House Democrats seeking answers from pharmaceutical companies accused of jacking up prices on vital medications have run into a stone wall in the form of Republican Oversight Committee chair Jason Chaffetz, who counts the drug industry as one of his biggest backers.
Valeant and Turing Pharmaceuticals have both faced mounting criticism in recent weeks. Turing’s CEO, the “Pharma Bro” Martin Shkreli, abruptly increased the price of a critical toxoplasmosis drug from $13.50 per tablet to $750 overnight. Valeant has also been accused of price-gouging, as well as controlling a secret specialty pharmacy that altered prescriptions so its higher-cost medications would go to patients.
Democrats, led by Elijah Cummings in the House and Bernie Sanders in the Senate, have taken aim at both companies, using them to symbolize rising anxiety over the cost of health treatments. For nearly a year, Cummings has sought internal documents and called for hearings through the Oversight Committee, where he’s the ranking member. Valeant and Turing have thus far resisted the document requests.
The Senate launched a bipartisan investigation of Valeant, Turing and other drugmakers this week. But although the House Oversight Committee agreed unanimously to investigate prescription drug prices at the beginning of the year, Chaffetz has refused every request to compel documents, issue subpoenas or schedule hearings.
On Wednesday, Cummings and his Democratic colleagues demanded that Chaffetz reconsider, claiming that he hadn’t even replied to their earlier requests. “Your silence on this … creates the appearance that you do not take seriously a request from nearly half of the members of this committee,” the Democrats wrote.
Given the Republican majority, without Chaffetz’s support, no investigation will be authorized. On Tuesday, Chaffetz said he planned to hold hearings on drug costs at some point, but his spokesperson told the Washington Examiner that no hearings were scheduled.
Chaffetz has received substantial support from the drug industry over the years. Pharmaceutical companies were the top contributor to his campaign in the 2014 election cycle, and No. 2 so far this cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Overall, pharmaceutical interests have donated over $198,000 to Chaffetz during his career, more than any other industry. He has consistently voted against access to affordable prescription drugs throughout his career, according to the organization Progressive Punch.
The Republican from Utah has carried water for the industry in legislation as well. This January he introduced a bill to extend market exclusivity for “combination drugs” with ingredients already approved by the Food and Drug Administration. This could enable drugmakers to slightly tweak their formulas and extend their monopoly, preventing generic drugs from competition.
Valeant and Turing have not given directly to Chaffetz. Valeant prefers to use its resources on direct lobbying, and Turing CEO Shkreli famously offered a maximum donation to the presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders, who gave the money to a Washington-area AIDS clinic. But by preventing hearings on Valeant and Turing, Chaffetz does protect the wider industry from Congressional inquiry at a time when pressure to limit price hikes is rising. Acting as a human shield for a major business sector can pay off for an ambitious politician who briefly flirted with a candidacy for House Speaker last month.
The industry has already benefited. When Chaffetz said Tuesday that Valeant would not be the sole subject of any hearings, the price of its stock, which has been battered amid the scandal, jumped three points.
House Democrats see opportunity in Chaffetz’s blockade. This week they formed the Affordable Drug Pricing Task Force, hoping to shame Chaffetz into agreeing to an investigation or at least raise awareness of the refusal.
In the letter to Chaffetz, House Democrats seek a November 17 vote on subpoenas to Valeant and Turing. “Of course, it is your prerogative as Chairman to set the Committee’s agenda,” they wrote, “but even if you have no interest in investigating these abuses on behalf of your own constituents, we ask that you not block us from investigating them on behalf of ours.”
Nuke Washington and start over with our government. Either that or change the Constitution to read “We the Corporations of the United States…”
Chaffetz is stonewalling whistleblower hearings as well. According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of congress, a senior CDC scientist has requested to be subpoenaed after submitting thousands of documents exposing dirty dealings at the CDC regarding autism and vaccines, namely the burying of study data showing a “massive” (in the whistleblower’s words) increased incidence of autism among African American boys who receive the measles/mumps shot before age three. The whistleblower disclosed other risks as well, specifically tics and Tourettes from a mercury preservative in some infant shots, risks of fetal exposure, etc., saying CDC directors aggressively ordered the removal of damning findings from published studies.
It’s Kafkaesque. The story broke in the middle of Ferguson protests. Now members of the African American community are calling it Tuskegee II and demanding Chaffetz stop snuffing the process. Bought.
You don’t even mention the story with UAS Pharma and colchicine. They created a whole new industry of “recertifying” previously legal drugs in order to get monopolies over them.
A very one sided article, you talk to Democrats and print their quotes and then dig up allegations from any and all sources except the republican target of your attack. Are you on the Democratic payroll? Any claim to be a journalist in the public interest is a sham! Go find some real facts about the drug companies misdeeds and leave the analysis of politicians motives to the people!
