Skip to main content
Monthly Archives

August 2023

THIS WEEK: “Lower Cost, Better Care” Bus Tour Pulls Into Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

U.S. Representatives Valerie Foushee, Lucy McBath, Jennifer McClellan, Susan Wild, State Senator Sheikh Rahman, Carla Cunningham, Rachel Hunt, Michael Garrett, Minority Leader State Representative James Beverly Will Headline “Lower Costs, Better Care” Events in Four States

Watch All Bus Tour Stops Live Here.

Washington, D.C. — On the fourth and final week of Protect Our Care’s 8,000-mile “Lower Costs, Better Care” bus tour, “Care Force One” will make stops in four states to demonstrate how recent victories by President Biden and Democrats in Congress are already “Driving Down Health Care Costs” by thousands of dollars a year — with even more savings on the way. During the events, speakers will discuss how the Inflation Reduction Act and other health care measures will improve care and lower costs for the American people. Over four weeks, Care Force One will travel to more than 16 states, make more than 30 stops, and travel nearly 8,000 miles.

The “Lower Costs, Better Care” tour promotes the work of lawmakers who are fighting tirelessly to improve health care and hold Republicans accountable for trying to roll back this progress, hike costs, and rip away protections from the American people. Drug companies and Republican lawmakers are doing everything in their power to roll back this progress in order to put profits over people. August marks the first anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act and the savings it continues to deliver. 

MONDAY

DULUTH, GEORGIA:

WHO:
U.S. Representative Lucy McBath (D-GA-07)
State Senator Sheikh Rahman (D-GA-05)
Mutima Anderson, Founder & President, Ruby A. Neeson Diabetes Awareness Foundation
Errol Anderson, Storyteller
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate

WHERE: Gas South Arena, 6400 Sugarloaf Pkwy, Duluth, GA 30097

WHEN: Monday, August 21, 2023, at 10:00 AM EDT

MACON, GEORGIA:

WHO:
Minority Leader State Representative James Beverly
Anita Barkin, Nurse Practitioner, PhD
Yvonne Pickford, Storyteller
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate

WHERE: IBEW Local 1316, 1046 Patterson St, Macon, GA 31204

WHEN: Monday, August 21, 2023, at 2:00 PM EDT

TUESDAY

CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA: 

WHO:
State Senator Rachel Hunt
State Senator Carla Cunningham
Little Lobbyists
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate 

WHERE: Mecklenburg Government Center, 600 E 4th St, Charlotte, NC 28202

WHEN: Tuesday, August 22, 2023, at 10:00 AM EDT

GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA: 

WHO:
State Senator Michael Garrett
ARA NC
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate 

WHERE: Center City Park, 200 N. Elm St, Greensboro, NC 27401

WHEN: Tuesday, August 22, 2023, at 2:00 PM EDT

WEDNESDAY

RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA:

WHO:
U.S. Representative Valerie Foushee (D-NC-04)
Anderson Clayton, North Carolina Democratic Party Chair
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate 

WHERE: Moore Square Park, 201 S Blount St, Raleigh, NC 27601

WHEN: Wednesday, August 23, 2023

NORFOLK, VIRGINIA:

WHO:
Freedom Virginia
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate 

WHERE: New Teamsters Facility on Virginia Beach Blvd

WHEN: Wednesday, August 23, 2023

THURSDAY

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA:

WHO:
U.S. Representative Jennifer McClellan (D-VA-04)
Susanna Gibson, Nurse Practitioner
Freedom Virginia
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate 

WHERE: Richmond, VA

WHEN: Thursday, August 24, 2023, at 9:00 AM EDT

FRIDAY

ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA:

WHO:
U.S. Representative Susan Wild (D-PA-07)
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate

WHERE: Cedar Creek Parkway – Rose Garden #3 Pavilion, 2860 Honochick Dr, Allentown, PA 18104

WHEN: Friday, August 25, 2023, at 10:30 AM EDT

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One will make stops in: 

Manchester, New Hampshire on Monday, July 31, 2023
Portsmouth, New Hampshire on Monday, July 31, 2023
Syracuse, New York on Tuesday, August 1, 2023
Kingston, New York on Tuesday, August 1, 2023
Valhalla, New York on Wednesday, August 2, 2023
New York City, New York on Wednesday, August 2, 2023
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on Thursday, August 3, 2023
Uniontown, Pennsylvania on Friday, August 4, 2023
Youngstown, Ohio on Monday, August 7, 2023
Toledo, Ohio on Monday, August 7, 2023
Trenton, Michigan on Tuesday, August 8, 2023
Lansing, Michigan on Tuesday, August 8, 2023
La Crosse, Wisconsin on Wednesday, August 9, 2023
Green Bay, Wisconsin on Thursday, August 10, 2023
St. Paul, Minnesota on Friday, August 11, 2023
Las Vegas, Nevada on Monday, August 14, 2023
Bakersfield, California on Tuesday, August 15, 2023
Los Angeles, California on Tuesday, August 15, 2023
Orange County, California on Wednesday, August 16, 2023
Palm Springs, California on Wednesday, August 16, 2023
Tempe, Arizona on Thursday, August 17, 2023
Tucson, Arizona on Thursday, August 17, 2023
Albuquerque, New Mexico on Friday, August 18, 2023
Duluth, Georgia on Monday, August 21, 2023
Macon, Georgia on Monday, August 21, 2023
Charlotte, North Carolina on Tuesday, August 22, 2023
Greensboro, North Carolina on Tuesday, August 22, 2023
Raleigh, North Carolina on Wednesday, August 23, 2023
Norfolk, Virginia on Wednesday, August 23, 2023
Richmond, Virginia on Thursday, August 24, 2023
Allentown, Pennsylvania on Friday, August 25, 2023

For more information on Protect Our Care’s “Lower Cost, Better Care” tour, click here

Week Three: Protect Our Care’s Care Force One Made Stops in Nevada, California, Arizona, and New Mexico

U.S. Representatives Judy Chu, Susie Lee, Greg Stanton, Irvine Mayor Farrah Khan, Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Karina Quintanilla, Former State Sen. Kirsten Engel Headlined “Lower Costs, Better Care” Bus Tour Events

On the third week of Protect Our Care’s 8,000-mile “Lower Costs, Better Care” bus tour, “Care Force One” made stops in four states to demonstrate how recent victories by President Biden and Democrats in Congress are already “Driving Down Health Care Costs” by thousands of dollars a year — with even more savings on the way. During each stop, national and local elected officials, health care advocates and storytellers discussed how the Inflation Reduction Act and other health care measures will improve care and lower costs for the American people. August marks the first anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act. Next week, the tour continues in Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Over four weeks, Care Force One will travel to more than 16 states, make more than 30 stops, and travel nearly 8,000 miles.

Watch All Bus Tour Stops Here

LAS VEGAS, NEVADA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by U.S. Representative Susie Lee (D-NV-03), and health care advocates at the West Flamingo Senior Center in Las Vegas to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Watch the event here.

BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by health care advocates at the Rasmussen Senior Center in Bakersfield to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Coverage:

Watch the event here.

