House and Senate intelligence committees about abandoning a proposal for a Trump Tower in Moscow in January 2016. Cohen has since acknowledged he continued pursuing the project for months after that. Burr suggested that the committee will take steps to ensure Cohen is telling the truth. “I’m sure there will be some questions we know the answers to, so we’ll test him to see whether in fact he’ll be truthful this time,” Burr said. As a close confidant of Trump for many years, Cohen’s testimony is among the most anticipated since the House and Senate started investigating the Trump campaign’s Russia ties two years ago. In addition to lying to Congress, Cohen pleaded guilty last year to campaign finance violations for his involvement in payments to two women who allege they had affairs with Trump. He is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in May. Federal prosecutors in New York have said Trump directed Cohen to arrange the payments to buy the silence of porn actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal in the run-up to the 2016 campaign. Trump denies the allegations and says that Cohen lied to get a lighter sentence. The person with knowledge of the matter said Cohen will provide information about Trump’s financial statements that he will claim shows Trump deflated assets to pay lower taxes on golf courses; will provide details of the Daniels payment and claim that Trump organized a cover-up by pretending Cohen would be repaid; and claim that Trump talked to him and asked him questions about the Trump Moscow project throughout 2016. He is also expected to discuss what he knows about a meeting between Trump campaign associates and a Russian lawyer in Trump Tower before the 2016 election, a matter that is of particular interest to special counsel Robert Mueller and congressional investigators. Cohen is only expected to discuss matters related to Russia in the closed-door interviews with the intelligence committees, as House Oversight and Reform Chairman Elijah Cummings has said he doesn’t want to interfere with Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and links to Trump’s campaign. Members of the Oversight panel are expected to ask questions about the campaign finance violations, Trump’s business practices and compliance with tax laws and “the accuracy of the president’s public statements,” according to a memo laying out the scope of that hearing. The hearing’s scope does not include Russia. Cohen’s week of interviews come as House Democrats launch multiple investigations into Trump’s ties to Russia and conflict-of-interest issues within the administration. House Republicans in the last Congress investigated whether Trump’s campaign coordinated with Russia, but ended that probe over Democratic objections, saying that there was no evidence that they did so. The Senate’s Russia investigation is ongoing. Cohen had been scheduled to speak to the three committees earlier this month, but rescheduled all of those appearances for different reasons. He said he needed to recover from surgery and also was concerned about what he considered to be threats to his family from Trump and the president’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff postponed Cohen’s appearance before that committee saying it was “in the interests of the investigation,” with no additional details. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Protesters remembered on anniversary of 1960 Alabama sit-in
Joseph Peterson was a college student on Feb. 25, 1960 when he and other African-American students walked to the whites-only lunch counter at the Montgomery County Courthouse, sat down and asked to be served. He and eight other students at what is now Alabama State University were later expelled for leading the state’s first known sit-in protest against segregation. Fifty-nine years after the protest, Peterson and other students were honored in the city. Montgomery city and county leaders presented resolutions to ASU President Quinton Ross expressing sorrow for the “wrongs from the past.” “I feel good about it,” Peterson, now 83, said at the ceremony. “I never really thought it would happen and this is just an opportunity for Montgomery to do the right thing and for the state of Alabama to do the right thing” Peterson said. Civil rights attorney Fred Gray said the students were not arrested but were suspended or expelled from the university at the behest of the state’s white governor. The resolutions expressed sorrow for the actions against the students. Asked if the resolutions were an apology, Montgomery Mayor Todd Strange noted the punishments against the students were taken by the state. “What we want to say is it is wrong,” Strange said. Montgomery County Commission Chairman Elton Dean called it an apology. “I’m not going to try to be politically correct at all. We are sorry. We apologize,” Dean said. Peterson said he learned from the newspaper that he was expelled and lost his GI Bill benefits. But he has no regrets about participating. “The whole South needed to change,” Peterson said. He later graduated from New York University and worked for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Joe Reed, who participated in the sit-in and was suspended, said local officials shut down the cafe after the students walked inside. Reed recalled that when he sat down that day, a white woman who was eating at the cafe looked up, saw him and quickly scurried away. State academic officials announced last year that they had expunged the students’ academic records. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Rauf Bolden: Solutionism in Orange Beach
