Bernie Sanders on prescription drug price gouging

The United States is the only major country on earth that does not regulate prescription drug prices and the results have been an unmitigated disaster. We need leadership prepared to stand up to the pharmaceutical industry and tell them loudly and clearly that they will no longer be able to rip off the American people.

Very good video explaining Sander's stance on prescription drug prices in the United States. Why do they charge so much? Because they can and they aren't regulated. The price can literally go up on you over night to a level you cannot afford leaving you the patient with no drug therapy overnight! He goes on to compare prescription drug prices in other countries and asks for explanations on a particular drug going up by 4000%.

I think this is very important to America and if you're not on prescription medications or depend on them, perhaps you have family or friends that it affects indirectly if not directly.

I seem to recall someone that was suppose to make health care cheaper.

Did the exact opposite.

Here we have another saying he's gonna make our drugs cheaper?

Well people not holding my breath.

Considering the source is just more government subsidization robbing from the 'rich'.

People need to stop placing their 'faith' in the wrong things/people.

This is just another example about how Bernie simply doesn't understand how things really work. The cost of development for new drugs is huge. Many of the companies go bankrupt and never even see any positive results from their hard work. It is a thankless job and the only reason people take the development risk is the possible huge payoff at the end.

There is not magic formula and the entire bio-tech industry is incredibly risk laden. Why would anyone do this if there was no potential payoff that made the risk worth it on the back end.

a reply to: Metallicus

Is the cost of their development huge enough to price gouge the American people and have a wide and bizarre mark up and profit margin to the extent of leaving some American's unable to afford these medications?

Do you not agree there should be some regulations in place for the prescription drug industry so that prices will not literally sky rocket overnight, leaving patients without their medications and adverse side effects from stopping them abruptly? Do you not agree regulation would at least provide patients an advanced warning so they could do their best to make arrangements?

a reply to: neo96

To my knowledge Sander's if elected plans to make the super rich and corporations pay their fair share of taxes. That doesn't sound like robbing them to me? He has a long history and track record to back up his plans if elected, it's a dice roll to put faith in him or anyone running for POTUS.

a reply to: Metallicus

I am pretty sure he understands how things really work. I am not so sure about you though.

Hell for the most part he is only wanting to undo the Bush admins follies that banned medicare's ability to bargain with drug companies and to open up the citizens rights to get our scripts from Canada at much cheaper prices.


One thing he doesn't even bring up is that most drug research is heavily subsidised by US taxpayers. So citizens pay for the drugs 2-3 even 5 times over. Maybe more.

originally posted by: Gumerk
a reply to: Metallicus

Is the cost of their development huge enough to price gouge the American people and have a wide and bizarre mark up and profit margin to the extent of leaving some American's unable to afford these medications?

Do you not agree there should be some regulations in place for the prescription drug industry so that prices will not literally sky rocket overnight, leaving patients without their medications and adverse side effects from stopping them abruptly? Do you not agree regulation would at least provide patients an advanced warning so they could do their best to make arrangements?

No, I don't agree that there should be some regulations in place, however, it would be nice if we passed some of the costs on to other nations and stop making the U.S. foot the bill for developing all the drugs.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Gumerk

Don't bother Neo he can watch 15 minute videos in 8 minutes or less and comment on it making up fallacious claims.


Why bother with that type?

When did it become acceptable to engage in personal attacks on ATS?

It seems detrimental to intelligent discussion.

originally posted by: neo96
I seem to recall someone that was suppose to make health care cheaper.

Did the exact opposite.

Here we have another saying he's gonna make our drugs cheaper?

Well people not holding my breath.

Considering the source is just more government subsidization robbing from the 'rich'.

People need to stop placing their 'faith' in the wrong things/people.

Exactly. The federal government just took on the role of a sleazy insurance salesman. I can say that from personal experience trying to purchase dental insurance through the Affordable Care Act. I couldn't do it unless my family dropped our current health insurance and bought both packages.