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by U.S. Representative Judy Chu (D-CA-28), and health care advocates at Brookside Park in Los Angeles to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Coverage:

  • Pasadena Now: Congresswoman Chu Headlines Care Force One’s Visit to Pasadena on Tuesday
  • World Journal: 護理巴士抵洛杉磯 抑制藥價降醫療費 (Buses arrive in Los Angeles to curb drug prices and medical expenses)
  • Spectrum 1: Judy Chu on Bidenomics

Watch the event here.

ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by City of Irvine Mayor Farrah Khan, and health care advocates at Mike Ward Park in Irvine to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Watch the event here.

PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by City of Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Karina Quintanilla, and health care advocates at Ruth Hardy Park in Palm Springs to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Watch the event here.

TEMPE, ARIZONA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by U.S. Representative Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04), HHS Region 9 Director Jeffrey Reynoso, and health care advocates at the Tempe Public Library to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Coverage:

  • Yellow Sheet Report: Congressman Greg Stanton and HHS Regional Director Headline “Lower Costs, Better Care” Bus Tour Stop in Tempe

Watch the event here.

TUCSON, ARIZONA

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by U.S. Former State Sen. Kirsten Engel, Director of the HHS Office for Civil Rights Melanie Fontes Rainer, and health care advocates at the YWCA of Southern Arizona in Tucson to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Watch the event here.

ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO

Protect Our Care’s Care Force One was joined by Mayor Tim Keller and health care advocates at Civic Plaza in Albuquerque to highlight how the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures will lower premiums and prescription drug costs for millions of Americans.

Watch the event here.

ROUNDUP: Democrats Celebrate the First Year of the Inflation Reduction Act

President Biden and Democratic Lawmakers Are Lowering Health Care Costs and Giving Families the Relief They Need

One year ago, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law, driving down health care costs for seniors and families nationwide. This was a huge win in the ongoing fight for affordable health care. Between lowering premium costs for families by $2,400 on average, capping insulin costs, and stopping drug companies’ egregious price hikes, the new legislation is already working for the American people. Soon, seniors’ drug costs will be capped at $2,000 annually, and Medicare will finally be able to negotiate lower drug prices. 

However, Republicans refuse to give up on their war on health care. They have reverted to some of the oldest tricks in the book and introduced numerous bills to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act and put drug and insurance companies back in charge. Meanwhile, in the courts, big drug companies have filed lawsuits against the federal government to try to stop Medicare from negotiating lower prices for millions of seniors.

Here’s what Democrats are saying about the anniversary of their historic victory:

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION

President Joe Biden: “One year ago, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law…The Inflation Reduction Act is a transformative law that is helping the United States meet its climate goals and strengthen energy security, investing in America to create good-paying jobs, reducing energy and health care costs for families, and making the tax code fairer. […] Nearly 15 million people are saving an average of $800 per year on their health insurance premiums, the nation’s uninsured rate has reached a historic low, and millions of seniors on Medicare are paying less in out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs—including insulin, which is capped at $35 per month. […] The Inflation Reduction Act advances President Biden, Vice President Harris, and Congressional Democrats’ longstanding commitment to making health care more affordable for American families and seniors. The law is bringing down health care costs and thanks to President Biden, Vice President Harris, and the Inflation Reduction Act’s continuation of important improvements on the Affordable Care Act, the nation’s uninsured rate has reached an historic low, and nearly 15 million people are saving an average of $800 per year on their insurance premiums.” [White House Press Release, 8/16/23]

Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra: “The first anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act is cause for celebration, as millions of Americans are already saving money on health care. As a result of this law, individuals purchasing Marketplace coverage are paying less in premiums, people with Medicare are benefiting from the $35 cap on insulin, and saving on free, recommended vaccines, and we are strengthening Medicare for the next generation. The Biden-Harris Administration is delivering lower prescription drug costs, making health insurance more affordable, and making the economy work for working families.” [Department of Health and Human Services Press Release, 8/16/23]

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure: “The historic Inflation Reduction Act builds on the Biden-Harris Administration’s efforts to make health care more affordable and accessible that are life changing for millions of Americans. On this first anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act, Americans are seeing the benefits – such as free recommended vaccines, lower insulin costs, and the enhanced tax credits that help more people afford their premiums in the Marketplaces.” [Department of Health and Human Services Press Release, 8/16/23]

U.S. CONGRESS

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY): “The Inflation Reduction Act was one of the most consequential pieces of legislation passed in decades, and in just one year it’s already paying huge dividends for the American people, for our economy, and for our climate. Democrats are proud of the progress we’ve made in implementing our agenda, and we will keep working until every American feels the benefits.” [Senate Democratic Caucus Press Release, 7/27/23]

House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA-5): “One year ago, President Biden and Congressional Democrats enacted the Inflation Reduction Act to make good on our promise of progress and prosperity for everyday Americans — and we are proud to see that it is already delivering. In just its first year, the Inflation Reduction Act has slashed the cost of insulin to $35 per month for seniors and secured affordable health coverage for nearly 15 million Americans — saving them an average of $800 a year. It has spurred over $270 billion in private sector investments, creating more than 170,000 good-paying, green jobs in 44 states. And it has injected fairness into our tax system, ensuring billionaires and wealthy corporations pay their fair share — all while paving our path toward a carbon-free, climate-resilient future. Democrats know the best way to grow America’s economy is by growing the middle class. Through the Inflation Reduction Act, we are cutting costs and building the stronger, safer, more sustainable future that Americans deserve.” [House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark Press Release, 8/16/23]

Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-11): “When President Biden affixed his signature to the Inflation Reduction Act one year ago today, America not only made history – but we made progress on the most pressing challenge of our times. […] At the same time, families are feeling the impact of this landmark law at their kitchen table. At long last, Medicare will soon have the power to negotiate the price of prescription drugs. Seniors can now get insulin for just $35 a month. And fifteen million Americans are saving an average of $800 per year on health insurance through ACA exchanges.” [Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi Press Release, 8/16/23]

Senator Bob Casey (D-PA), Chair of the Special Committee on Aging: “One year ago, Democrats enacted the Inflation Reduction Act to fulfill President Biden’s promise to lower costs for families and tackle the climate crisis. Because of this law, seniors and families are spending less on their prescription drugs, Americans are spending less on their electricity bills, and we’re on the cusp of a manufacturing renaissance in the United States. By investing in America’s clean energy capabilities, we’re on track to meet our climate goals. Pennsylvania families and communities are feeling the impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act, but I’m proud to say that the best of this law is yet to come.” [Senator Bob Casey Press Release, 8/16/23]

Representative Frank Pallone (D-NJ-06), Ranking Member of the Committee on Energy & Commerce: “The Inflation Reduction Act is delivering for the American people, and it will continue to do so for years to come. The law is making prescription drugs and health care more affordable for millions of American families. Already this year, seniors are paying less for lifesaving insulin as the law caps the cost at $35 per month. Now, pharmaceutical companies have followed suit and are lowering the cost of insulin for more Americans, something that simply would not have happened without the passage of this law. Drug companies are also being forced to pay penalties when they raise prices above the rate of inflation, which has resulted in seniors receiving discounts on 43 drugs so far this year. And next month, the Department of Health and Human Services will announce the first 10 drugs it plans to negotiate lower prices on so seniors are no longer paying outrageously high prices. It is also dramatically lowering the cost of monthly health insurance premiums for millions of Americans, with four in five customers able to find health care coverage for $10 or less per month on HealthCare.gov.” [Representative Frank Pallone Press Release, 8/16/23]

