The Hill examines Presidential candidates' positions on prescription drug issues

The Hill on Tuesday examined how Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) are perceived by the drug and biotech industries.

According to The Hill, Obama and McCain have voted to allow the federal government to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies for discounts on prescription drugs under the Medicare prescription drug benefit, and both have used "harsh rhetoric against the drug industry and its influence in Washington."

Rep. Jim Greenwood (R-Pa.), president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, said that BIO will not endorse either candidate "because there are not such great differences between these candidates that it would make sense for us to make such an endorsement." He said, "If you look at the presidential candidates, we conclude that they've both said some pretty good things about biotechnology," adding, "Both candidates have also critical things to say about the drug industry in general, and they have supported a couple of policies we do not support."

BIO never has endorsed a presidential candidate, and the political action committee operated by the group has not made contributions to any presidential candidate in the current election cycle. Greenwood said, "It may well be that in another presidential year, the contrasts are so stark" that BIO would have to endorse a candidate, but "that's not the case in 2008."

Although the pharmaceutical and biotech industries "typically [have] aligned politically with the GOP," this year "drug company employees have given substantially more to Obama than McCain," and the contributions that their PACs have made to lawmakers "slightly favor Democrats," according to The Hill. The Hill reports that "the drug industry is troubled by both candidates, especially their votes to permit cheaper medicines to be imported into the United States and to allow the government to negotiate with manufacturers on the price of drugs for Medicare recipients" (Young, The Hill, 9/8).

Political Parties, Pharmaceutical Industry

As Democrats seek to expand their majorities in the House and Senate and possibly win the presidential election, "pharmaceutical companies are braced for a reckoning that will test the resolve of their hastily built political defenses," Roll Call reports. According to Roll Call, since Democrats won a majority in Congress last year, "the drug industry has faced its share of heat on Capitol Hill, but deft political maneuvering, and some fortuitous real-world developments, have spared it what could have been a pile-up of hostile legislation."

House Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chair Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) said that Democrats' current slim majority precluded action on legislation regarding the pharmaceutical industry and that the party needed time to examine the issues and "set the table" for future legislation. He said, "Our first term back in the majority, we were not going to rewrite legislation that we feel strongly about until the American people have trust in our ability to govern and hold these people accountable," adding, "Now members of Congress are demanding action, and I look forward to giving them that stronger accountability."

Roll Call reports that congressional lawmakers currently are developing several bills addressing the pharmaceutical industry, including legislation that would require CMS to negotiate Medicare prescription drug prices with the industry; allow the reimportation of prescription drugs from Canada; limit drugmakers ability to directly market their product to consumers; and expand drug companies' legal liability for their products, all of which "could take a bite out of the drug industry's bottom line" (Newmyer, Roll Call, 9/8).

'Divided We Fail' Campaign

Divided We Fail -- a coalition led by AARP that includes the Business Roundtable, the National Federation of Independent Businesses and the Service Employees International Union -- has convinced Obama, McCain and a number of other lawmakers to sign a pledge to work across party lines to pass legislation to address health care and financial security issues, Reuters/Boston Globe reports.

The coalition -- which has proposed a set of principles that highlight the need for affordable, quality health care, rather than a specific plan -- has launched a campaign that includes television advertisements and dozens of community forums to focus the 2008 presidential election on the issues. According to the coalition, 342 of the 535 members of Congress have signed the pledge or expressed support for the campaign.

Nancy LeaMond, an AARP executive vice president who has directed the coalition, said, "There is no question that the American people, as they look at Washington, are shaking their heads and saying, 'Why can't something get done?' To that extent, health care is high on their list."

According to Reuters/Globe, the campaign is "unusual because it does not advocate a particular approach," but instead, has pushed for "a set of principles underscoring the need for affordable, quality health care and financial security for all" (Smith, Reuters/Boston Globe, 9/9).