Chaffetz has tough row to hoe to meet the accreditation standards of a two-dollar blow-job.
Straight from the Casablanca script, the circus continues. When in power, the democrats craft a health care act that catered to the desires of the pharma industry: no single payer plan, no drugs from overseas, no negotiating on drug prices. Meanwhile, the republicans howled. Now, with the shoe on the other foot, the republicans protect the pharma industry while the democrats cry foul. And, ostensibly savvy journalists report on it as though it was truth.
Protest all you want, but if you really want to do something about it, first educate yourself on how much the pharmaceutical industry contributes to YOUR congressional representatives’ campaigns, and to the campaigns of those running against them. Odds are you will find support for both the incumbent and the challenger, be they democrat or republican. So, then, what are the chances of change if either major party wins? Zip. If you do really, seriously, want this to change, vote for third party candidates who are not owned by the big corporations. Greens or Libertarians. Not democrats or republicans.
Is there hope? Suppose the Republicans really do nominate Trump or Carson, both of whom are too crazy even for a significant percentage of the crazy Republicans. Suppose the Democrats nominate Hillary, a Republican on every issue except abortion. Would a choice this bad leave an opening for the Greens or Libertarians to, at least, draw enough votes to receive attention? Nah. I’m dreaming.
Two party system is broke-absolutely correct Jeff.
And the upcoming election cycle will change nothing – the House of Representatives will remain Republican, and I suspect that the likely coronation of Hillary Clinton as the Democrat president candidate will result in Republican control of the Senate, and possibly even a Republican presidency. Well, it will actually guarantee a Republican presidency, because Hillary Clinton is a Republican on almost all issues.
Probably including the issue of pharmaceutical corporations. While she was in the Senate, she was the number 2 highest recipient of PHRMA lobbying dollars, basically PHRMA’s go-to girl for getting what they want.
Yes, indeed, these are troubling times. Money buys everything except drugs that are affordable. Is it any wonder that there is a drug available that would cure me, but is so expensive that I don’t have access to it. The US has become a have and have not society, with the haves becoming increasingly a very small fraction at the very top of the economic ladder.
Congress is so ripe for some democratization. In this digital day and age, there’s no reason that leaders should be able to set agendas. Congresspeople should be able to digitally submit bills at any time, others should be able to mark their approval, disapproval online. We have the technical version tracking tools to handle amendments, which each could require majority approval to be merged into the bill. Discussion threads could be added for congresspeople to add their comments (without a chairperson’s permission to speak). When the threshold of approval is reached, the bill proceeds to the next house without any concern for speaker’s approval.
I suppose the committee chairs can still be in charge of public hearings. But the main legislative work of congress needs to be yanked out of the controlling hands of the leaders of congress.
Thank you for your Tea Party views. Irrespective of the merits of changing the system, nothing is going to be changed as a result, because the people crafting and voting on the bills will have the same conflicts of interest as before.
Moreover, if I might offer an observation based on a full career as a scientist: there are no technological solutions to social problems. Whenever someone tells me of a proposed technology fix to a social problem, I know they are blowing smoke out of you know where.
Tea party views? I’m not sure where that attack came from.
You’re right that it won’t fix conflicts of interest. But it would address problems where bills like ECPA reform, which had a majority of the house as cosponsors, never gets a vote.
The corporations own congress and the purpose of a corporation is to defeat any attempts by the people to govern themselves. Corporations are virulent anti-democratic forces whose sole purpose is to enslave the populace with debt and to destroy government agencies that hold corporations accountable for their bad behaviors.
This guy used the PP Hearings (where he had his ass handed back to him) to launch his career on the national stage. (Right after the PP Hearings he threw his hat into the ring for Speaker – in case Ryan didn’t want it.) You will see this face and hear this name everywhere for the next 5 years as he positions himself for a POTUS run in 2020.
Be that as it may – he’s a very ugly human being and a narcissist of the first order. Beware.
Congressman like Chaffetz who get temporarily blinded by hush money are sickening in that they are so transparent in their greed. Big money either gets special treatment or writes their corrupt favors into actual legislation. Then you always hear the Republican: “Yes, but were any laws broken?” A prime example of this was when Melissa Lee on11/4/15’s Fast Money program on CNBC reminded Senators Collins and McCaskill twice that raising drugs prices is within the law.
@Phil : “Congressman like Chaffetz …”
All of them are like Chaffetz. Those that are slightly different are spineless. The rest of us are all idiots who vote every time and hope for a different result.
Big money is not the result of labor or anything valuable. It’s just ink on paper backed by a merciless army of zombies that’s under the control of the same printed stuff. All very convenient.
Chaffetz or no Chaffetz, we are all screwed.
@General Hercules-I Totally agree…
@ General Hercules: me too.