Representative Richard Neal (D-MA-1), Ranking Member of the Committee on Ways and Means: “This first anniversary serves as a powerful reminder of what Democrats could achieve for the American people with a tight majority and goes to show, that where there’s a will there’s a way. From capping the cost of insulin for seniors to unlocking a new era of service at the IRS or spurring the single largest federal investment in climate action, the IRA is chock full of wins for the American people. Ways and Means Democrats proudly led on so much of this landmark law—saving families an average of $2400 on their health premiums, allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices for the first time, and driving historic manufacturing and energy investments—and responsibly funded it by holding the wealthiest corporations accountable for their fair share. […] The promise of the Inflation Reduction Act shines bright after its first year and is only getting brighter.” [Representative Richard Neal Press Release, 8/16/23]

Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ): “A year ago today, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law. This historic legislation, which I was proud to support, was designed to lower costs, grow the middle class, and invest in our nation’s green energy future – and it is delivering on its promise. […] In the year since, seniors are paying less at the pharmacy counter, families are seeing reductions in their monthly energy bills, and the nation is pivoting faster than expected towards clean energy while we combat the global climate crisis. Simply put, our efforts are paying dividends for the American people, for the economy, and for the environment. The Inflation Reduction Act is a prime of example of what is possible when we prioritize helping hardworking families thrive.” [Senator Bob Menendez Press Release, 8/16/23]

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV): “The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is one of the most historic pieces of legislation passed in decades for working and middle class families, and we are already seeing real results across West Virginia. While some across both parties and the Administration have chosen to play political games with this important legislation, the IRA included $238 billion in debt reduction, lowered the cost of prescription drug prices for millions of seniors – including more than 400,000 West Virginians on Medicare, capped insulin at $35 for seniors, and secured permanent funding for the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.” [Senator Joe Manchin Press Release, 8/16/23]

Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI): “The Inflation Reduction Act is making a real difference in the lives of Wisconsin’s working families, and I am proud to have voted for it. Seniors across Wisconsin are saving hundreds of dollars a month on the cost of their prescription drugs because we took on big drug companies and capped the cost of insulin at $35 per month. Hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites are saving on their monthly health care premiums. […] Big corporations are finally paying their fair share of taxes and we are cutting the deficit. I know we have more work to do to lower costs for families, but I am proud that our Inflation Reduction Act is delivering needed relief for working families and growing our Made in Wisconsin economy.” [Senator Tammy Baldwin Press Release, 8/16/23]

Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA): “[F]amilies are seeing the cost of life-saving medications lowered and the American Rescue Plan’s Affordable Care Act premium subsidies extended — preventing nearly one million low-income Californians’ premium costs from doubling. And we are funding these efforts by requiring billion-dollar corporations to finally pay their fair share in taxes. Thanks to the IRA, one year later we are celebrating reduced costs for working families and historic climate and health care investments in America. This is why the American people sent us to Congress — and why we will continue working to build on this historic progress — so that Californians have more money in their pockets, cleaner air to breathe, and a healthier future ahead.” [Senator Alex Padilla Press Release, 8/16/23]

Senator Peter Welch (D-VT): “The passage of the Inflation Reduction Act was a win for Vermont families, our economy, and the green energy future–and one year later it’s clear this law is delivering on its promises for our communities. We worked closely with the Biden Administration to include key Vermont priorities in this bill–including provisions to lower the cost of prescription drugs, expand access to home energy upgrades, and tackle climate change. And importantly, it will create good-paying jobs right here in Vermont. Making sure this law–and the transformative programs within it–get implemented quickly and fairly will be key. No person, and no community, should be left out.” [Senator Peter Welch Press Release, 8/16/23]

Representative Steny Hoyer (D-MD-5): “A year later, America still feels the positive impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act. Inflation has fallen by two thirds since last summer. […] Additionally, thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, 69.3 million seniors have saved money on their prescription drug costs, and the 16.3 million people who receive their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act are saving an average $800 a year on their health premiums. From capping monthly insulin costs for millions of Medicare beneficiaries to creating green jobs across the country, the Inflation Reduction Act is a cornerstone in Democrats’ Investing in America agenda.” [Representative Steny Hoyer Press Release, 8/16/23]

Representative Susan Wild (D-PA-07): “I’ve been taking on Big Pharma in the fight to get health care costs and drug prices down since my first day in Congress. The Inflation Reduction Act is a huge win in that fight. It’s making a real difference for Pennsylvania families and seniors by lowering health care costs, and by investing in clean energy and growing our economy. A year after I worked to pass the IRA into law, I’m keeping up the work to get costs down and build an economy that works for working people.” [Representative Susan Wild Press Release, 8/16/23]

Representative Jennifer McClellan (D-VA-04): “One year ago, President Biden signed House Democrats’ transformative Inflation Reduction Act into law. […] The IRA allowed Medicare to negotiate the price of certain prescription drugs for the first time, reduced the cost of insulin to $35 per month for seniors, and expanded affordable health care coverage to more Americans by enhancing subsidies under the Affordable Care Act and lowering premiums by an average of $800 per month. These are important steps in our continued efforts to ensure every American has access to quality, affordable health care and the life-saving prescription drugs they need. […] We have made tremendous progress since the IRA was signed into law, and we will continue to see the benefits of this legislation for years to come. As the provisions within the bill are implemented, I will work with the Biden-Harris Administration and relevant agencies to ensure Virginia’s Fourth continues to benefit from this historic legislation.” [Representative Jennifer McClellan Press Release, 8/16/23]

Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Senator Gary Peters, and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Representative Suzan DelBene: “Democrats took historic steps to address Americans’ most pressing priority: lowering costs on everything from prescription drugs to energy bills – all while helping grow jobs here in our country and tackling the climate crisis. While Democrats fought to lower costs, Republicans stood on the side of big drug companies, big oil companies, and other mega corporations that get rich by keeping prices high. Democrats remain committed to putting the interests of working families first. And that’s why voters will stand with Democrats in 2024.” [Democratic National Committee Press Release, 8/16/23]

EVENTS

President Joe Biden held a press conference delivering remarks on the anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act. [White House Live, 8/16/23]

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) held a round table to highlight four different stories of how the Inflation Reduction Act is helping one year in. [X, 8/16/23]

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Chair of the Finance Committee Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) held a press conference with AARP CEO Jo Ann Jenkins, Protect Our Care Executive Director Brad Woodhouse, and Irv Varkonyi, a Virginia senior on Medicare, celebrating the progress made to lower health care costs for Americans ahead of the one-year anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act. [Facebook Live, 7/27/23]

HEADLINES

Newsweek: Opinion: Representative Pallone: Republicans Want You to Pay More for Medicine – Again. “One year ago this week, I joined President Joe Biden as he signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law. This transformational law finally reversed longstanding legal restrictions put in place by a Republican Congress 20 years ago that explicitly prevented Medicare from negotiating with pharmaceutical companies on the prices seniors pay for prescription drugs. Other nations negotiate lower prices for their citizens and so it’s only fair that the United States should be able to do the same. Negotiating drug prices is not only good for seniors’ wallets, making the lifesaving drugs they need more affordable, but also for taxpayers and national spending. The drug pricing reforms included in the Inflation Reduction Act are expected to cut the federal deficit by $237 billion over 10 years, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and extending Medicare’s solvency for years to come.” [Newsweek, 8/14/23]