Bernie just wants government to be the big sleazy prescription drug price gouger. Members of Congress can invest in contracts that will make them so much $$$.

a reply to: Metallicus

Are you saying you don't know what a personal attack is because that wasn't one.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Sometimes you come off as condescending and arrogant.

Maybe I mistook that for an attack.

originally posted by: Gumerk
He has a long history and track record to back up his plans if elected, it's a dice roll to put faith in him or anyone running for POTUS.

No, he doesn't. His record isn't substantive even if it's long -- and it's only long as a representative.

You cannot put your faith in any major candidate without having faith in some sort of scum.

a reply to: MotherMayEye


Sander's if elected wants to implement a Medicare for all, single payer system. Would members of congress be able to invest in that and if this system put regulations in place for the prescription drug industry would this not increase the desired effect to do away with price gouging all together?

a reply to: Metallicus

I can be condescending. When I see people making up arguments based on nothing I do get condescending.


Bernie never argued in that video for anything having to do with taxes. I know this because I watched it and it is a fact that you can't watch a 15 minute video in 8 minutes or less.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

What about Sander's record does not have a firm base in reality?

He focuses on economic issues such as income and wealth inequality, raising the minimum wage, universal healthcare, reducing the burden of student debt, making public colleges and universities tuition-free by taxing financial transactions, and expanding Social Security benefits by eliminating the cap on the payroll tax on all income above $250,000. Sanders has become a prominent supporter of laws requiring companies to provide their workers paternity leave, sick leave, and vacation time, noting that such laws have been adopted by almost every developed country. He also supports legislation that would make it easier for workers to join or form a union. Sanders advocates bold action to reverse global warming and infrastructure investment in the United States, with "energy efficiency and sustainability" as a prominent goal. He is opposed to the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

At what point has he not been reasonably consistent on those issues stated above?

Lifetime pro-choice record, plus funding for family planning. (Sep 2015) Advocate for family planning and funding for contraceptives. (Sep 2015) Women have the right to choose, regardless of income. (Jun 1997) Voted NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies. (Mar 2009) Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008) Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008) Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007) Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007) Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005) Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005) Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004) Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003) Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003) Voted NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002) Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001) Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000) Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999) Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003) Emergency contraception for rape victims at all hospitals. (Sep 2006) Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006) Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007) Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescriptions. (Jul 2011) Ban anti-abortion limitations on abortion services. (Nov 2013) Protect the reproductive rights of women. (Jan 1993) Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007) Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception. (Jan 2009)

On The Issues

originally posted by: Gumerk
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Sander's if elected wants to implement a Medicare for all, single payer system. Would members of congress be able to invest in that and if this system put regulations in place for the prescription drug industry would this not increase the desired effect to do away with price gouging all together?

That is what he is addressing. Right now because of the Bush admins changes to medicare, medicare can't bargain for better prices with drug companies so drug companies are free to price gouge all they want.

Like he said that drug that was raised up to $750 a pill is sold in the UK for 66 cents.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Indeed, and I believe the wide and bizarre margin from 66 cents to 750 dollars isn't all about the cost of development. Thank you for pointing out the tax dollars that goes into prescription drug development as well.

originally posted by: Metallicus
This is just another example about how Bernie simply doesn't understand how things really work. The cost of development for new drugs is huge. Many of the companies go bankrupt and never even see any positive results from their hard work. It is a thankless job and the only reason people take the development risk is the possible huge payoff at the end.

There is not magic formula and the entire bio-tech industry is incredibly risk laden. Why would anyone do this if there was no potential payoff that made the risk worth it on the back end.

Didn't seem to be the case a few years back, why now....Greed.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
Bernie just wants government to be the big sleazy prescription drug price gouger. Members of Congress can invest in contracts that will make them so much $$$.

WTF??? Did you even watch the video or are you just pulling stuff out of your butt???

Do yourself a favor and look at the information first before responding out of ignorance. What a shame..