Here at BTP, I try to focus my comments on news reporting, not columns or editorials. I may occasionally bash David Brooks or mock Thomas Friedman�s latest letter on behalf of a national leader, but I realize that these are expressions of opinion and therefore should be allowed a bit more leeway than straight news reporting. But, the Washington Post�s editorial position on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry is hard to ignore. Its lead editorial �The Wrong Prescription� gives yet another dose of misinformation intended to protect high industry profits. In contrasting the current Medicare system with the Veterans Administration it tells readers that �fully 3,000 of the 4,300 medicines covered by Medicare are unavailable under the veterans� program.� This assertion is misleading in three ways: 1) The 1,300 drugs on the VA formulary account for the vast majority of prescriptions that are filled by people on Medicare. Many drugs are rarely prescribed, so it would not be surprising if the VA list accounts for more than 90 percent of all prescriptions filled in the country. 2) Veterans can still get drugs not on the VA formulary. They just need to have their doctor explain why they need the drug in question. So, it is not true that the other 3,000 drugs are �unavailable under the veterans� program.� 3) Not all plans (perhaps none) in the Medicare program cover all 4,300 drugs. These plans have preferred drugs as well, which is the typical beneficiary had to spend 8 hours last year sifting through the various options, according to a study done for the Medicare Payments Advisory Commission. Seniors with many drug needs presumably spent even more time. Three major errors in one sentence is pretty impressive, even for the Post editorial board. (Do they give Pulitzers for this?) Let�s get beyond the silliness. Medicare can get prices that are 40 percent lower than what the private insurers pay. Every other government in the world pays prices that are 40 percent lower, and the people running the program in the United States can�t be that much more incompetent than government officials in other countries. (If they are, we can just outsource the job.) This is big money � 40 percent savings on drugs would save the government close to $400 billion over the next decade. Since the Post wants to cut everything from Social Security to Head Start to meet its deficit targets for the government, most people might think that cutting Medicare drug prices, thereby cutting drug company profits, should be an option on the table. There is a real issue about the impact that such cuts would have on research. Given the incredible corruption and abuses associated with the current system of supporting research with government provided patent monopolies, it would be desirable to have a serious debate on the best way to finance drug research. But it is just straight out dishonest to deny that Medicare could get lower prices than what the private insurers are paying.
--Dean Baker