New Hampshire Bulletin: Opinion: Expanding Affordable Health Care In New Hampshire. “One year ago, the Inflation Reduction Act became law. I’m thrilled to be traveling coast to coast on a national bus tour with Protect Our Care to celebrate that achievement, and to share the news about all the changes to our health care system in the past few years under the Biden administration. […] Under the Inflation Reduction Act, people on Medicare already have their insulin copays capped at $35 per month. The pressure from this measure has already forced insulin makers to lower the price of insulin for many people not covered by Medicare, too. […] The Inflation Reduction Act is only one of many ways in which the Biden administration is moving America forward on health care.” [New Hampshire Bulletin, 8/17/23]

ABC News: Biden Takes Victory Lap on Inflation Reduction Act Amid 2024 ‘Bidenomics’ Push. “At a celebration in the White House East Room, Biden branded the $740 billion climate, health and tax bill as one of the “most significant laws” ever enacted. “Taking on the special interests and winning,” the president said. “Delivering on promises that have long been made to the American people to lower cost for families, especially health care costs; increase America’s energy security; restore fairness to a tax code; create good paying jobs here in America; and to address the potential threat of climate crisis.” [ABC News, 8/16/23]

CNN: Biden Knocks GOP for Opposing His Domestic Agenda as He Celebrates Anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act. “President Joe Biden celebrated the first anniversary of his administration’s signature climate and health care law on Wednesday – and knocked Republicans for opposing the measure during a lively event in the White House’s East Room. […] In his Wednesday remarks, Biden trumpeted provisions in the law that he pledged would cut carbon pollution in half by 2030, invest more than $50 billion to build up climate resilience and save Americans an average of $800 a year in health care premiums under the Affordable Care Act.” [CNN, 8/16/23]

Michigan Advance: Michigan Dem Leaders Tout Climate, Health Initiatives In The Inflation Reduction Act’s First Year. “The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022, which set out to support the economy by curbing prescription drugs costs and investing in clean energy and electric vehicles, turned one year old Wednesday and Democratic leaders in Michigan joined together over Zoom to give a year-in-review. […] Gilchrist noted the IRA put a $35 cap on the monthly cost of insulin for Medicare beneficiaries, saying he’s witnessed people in his own family struggle to afford the insulin they need. […] More and more Michiganders will reap the benefits of health care reducing costs outlined in the IRA, Dingell said, with an estimated 673,000 Michiganders to save an average of $360 on prescription drugs annually starting in 2025 when more caps and drug reducing policies go into effect under the IRA.” [Michigan Advance, 8/16/23]

NY1 Spectrum News: ‘We’re Investing In All Of America: Biden Marks Anniversary Of Signing Landmark Climate, Health Care And Tax Law. “President Joe Biden marked the anniversary of one of his signature pieces of legislation on Wednesday – the so-called Inflation Reduction Act – calling it ‘one of the biggest drivers of jobs and economic growth this country has ever seen.’ […] Among the bill’s provisions are a $35 per month cap on insulin for Medicare recipients, reforms to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices for certain medications, increased tax enforcement and a 15% corporate minimum tax rate, as well as the largest-ever federal investment to fight climate change. It passed both the Democratic-controlled House and Senate last year without any Republican support.” [NY1 Spectrum News, 8/16/23]

SOCIAL MEDIA

President Joe Biden: “Under the Inflation Reduction Act, folks on Medicare—no matter how many prescriptions they have—pay no more than $2,000 a year for their medication. This is a game-changer for American families.” [X, 8/16/23]

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY): “Since the Inflation Reduction Act became law: We made it possible for the first time ever for Medicare to negotiate the price of prescription drugs to bring down costs for seniors.” [X, 8/16/23]

Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL): “One year ago today, @POTUS signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law. @SenateDems fought tooth and nail for this historic legislation and for everyday Americans—to reduce costs for families, make the tax code fairer, and make the biggest climate action investment in history.” [X, 8/16/23]

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY-8): “Insulin used to cost thousands of dollars per year for many older Americans. Dems passed the Inflation Reduction Act. Now it’s $35 per month.” [X, 8/16/23]

House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-CA-33): “One year ago, @HouseDemocrats passed the Inflation Reduction Act to lower health care costs for families, which included:
💊 Lower prescription drug costs
⚕ Lower health care costs
💉 $35/month cap on insulin[X, 8/16/23]

Assistant House Democratic Leader James E. Clyburn (D-SC-6): “Today marks one year since @POTUS signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law — historic legislation to lower kitchen table costs, reduce prescription drug prices, shrink the deficit, and tackle climate change. That’s Bidenomics at work.” [X, 8/16/23]

Representative Jerry Nadler (D-NY-12), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee: “One year ago today, @HouseDemocrats secured access to affordable health care for almost 15 million Americans. With the #InflationReductionAct, #NY12 residents are saving an average of $2,990 every year on their health insurance.” [X, 8/16/23]

Representative Nydia Velazquez (D-NY-7), Ranking Member of the Committee on Small Business: “One year ago, Democrats delivered the largest investment in clean energy in history. We empowered Medicare to negotiate drug prices and we secured lower health care costs. And we did it by making rich corporations finally start to pay their fair share. #InflationReductionAct” [X, 8/16/23]

Senator Jon Tester (D-MT): “A year ago today, we passed the Inflation Reduction Act to:
📉 Pay down the debt
💊 Slash prescription drug prices
🩺 Cap health care costs
🇺🇸 Invest in American energy
🌎 And protect our climate
ALL without raising taxes on Montanans, but by holding corporations accountable.” [X, 8/16/23]

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA): “One year ago, the Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law! It focused on the issues that matter: cutting health care costs for seniors, protecting miners’ benefits, lowering emissions, and slashing the deficit. Proud to have gotten it done for Virginians.” [X, 8/16/23]

Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL): “One year after @POTUS and Congressional Democrats enacted the Inflation Reduction Act, all have benefited from:
—Lower Rx costs
—$35/month cap on Medicare insulin costs
—Boosts in manufacturing and clean energy
—A fairer tax code
—Investments in climate action
—JOBS, JOBS, JOBS” [X, 8/16/23]

Representative Judy Chu (D-CA-28): “The #InflationReductionAct has also:
🩺Lowered health care costs
💊Capped prescription costs for Medicare beneficiaries
💡Driven down energy costs
@HouseDemocrats and I will keep fighting to continue this progress.” [X, 8/16/23]

Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA-36): “Since the #InflationReductionAct was passed one year ago, it has:
✔️Lowered prescription drug costs
✔️Created jobs and boosted the economy
✔️Lowered energy costs for families
Learn more about how this law is impacting our community: https://democrats-budget.house.gov/legislation/InflationReductionAct” [X, 8/16/23]

Representative Susie Lee (D-NV-03): “One year ago today, I voted for the #InflationReductionAct to give working folks the tools & opportunities to succeed.
In NV & beyond, those investments are:
🏥 Driving down health care costs
☀️ Creating 1000s of clean energy jobs
🌄 Protecting our public lands & water supplies” [X, 8/16/23]

Representative Lucy McBath (D-GA-07): “💊 Lower prescription drug costs
🏥 Lower health care costs
⚡ Lower energy costs
One year ago, my colleagues and I delivered the #InflationReductionAct to lower costs for American families—including a $35 insulin cap that I championed. We’re working to continue that progress.” [X, 8/16/23]

TODAY: Rep. Greg Stanton Headlines Arizona Event During Week Three of Protect Our Care’s “Lower Costs, Better Care” Bus Tour

FOR PLANNING PURPOSES
Contact:
Morgan Finkelstein, [email protected]

***MEDIA ADVISORY FOR THURSDAY, AUGUST 17, 2023 AT 9:30 AM MST // 12:30 PM EDT***

Care Force One Rolls into Tempe as it Travels Across 16+ States, Making Over 30 Stops and Covering Nearly 8,000 Miles

Watch All Bus Tour Stops Live Here.

