As we head into the final month of what has already been an unprecedented election season, candidate and party platforms are beginning to come to fruition.
Campaign promises, whether aspirations or vows to continue with existing policies, are at the forefront of many voters’ minds. In light of this, it is crucial to discern what policies are friendly to patients and which are not — most notably, price controls that have dominated recent headlines.
In 2022, millions of Medicare patients were promised that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) would deliver lower out-of-pocket spending and improved access to medicines and care. The administration stands by its claims two years later, but the results are much more mixed.
Overall, the IRA is increasing premiums and limiting choices. The law fundamentally broke Medicare Part D, a critical program that helps seniors access their medications. This year, average senior premiums have gone up 21 percent, which is expected to continue climbing in 2025. To make matters worse, despite increased payments, the number of prescription drug plans that seniors can choose from has fallen 25 percent since 2020. In fact, the number of prescription drug plans is at its lowest point since the program’s inception — less than half what it was in 2006.
Recently, the administration announced a “demo” plan to attempt to tamp down the high premiums the law caused. This program will aid big insurers by artificially and temporarily shielding spiking premiums ahead of the election. This money is out of the Medicare trust fund that goes into the pockets of insurance companies.
What’s even more concerning is that the IRA’s sponsors don’t just want to stop there. Proponents want to expand the IRA’s price controls to 15, possibly even 50 drugs per negotiation. What is unclear, however, is why. Seniors have already expressed concerns the law is disrupting their access to critical medicines and forcing them to spend more on healthcare. With all of this disruption, why not focus on addressing the consequences of a hastily written and passed law instead of doubling down?
The law threatens the development of treatments for chronic disease — medicines that seniors disproportionately rely on. Shouldn’t the IRA’s architects pause to ensure no more damage is done and determine if the program needs to be walked back if it’s as bad as experts warn? Unfortunately, many lawmakers are turning a blind eye to the side effects because the IRA is a staple healthcare platform item.
It’s time that politicians serving or hoping to serve at the highest levels of government put all patients first. As things heat up, it is critical that all parties be aware of the negative effects of price-setting policies — from drug price “negotiations” to the proposal to combat grocery “price gouging” — will have on Americans.
In the case of healthcare, price controls will disrupt the Medicare program that Americans rely on to access the medications and therapies they need. They may appear as an appealing “quick fix” to high drug costs in America, but, in truth, these policies are just an example of taking the easy way out.
Reprinted with permission from the DC Journal by Mark Gibbons.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AMAC or AMAC Action.