According to the New York Times, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America will spend $150 million specifically boosting for the health care reform proposal introduced last week by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT).
PhRMA has already spent millions on ads supporting the idea of reform more generically. But now that Baucus has come forward with an industry friendly proposal of his own--one that's significantly less progressive than the other proposals in Congress--PhRMA's throwing it's weight specifically behind his plan.
Baucus will unveil a draft of his legislation this week, and begin hearings on it next week. His legislation will not include a public health insurance option.

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

markg8
September 14, 2009 9:43 AM
Brian it's nice to see you recognize it was Baucus's idea to make a deal with PhRMA and not Obama as was widely reported a month ago.
To recap Baucus says he'll take $80 billion in rebates from PhRMA over 10 years and Pelosi and Waxman prefer direct government negotiation with individual pharma mfrs which they say will save us $120 to $140 billion over 10 years.
That averages a difference of $4 to $6 billion a year, not a deal breaker by any means. But I wonder where the patent protection length, clinical study availability other features of HR 3200 figure in the senate bills. Those are huge factors that will affect how fast new, better and cheaper drugs are brought to market and closing the donut hole.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
September 14, 2009 12:24 PM in reply to markg8
"...deal that drug makers struck in June with Mr. Baucus and the White House....
Shortly after striking that agreement, the trade group — the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA — also set aside $150 million for advertising to support health care legislation.
President Obama has cited the deal with the group as signifying a new era of cooperation."
Maybe it was Baucus' idea, but this by no means exonerates the White House.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
trblmkr
September 14, 2009 10:15 AM
"...Baucus has come forward with an industry friendly proposal of his own..." Which means of course he was taking dictation from PhRMA. Better check his chin for dents.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
September 14, 2009 10:44 AM
It's all creepy. Democrats making alliances with Big Pharma is too much like the West's alliance with Stalin during WWII. Maybe necessary, but still very distasteful!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
September 14, 2009 12:20 PM in reply to CityGuy
And its necessary, why? Since when do capitalists give up their right to freely negotiate prices? I am outraged! This is unheard of, Communistic and down-right un-American, so please educate me, why is it necessary?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
September 14, 2009 1:36 PM in reply to henk
Well just as with decisively winning WWII-which was the Greater Good. This alliance may be necessary to win a decisive, game-changing reform of health care.
The current system is broken. A few large health insurance companies hold virtual monopolies in "their" geographical areas of the US. This has led to a spiraling of costs, denial of coverage and benefits by committees of bean-counters, and resulted in an increasingly large number of uninsured (by choice or no choice) US citizens. The ONLY way to restore some sanity to the current system is for government to take action. It has come to that! Some may prefer an abolition of the tax breaks companies now receive for including health care to their employees. I do not like that idea, as it smacks of punishing employers for their good behavior. A public option, on the other hand, would hardly force insurance companes out of business. It would just force them to be competitive again! Lower costs to the insured. Lower rates for Rx and Dr. visits. And the public option would insure the currently uninsured Americans.
No just as the US Post Office hasn't forced UPS or FedEx out of business, the public option would not force Blue Cross, or Kaiser Permanente, out of business either!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
September 14, 2009 3:26 PM in reply to henk
Um, because if we'd been fighting Hitler and Stalin instead of us and Stalin fighting Hitler we'd have either lost the war outright or only won it by droping a whole lot more atomic bombs on a whole lot of cities?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NH Bob
September 14, 2009 10:45 AM
I would trust Raucus with the health of the American people and the fairness of a plan at least as much as I would trust the Devil herself. At least the Devil shares the hellfire, Max wants it all for himself! He's as phony as they come, and still represents only about ONE percent of our fellow citizens. Those sainted fore bearers of ours left quite a loop hole in the Senate!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sbv
September 14, 2009 11:00 AM
if that is the case, then we are staring down the barrel of another 2003 medicare modernization act. at this point, one is beginning to wonder not just who is and who isn't negotiating in good faith for the good of our nation and all its citizens; but rather whose agenda is it to bankrupt our nation and kill the government in favor of corporations for all!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Andreams
September 14, 2009 11:07 AM
Check out the Wyden plan. If there's not going to be a public option, this is definitely the best plan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
September 14, 2009 11:27 AM
If Baucus was in any other profession other than a Senator in Congress, he would be indicted for taking bribes. This is not idealogy. This is a CRIME. We can't count on the media, the press, or even the quasi-decent members of Congress to call him out. The system is so broken, you have to wonder if the entire country has to become bankrupted before there is revolt. America used to point to third world corruption with high minded indignation. It appears our officials are equally corrupt and even more greedy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
roxanne
September 14, 2009 11:53 AM
And now we and the progressives in the House can begin pointing out that PhRMA wrote this bill as Raul Grivalja pointed out in an article right here on TPM yesterday. Jane Hamsher's firedoglake.com also had a story on this. So Liz Fowler who is a Baucus aide, but worked for Wellpoint before returning to work for Baucus again and wrote this gift to the insurance idnustry. This bill should be dead by Friday if it's properly brought to light repeatedly over the next few days! Of course PhRMA would buy ads to push this trash. It works for them but, not for us. Can't wait to see what kind of ad Moveon.org hits them with! It will be Bye, Bye Baucus!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jalbert
September 14, 2009 12:17 PM
We'll quickly find out just how involved and supportive the White House has been with Baucas' negotiations. If they are backing this/him, then they'll be quiet or supportive of.
If the admin does not back his approach at this point, he's crossed a very serious line and can expect a very cold shoulder for the rest of his term (not that he'll care, he'll have enough money that he won't need any outside help ever again).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
September 14, 2009 12:26 PM in reply to jalbert
My money is on quiet and supportive.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
krada
September 14, 2009 4:46 PM
But the point is to get a bill out of the Senate, right? Won't the WH be waiting for that before they signal support one way or the other? Isn't the major fight down the road? And I do NOT support the Baucus bill or Baucus, just asking in terms of procedure and strategy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?