TEMPE, ARIZONA — On day four of week three of Protect Our Care’s “Lower Costs, Better Care” bus tour, Representative Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04) will join health care advocates and Protect Our Care for events in Tempe and Tucson, demonstrating how recent victories by President Biden and Democrats in Congress are already “Driving Down Health Care Costs” by thousands of dollars a year — with even more savings on the way. During the events, speakers will discuss how the Inflation Reduction Act and other health care measures will improve care and lower costs for the American people. Over four weeks, Care Force One will travel to more than 16 states, make more than 30 stops, and travel nearly 8,000 miles. 

The “Lower Costs, Better Care” tour promotes the work of lawmakers who are fighting tirelessly to improve health care and hold Republicans accountable for trying to roll back this progress, hike costs, and rip away protections from the American people. Drug companies and Republican lawmakers are doing everything in their power to roll back this progress in order to put profits over people. August 16 marks the first anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act and the savings it continues to deliver. 

TEMPE, ARIZONA:
WHO:
Representative Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04)
Jeffrey Reynoso, Region 9 Regional Director, Department of Health & Human Services
Saundra Cole, President, Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans
Marcos Castillo, Storyteller
Laura Packard, cancer survivor and health care advocate 

WHERE: Tempe Public Library, 3500 S Rural Rd, Tempe, AZ 85282

WHEN: Thursday, August 17, 2023, at 9:30 AM MST // 12:30 PM EDT

Reminder: Big Drug Companies Are in Court to Stop Medicare Negotiation and Protect Their Sky-High Profits

Drug Companies Are Putting Their Greed on Full Display as Inflation Reduction Act Turns One

Yesterday marked the one year anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act. Right now, millions of people are benefiting from the law’s provisions to drive down health care and prescription drug costs, but big drug companies and their allies are in the courts trying to dismantle the Inflation Reduction Act’s core provision of giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices. 

Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson-owned Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk as well as mega lobbying groups PhRMA (of which Amgen, Johnson & Johnson and others are members) and the US Chamber of Commerce (which represents AbbVie as a member), have filed meritless lawsuits against the federal government in an effort to stop Medicare from negotiating for lower prescription drug prices — the most popular provision of the Inflation Reduction Act. 

In late September, a Trump-appointed federal district judge in Ohio rejected the Chambers of Commerce’s request for a preliminary injunction to stop the negotiation program before it started and ordered for an amended complaint to be filed, rejecting the Chambers’ claim that negotiation violates their due process rights under the Constitution.

Since the enactment of the Negotiation Program, drug companies have announced massive, above-expectation profits while arguing that negotiation is “tantamount to extortion” and will “upend…pharmaceutical innovation.” They’re just trying to protect their massive profits. While they rake in billions, U.S. drug prices are up to four times higher than prices in other high-income countries, leading patients in America to cut pills and skip doses to make ends meet.

Medicare drug price negotiation is projected to lower costs for seniors and save taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, but big drug companies are eager to protect their outsized prices and profits. Drug companies that manufacture drugs likely to be eligible for negotiation now or in the near future typically exploit the patent system to keep competitor drugs off the market, spend tens of millions on lobbying, and increase their list prices at rates that far exceed inflation.

What’s At Stake? 

These lawsuits seek to end Medicare’s new ability to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries. If the big drug companies get their way, patients will pay more so the drug companies can make more money:

  • GONE: Medicare’s power to negotiate lower prices for the most popular and expensive prescription drugs. Under the Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare is set to begin negotiating prices for 10 of the top 50 most expensive Part D drugs in 2026, adding another 15 drugs in 2027 and 2028, and another 20 in 2029 and subsequent years.
  • GONE: $98.6 billion in Medicare savings over the next decade from the drug negotiation program, which translates into savings for patients and taxpayers.
  • GONE: Lower Part D premiums and lower out-of-pocket drug costs for certain Medicare beneficiaries who rely on qualifying drugs.

Who Is Behind These Lawsuits? 

The plaintiffs are strategically filing these junk lawsuits in a variety of different federal court jurisdictions. Merck & Co. filed in the District Court for the District of Columbia, Bristol Myers Squibb and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., owned by Johnson & Johnson, filed in the District of New Jersey Trenton Vicinage, PhRMA et al. filed in the Western District of Texas, and the US Chamber of Commerce et al. filed in the Southern District of Ohio Western Division. Boehringer Ingelheim filed in the District of Connecticut, AstraZeneca filed in the District of Delaware, and Novartis & Novo Nordisk filed separately in the District of New Jersey.

The Plaintiffs

Merck. Merck sells Januvia, a Type 2 diabetes drug that has been selected for negotiation. Januvia has been on the market without competition for 17 years and has grossed Merck $49.9 billion in sales since its launch. Medicare has spent nearly $28 billion on the drug since 2010, spending an average of $4,343 per beneficiary as of 2021. Patients in countries like Australia paid around 87 percent less – all while Merck CEO Robert Davis raked in $13.72 million.

Bristol Myers Squibb. Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) is motivated to block the negotiation program because its blockbuster drug Eliquis, a highly profitable blood thinner that can be as much as 78 percent cheaper overseas, has been selected for negotiation. In 2021 alone, Medicare spent over $12.5 billion on the blood clot drug, which is taken by over three million Medicare beneficiaries. BMS also believes their cancer drug Opdivo is likely to qualify for negotiation; Medicare spent approximately $1.6 billion on Opdivo in 2021.

The Pharmaceutical Research And Manufacturers Of America (PhRMA). PhRMA represents many of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the country, including drug giants Pfizer, Amgen, Eli Lilly & Company, and Johnson & Johnson, as well as Merck and Bristol Myers Squibb, and has lobbied fiercely against lowering drug prices for decades. The pharmaceutical industry outspent every other industry on lobbying in 2022, with PhRMA spending over $29 million on lobbying and tens of millions more on false and misleading ads trying to defeat the Inflation Reduction Act’s provisions to lower drug costs in Congress.