Solutionists believe their way is the only way, fighting against the tide of possibilities, reasoning they have thought the problem through, analyzed all the facts, and concluded their vision is completely correct. Orange Beach Mayor Tony Kennon is a solutionist. He espouses the fix to the traffic problem in Orange Beach is more roads and bridges to move the tourists, ignoring the evidence that unbridled development on the beach road caused the problem, and it happened over the last ten years on his watch. We are past the point of limiting development, but not past the point of asking ourselves if this government is governed by council’s addiction to the wealth from tourism, or if the notion of maintaining our small town quality of life means more to us than supporting council’s devotion to increasing the city’s tax yield on revenues. The unfolding rests with voting for council seats in 2020, possibly giving birth to a group of neomillennial politicians. Solutionism is singularly focused on the distillation of one person’s ideas, letting them implement every policy of government in a democracy. This requires the collective surrender of all the levers of power, believing the strong individual understands the big picture better than anyone else in the community. The mayor and council are not co-equal branches of government as defined by the founders. Mayor Kennon is the person we elected to lead us through the very difficult recession of 2008, recovering from the post-Ivan devastation of 2005. In 2018 our town sits with cash reserves of more than $40 million, according to documents on the city’s web site. This is commendable, and I am thankful for the city’s fiscal solvency, providing job security for municipal employees. Perhaps it is time to plan for a change away from solutionism. The Alabama Constitution Section 2 provides guidance, “That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and that, therefore, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to change their form of government in such manner as they may deem expedient,” according to a report on Justia. Districting Council Seats is one alternative, forcing each council member to support the concerns of their constituents, not the vision of the strong mayor. Mayor Tony Kennon went on a lobbying tour in January of this year, visiting Rotary Clubs and Chambers across the state, arguing for a transportation solution through the State Park (Powerline Road), even though the BP Agreement prohibited such an environmentally destructive project for two decades. “A federal lawsuit that was settled last year, and which enabled a new beachside conference center and hotel complex to move forward, bluntly declares that no north-south connecting road [Powerline Road] can be built through a popular coastal Alabama state park for the next 20 years,” according to a report by John Sharp at al.com. The solutionist in Kennon rails against this part of the settlement. According to a report by John Mullen in the Lagniappe, “I really want to start educating these folks to just how simple the fix is, and that is the road down Powerline Road [north-south corridor] to the beach,” Kennon said. “It could solve so many of our traffic problems during the summer. I’m going to start beating that drum now all over the state as we need help getting that done.” Kennon continues, “These are Alabama’s beaches, we’re the stewards of them and you guys need to help us build the infrastructure and maintain the infrastructure that we need to move all these tourists. You’re not doing Orange Beach a favor by helping us out, you’re doing the state of Alabama a service because there’s so much money generated down here and a good bit of it goes to Montgomery. Orange Beach generates about 15 percent of all lodging tax in the state. This is significant.” Solutionism reflected in Mayor Tony Kennon’s words speaks volumes. This key issue neglects to mention who will get the bill for breaking the BP Agreement, building a road across the state park. Alabama should not entertain paying for nonsense in Orange Beach, including the proposed Flyover Bridge west of the Foley Beach Express. Confiscating properties through eminent domain to build this bridge rails against conservative values. Nothing says socialism quite like seizing private lands. Orange Beach boasts overflowing coffers, enthusiastically campaigning against preserving the environmental integrity of the state park, but still grabbing their portion of the BP settlement, “We were very pleased with $40 million, with $275 million on the table, I’ve seen knifing’s and shootings for a whole lot less but it was fairly distributed and very equitable,” Kennon said, according to a report on Fox10 News. Solutionism is driving the conversation in Orange Beach. We see diametrically opposing forces at work here, simultaneously wanting to kill the BP Settlement, proposing a road across the state park, and concurrently blessing the BP Settlement monies the city has yet to receive. Perhaps it is time to reflect. ••• Rauf Bolden is retired IT Director at the City of Orange Beach, working as an IT & Web Consultant on the Beach Road. He can be reached by email: publisher@velvetillusion.com.
