Thread by @KylieTaitano

Let’s be clear – @RepScottPeters, along with @RepSchrader and @RepKathleenRice voted *with Republicans* to tear down the Lower Drug Costs Now Act which had overwhelming support from most of the Democratic caucus – Biden, Pelosi, and Progressives included.

https://twitter.com/sdutopinion/status/1527731320767385600

The “orchestration of a compromise”, as the Union-Tribune describes the situation, is quite deceptive.

Let’s break it down ⬇️

The original drug pricing provision in #BuildBackBetter was not only much stronger than Peters’ version that the Union Tribune cited, but it also had the vast support of Democratic leadership in both houses.

It was adopted from a previous bill – HR3.
americanprogress.org/article/h-r-3-…

The Lower Drug Costs Now Act (HR 3) called for negotiating all insulin products and the top 125 drugs that account for the greatest Medicare spending.

It passed the House in 2019 with a vote of 230-192.

Let’s give Rep. Peters credit where credit is due – he actually voted for HR 3 the first time it was introduced in 2019 as a standalone bill.

However, when HR 3 was included as part of #BuildBackBetter, Rep. Peters was 1 of only 3 Dems that voted with the GOP to shoot it down.

This isn’t the first time he’s opposed lowering prescription drug prices.

In fact, he co-authored a letter to Nancy Pelosi arguing against lowering drug costs. The day after this letter was published, he received several thousand dollars from big pharma.
opensecrets.org/news/2021/09/p…

In an article with the Union Tribune, Rep. Peters said that “he cast the [original vote in 2019] to be a ‘team player’, knowing the bill didn’t have a chance in the Senate”.
sandiegouniontribune.com/columnists/sto…

Not only is Peters’ version weaker than the one all other Dems supported, it’s also much more complicated.

In his version, Medicare could negotiate down some drugs under Medicare Part B & D, but only if they’re 9 or 13 years (depending on the drug) past their FDA approval date.

This means that no new life-saving drugs are allowed to be considered for negotiation!

Drugs that also cannot be negotiated are those that Medicare spends $200 million or less on. That is a lot of money!

There are so many more exemptions that are too long to fit, but here is a good source on more specifics of Rep. Peters’ version, created by the Kaiser Family Foundation:
kff.org/medicare/issue…

An argument constantly made against negotiating drug prices is that it will stifle innovation.

That is simply not true.

In an investigation conducted by the House Oversight Committee, it was revealed that pharmaceutical companies have spent more on stock buybacks, dividends, and advertisements than they did on research and development between 2016 and 2020.
oversight.house.gov/news/press-rel…

With its overwhelming popularity among the general public as well as with Democratic leadership in both houses, there was no need for Scott Peters and Kurt Schrader to create a stripped-down, compromised version.

The argument can be made that the original version did not pass the Senate, but Peters’ version hasn’t either.

If this was supposed to be the compromise, then why hasn’t Joe Manchin and the GOP voted to pass #BuildBackBetter?

So here we are today, still without the ability for Medicare to negotiate prices on any prescription drugs.

In Congress, I’ll fight to ensure that all prescription drugs can be negotiated, joining the other major countries that allow drug price negotiation.

I will support any legislation that advances us toward that goal. This is exactly why I support #MedicareForAll.

I’m not taking a single penny of corporate PAC or lobbyist money because San Diego deserves an unbought and unbossed representative in Washington D.C.

Chip in to help fuel our people powered campaign!
secure.actblue.com/donate/kylie-t…