Other plaintiffs receive direct financial support from PhRMA and have deep PhRMA connections. The National Infusion Center Association and the Global Colon Cancer Association are also joining PhRMA’s lawsuit — both of which have aligned with PhRMA in previous lawsuits to protect big drug companies’ ability to charge sky-high drug prices. The National Infusion Center Association received $120,000 from PhRMA in 2019, while the Global Colon Cancer Association got at least $50,000 and has spent years lobbying against a myriad of efforts to lower prescription drug prices ranging from importation to cancer drug pricing regulations. The Global Colon Cancer Association is led by a number of “corporate members” from pharmaceutical and biotech companies represented by PhRMA.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Michigan, Ohio, and Dayton Area Chambers. As STAT concluded, “There aren’t many groups more well-funded than the pharmaceutical industry on Capitol Hill — there are two, to be precise — and the Chamber is one of them. The Chamber has spent $29.6 million lobbying so far this year, nearly double the $15.2 million spent by the brand drug industry lobby PhRMA, according to a list compiled by OpenSecrets.” 

In late September, a federal district court judge dealt a major blow to the plaintiffs, rejecting the Chamber of Commerce’s motion for a preliminary injunction that sought to block the implementation of the Medicare drug negotiation program and suggesting he would reevaluate whether the Chamber in fact had standing to bring the case following limited discovery, an amended complaint, and the government’s renewed motion to dismiss. The judge ruled, “Because the Court, at this early juncture in the litigation, cannot tell with certainty whether or not Plaintiffs have standing to raise each of their claims, they necessarily cannot have a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim.”

Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., owned by Johnson & Johnson. Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen sells Imbruvica, a leukemia drug that was selected for negotiation and has grossed the company $22.33 billion since 2013. The drug, which costs around 58 percent less in other high-income countries like France, cost Medicare $3.15 billion in 2021 alone. Johnson & Johnson’s top-selling blood clot and stroke drug, Xarelto, was also chosen for negotiation; Medicare spent $5.23 billion on Xarelto in 2021 alone.

Boehringer Ingelheim. Boehringer Ingelheim is a Germany-based drug company that sells Jardiance, a type 2 diabetes drug that Boehringer shares with Eli Lilly & Co that was selected for negotiation and has grossed the companies approximately $18.5 billion (in 2023 USD) and cost Medicare over $3.7 billion in 2021 alone. Patients in other high-income countries like Canada pay around 81 percent less, and the drug has seen a 63 percent increase in list price since launch. Boehringer Ingelheim also manufactures a top-selling asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease drug, Spiriva, which Medicare spent over $1 billion on in 2021 alone.

AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca is a UK-based multinational drug company that sells Farxiga, a diabetes, heart failure, and kidney disease drug that was selected for negotiation and has cost Medicare $3.4 billion as of 2021. AstraZeneca has made more than $17.7 billion in global revenue and has spent $33.8 million on lobbying since launching the drug. Patients in other high-income countries like Australia pay around 88 percent less, and the drug has seen a 130 percent increase in list price since launch.

Novartis. Novartis is a Swiss drug company that sells Entresto, a critical drug used to fight heart failure that was selected for negotiation and has grossed the company over $17 billion in global sales. Entresto has cost Medicare more than $4.5 billion since launch, while patients in other high-income countries like Australia pay around 62 percent less for the same drug.

Novo Nordisk. Novo Nordisk is a Danish drug company that sells Fiasp, a diabetes drug also known as NovoLog that has cost Medicare more than $24.8 billion through 2021. Meanwhile, Novo Nordisk has initiated at least $33 billion in stock buybacks while bringing in around $38.6 billion in global sales and spending more than $132 million on lobbying since launching the drug.

BONUS: Astellas Pharma was so eager to protect their profits that they preemptively filed suit in the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division and withdrew after the Biden administration announced the first ten drugs up for negotiation – a slate that did not include Xtandi, Astellas’ blockbuster drug used to treat prostate cancer.

Why The Plaintiffs’ Legal Arguments Are Wrong

The plaintiffs assert several sweeping claims, including under the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the Eighth Amendment across the lawsuits, but experts agree that these meritless arguments are merely an attempt to maintain the status quo where drug companies can protect their massive profits by charging whatever they want at the expense of patients and taxpayers.

Plaintiffs’ First Argument: First, the drug companies argue that the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment requires the federal government to pay “just compensation” if it takes “property” for public use – Merck argues that the negotiation process is akin to a ‘forced seizure.’ BMS argues that the Fifth Amendment requires the government to pay “just compensation” if it takes “property” for public use, and that obtaining drugs at what BMS characterizes as a “unilaterally dictated discount” is no different from outright seizure of a portion of a pharmaceutical company’s inventory. Relatedly, the companies argue that it is unconstitutional for a manufacturer to have to exit the Medicare and Medicaid programs for all of its products in order to avoid selling one of its products at a negotiated price.

Why The Plaintiffs Are Wrong: The Negotiation Program in no way requires drug companies to sell selected drugs to Medicare at a specified price, nor is it an “unilaterally dictated” program. First and foremost, Medicare is, and always has been, a voluntary program. Drug manufacturers – like physicians, hospitals, clinical labs, insurers, and other health care industry stakeholders – choose to participate in Medicare on a voluntary basis. If a manufacturer of a selected drug does not want to negotiate the price of a selected drug or cannot come to an agreement on a negotiated price, the manufacturer can withdraw from participation, just as they could have done at any point since the law has been debated and enacted. Setting Medicare program requirements that include negotiating the price of certain drug products is already standard in Medicare; program requirements apply broadly to other participants in the Medicare program. For example, hospitals that participate in Medicare can’t choose to deny certain services to Medicare patients because they think Medicare doesn’t pay them enough. Rather, if they participate in Medicare they must provide all offered services to Medicare beneficiaries. 

Companies do not have any kind of property right to participate in a voluntary program and dictate the prices they pay. The notion that participating in market negotiation in a voluntary program somehow violates a company’s constitutional right is nonsensical. The Act lets companies decide whether they wish to participate or not–and leaves it to companies to decide which path makes the most economic sense for them. So far, the courts have found this claim dubious. As a federal judge in Ohio’s Southern District ruled in the Chambers of Commerce case, “The law established in the Sixth Circuit and beyond is clear: participation in Medicare, no matter how vital it may be to a business model, is a completely voluntary choice…Thus, the Program’s eventual “maximum fair price” cannot be considered confiscatory because pharmaceutical manufacturers who do not wish to participate in the Program have the ability—practical or not—to opt out of Medicare entirely.” 

Simply put, drug companies want to continue the status quo of having their greed unchecked by setting their own prices for their drugs and having Medicare be required to pay those prices. For too long, the industry has been able to exert its unparalleled power and deprive Americans of affordable drugs. The only reason they did not have to negotiate sooner is that Republicans included a provision in 2003 amendments to Medicare preventing negotiation in a concession to the powerful drug industry.

Pharma Plaintiffs’ Second Argument: Second, the drug companies make a desperate attempt to distort the First Amendment by arguing that they are being forced to use language they disagree with to describe the Negotiation Program. Merck argues that they shouldn’t have to sign an “agreement” to “negotiate” a “maximum fair price” because it betrays their belief that the negotiation program is not a legitimate negotiation. Likewise, BMS argues that the negotiation process set out by the Inflation Reduction Act violates the First Amendment’s mandate that the government cannot conscript businesses to “parrot its preferred political messaging,” and plaintiffs in US Chamber of Commerce et al. also argue that the program violates the First Amendment by compelling drug companies to characterize the program as a negotiation process.

Why The Plaintiffs Are Wrong: The Negotiation Program does not force drug companies to enter into agreements against their will; participation in Medicare is completely voluntary and the plaintiffs are attempting to stretch First Amendment doctrine beyond belief. As a federal district judge ruled in the Chambers of Commerce case, “As there is no constitutional right (or requirement) to engage in business with the government, the consequences of that participation cannot be considered a constitutional violation. Because Plaintiffs are not legally compelled to participate in the Program— or in Medicare generally—they have not shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim.” PhRMA itself lost a First Amendment challenge to California’s drug pricing legislation in 2021, and the Supreme Court has previously explained that the government may attach certain conditions and language to funding and programs without violating the First Amendment, even where private actors disagree with those conditions and language. 

Plaintiffs’ Third Argument: Plaintiffs for both PhRMA et al. and US Chamber of Commerce et al. argue that the drug price negotiation program violates the Eighth Amendment’s excessive fines clause because they claim the act imposes an excise tax on companies that choose not to enter into the negotiation process by refusing to submit statutorily required information to facilitate the negotiation process.

Why The Plaintiffs Are Wrong: The Supreme Court has famously ruled that Congress has broad and far-reaching authority to tax. While the Eighth Amendment protects against “punitive” or “grossly disproportionate” taxes, the excise tax levied for refusing to comply with the Negotiation Program is neither a compulsory tax nor punitive. Drug companies can avoid the tax by complying with the Negotiation Program or simply exiting the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In fact, there are several provisions in the Tax Code that impose extremely large excise tax assessments, some even more than 100% of the amount involved.  

Plaintiffs’ Fourth Argument: The drug companies argue that the IRA gives the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) overly broad, unconstrained authority to negotiate prescription drug prices. This, they argue, “flouts bedrock principles of separation of powers and nondelegation, [and] exceeds Congress’s enumerated powers…” Additionally, by barring judicial review of some drug-price-negotiation items and allowing HHS to implement the program through guidance rather than rulemaking, they argue that the IRA provides no avenue for checking HHS’s authority.

Why The Plaintiffs Are Wrong: There is a long-standing precedent for Congress delegating authority to negotiate lower prescription drug prices. Since 1992, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been able to negotiate prescription drug prices. The VA pays approximately 54 percent less for drugs than Medicare. Congress barring judicial review or administrative rulemaking is not a novel concept; There are at least 190 instances in federal code where Congress has barred judicial review. The Medicare statute already bars judicial review of reimbursement rate payments in at least 25 instances. 

Plaintiffs’ Fifth Argument: The plaintiffs argue that the program violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause because it allows HHS to impose “confiscatory” negotiated prices without providing adequate procedural protections through “administrative and judicial review.” They characterize the negotiation program as an arbitrary price control mechanism and argue that they have a constitutionally protected right “to be free from [such] price controls.” By barring notice-and-comment rulemaking and judicial review, they argue, the IRA deprives big drug companies of “an opportunity to be heard” in determining drug prices. They argue this is a violation of their due process rights.

Why the Plaintiffs Are Wrong:

The IRA is not a price control statute. These are private companies, with enormous market power because they are the sole manufacturer of drugs that Americans depend on. The IRA merely empowers HHS to negotiate–rather than blindly accept a price dictated by a drug company–the prices Medicare pays for a limited number of specified drugs. The IRA does not set the market rate for drug prices. It establishes a mechanism by which drug manufacturers and the federal government mutually participate in a regulated market-driven process. 

Even assuming the IRA was a price control statute, as the drug manufacturers wrongly characterize it, the Constitution does not shield businesses from lawful price regulation. For doctors choosing to participate in the program, Medicare determines what doctors can be paid for services provided to patients (rates substantially lower than commercial market rates). All levels of government – federal, state, and local – have laws that affect prices in some form. These run the gamut, including areas such as real estate leases, utilities, insurance, wages, and so forth. And these laws have been upheld against constitutional challenges.

What Happens Next

  • October 13: U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s amended complaint is due in Chambers of Commerce v. Becerra.
  • September 20: Astellas filing due
  • October 16: The federal government’s cross-filings are due in Bristol Myers Squibb v. Becerra and Janssen v. Becerra
  • October 19: Merck’s reply filing is due
  • October 23: Amicus briefs are due in Bristol Myers Squibb v. Becerra and Janssen v. Becerra
  • October 27: The federal government’s renewed motion to dismiss is due in Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce v. Becerra.
  • November 10: Bristol Myers Squibb’ & Janssen’s reply filings are due
  • November 21: Merck’s reply filing is due
  • December 1: The federal government’s reply filing is due in Bristol Myers Squibb v. Becerra
  • December 6: The federal government’s summary judgment motion is due in Boehringer Ingelheim v. Becerra
  • December 8: Bristol Myers Squibb’ & Janssen’s reply filings are due
  • December 13: Amicus briefs are due in Boehringer Ingelheim v. Becerra
  • January 12: Boehringer Ingelheim’s reply filing is due
  • February 12: The federal government’s reply filing is due in Boehringer Ingelheim v. Becerra

Here’s What Legal & Health Experts Have Said About The Cases

Amici

  • Nine Nationally Recognized Health Care Experts, Including Three Former Medicare Administrators: “Ensuring Prescription Drug Price Affordability Is Essential To The Financial Stability Of The Medicare Program.” “The Amici, nationally recognized experts in healthcare, healthcare finance, and Medicare, submit this brief to explain: that ensuring prescription drug price affordability is essential to the financial stability of the Medicare program; that the authority conferred on CMS by the DPNP to negotiate drug prices for the Medicare program is consistent with the authority that Congress has given CMS to limit excessive prices of other Medicare services; that this authority is also consistent with that given to other agencies to limit drug prices in other federal government programs; and, finally, that the courts have uniformly rejected challenges to the federal authority to limit prices for drugs and services paid by federal healthcare programs.” [Merck & Co. Inc. v. Becerra et al., Amicus Curiae Brief, 9/18/23]
  • Seven Top Economists & Health Care Policy Scholars: Drug Companies Present “An Overly Simplistic And Misleading Account Of The Prescription-Drug Market.” A group of seven top health care policy scholars and economists hailing from Harvard, Yale, Johns Hopkins, Boston University, and Georgetown wrote: “This brief shows how Merck’s contention reflects an overly simplistic and misleading account of the prescription-drug market. […] [The Inflation Reduction Act] gives Medicare the authority to negotiate prices for drugs that have been on the market for at least 9-13 years. By doing so, it provides consumers a negotiating agent with enough clout to counter the pharmaceutical monopolist’s excessive prices. The law now gives consumers a negotiating agent that has enough clout to counter the pharmaceutical monopolist in establishing a price. The harm to true innovation is negligible because any drug eligible for negotiation will almost certainly have already recuperated its investment many times over. […] [C]ontrary to Merck’s contention, the Inflation Reduction Act pushes the drug market’s dynamics closer to competitive equilibrium, not further away.” [Merck & Co. Inc. v. Becerra et al., Amicus Curiae Brief, 9/18/23]
  • Protect Our Care, Public Citizen, Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, Doctors for America and Families USA: Without Negotiation, Big Drug Companies Set Prices By “To Maximize Profit.” “Merck’s theory is built on the faulty premise that the price that Merck charges absent negotiation is necessarily the “fair market” price. “Fair market value” is the price determined by a willing buyer and a willing seller. Drug companies, however, set prices for brand-name prescription drugs under monopolistic conditions. In a monopoly system where a seller has an exclusive product, the sales price—absent negotiation— is not set by the “fair market value,” but by the seller’s effort to maximize profit. Indeed, Merck charges different amounts to different buyers and in different countries. Because Merck’s Takings Clause argument claim fails to take into account the dynamics that inform pricing in the market for brand-name prescription drugs, Merck’s assertion that the price negotiated under the IRA program results in an unconstitutional taking fails.” [Merck & Co. Inc. v. Becerra et al., Amicus Curiae Brief, 9/13/23]
  • American Public Health Association and Three Top Public Health Professional Organizations: “Doctors And Their Patients Do Not Support Untrammeled Price Increases By Drug Manufacturers.” “[T]he Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) Drug Price Negotiation Program…is vital to maintaining and strengthening patient care and the Medicare program. Contrary to what drug companies have argued, doctors and their patients do not support untrammeled price increases by drug manufacturers.” [Merck & Co. Inc. v. Becerra et al., Amicus Curiae Brief, 9/18/23]
  • AARP and the AARP Foundation: “Many Older People Simply Do Not Have The Resources To Pay For Exorbitant And Escalating Drug Prices.” “Ever-escalating drug prices have hit older people particularly hard, forcing millions of them to make devastating decisions because they cannot afford the medication they need. More than 50 million people are enrolled in Medicare Part D, the federal government’s voluntary prescription drug benefit program for Medicare beneficiaries. On average, they take between four and five prescriptions per month and have a median annual income of just under $30,000. The vast majority have chronic conditions that require lifelong treatment. Many older people simply do not have the resources to pay for exorbitant and escalating drug prices. As a result, they are forced to choose between paying for their prescribed medication or paying for basic life essentials such as food, housing, or heat. Some older people skip doses, split doses, or forego filling their prescriptions altogether to make ends meet. Others sell everything they own and drain their resources because the price of their medication is beyond their reach.” [Merck & Co. Inc. v. Becerra et al., Amicus Curiae Brief, 9/18/23]
  • Fourteen U.S. Senators: Big Drug Companies Are Working “To Accomplish Through Judicial Action What It Could Not Through The Legislative Process.” A group of fourteen U.S. Senators – including Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Peter Welch (D-VT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Catherine Cortez-Masto (D-NV), Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), John Fetterman (D-PA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – wrote, “Merck and its allies in the pharmaceutical industry tried to prevent this legislative result. Merck now attempts to accomplish through judicial action what it could not through the legislative process. […] As a matter of constitutional law, that position is baseless, as the government’s opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment ably explain. […] Congress improves laws all the time, and it has the right and indeed the duty to do so. The Program takes nothing from Merck: not its drugs and not its patents. And the Program likewise does not coerce Merck to do or say anything: like every other market participant, it may sell its products at a price the buyer thinks is fair, or it may not.” [Merck & Co. Inc. v. Becerra et al., Amicus Curiae Brief, 9/19/23]

Legal Experts

  • Suhasini Ravi, ​​Zachary Baron and Andrew Twinamatsiko, researchers at the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at the Georgetown University Law Center: “[T[he stakes of these lawsuits are considerable. The outcome of these cases will likely substantially affect prescription-drug accessibility and affordability. The pharmaceutical industry’s attempts to prevent the implementation of the negotiation program could fundamentally reshape the government’s authority to manage the Medicare program and would impede decades-long advocacy and legislative efforts to curb ever-increasing prescription drug prices.” [Health Affairs, “Amicus Briefs In Merck Lawsuit Defend Constitutionality Of Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program,” 9/29/23]
  • Nicholas Bagley, Professor at the University of Michigan School of Law: “Merck doesn’t have a constitutional right to sell its drugs to the government at the price that it sets. That’d be nuts. […] both of these claims look very, very weak. […] That’s not an unconstitutional condition. That’s just bargaining.” [X (Thread), 6/6/23]
  • Zachary Baron and Andrew Twinamatsiko, associate directors of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at the Georgetown University Law Center: “That lawsuits are ultimately brought says nothing about any actual legal infirmity with the IRA or the Medicare Drug Negotiation program. In fact, as discussed briefly below, a number of the potential claims that the pharma industry and their allies may pursue largely track other unsuccessful industry challenges and would likely face substantial legal headwinds. If successful, such lawsuits would have broader implications beyond just Medicare or prescription drugs. Rather, the success of these challenges could result in new legal doctrines that would severely restrict federal regulatory authority in the health care arena.” [Health Affairs Forefront, 6/7/23]
  • Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute: “Is this actual coercion? Is it a takings in violation of the Fifth Amendment, as Merck alleges? No. Merck is rent-seeking—and hoping its use of the right shibboleths will trick conservative and libertarian legal scholars into rallying to the company’s cause. […] In case we needed more evidence that Merck is just rent-seeking—that is, attempting to gouge taxpayers—the company describes the prices it currently receives from Medicare as reflecting ‘fair market value’ and Medicare’s current drug‐​pricing rules as ‘a free‐​market approach based on market‐​driven prices.’ Troy describes what Medicare pays as a ‘market price.’” [The Cato Institute, 6/9/23]
  • Robin Feldman, professor of intellectual property and health law at the University of California College of the Law in San Francisco: “Applying the takings clause to patents would be like the shot heard round the world — it would be an extraordinary shift and the companies will have a heavy lift to convince the courts that those words apply to patents.” [CNBC, 6/20/23]

Physicians and Health Care Experts

  • Erik Gordon, Clinical Professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business: “[There are] better odds that Elizabeth Holmes wins Medtech Innovator of the Year than that Merck wins its lawsuit.” [STAT, 6/6/23]
  • Ameet Sarpatwari, Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School: “What Merck argues is ‘coercion’ is actually the establishment of a freer, more rational marketplace [that will address a crucial root cause of high drug prices].” [New York Times, 6/6/23]
  • Jonathan Reiner, Professor Of Medicine & Surgery at the George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Services: “Merck made $14.5 billion in profits last year.” [Twitter, 6/7/23]

Health Care Organizations and Advocates

  • Larry Levitt, Executive Vice President for Health Policy at KFF: “While the drug companies that make the 10 drugs subject to negotiation are expected to start engaging with the government, the industry is publicly attacking the program and has filed a slew of lawsuits to block the government from carrying it out. […] [A]s the cases now wind their way through the lower courts, the pharmaceutical industry may not win in the court of public opinion. According to KFF polling, 81 percent of the American public favors negotiation of drug prices in Medicare, with support spanning the political spectrum, so it’s no surprise that Democrats see this as a winning political issue in the 2024 election. […] The more the pharmaceutical industry does to attack drug price negotiation, the more the public will become aware of the most noteworthy health reform initiative since passage of the Affordable Care Act more than a decade ago.” [The New York Times (Opinion), 9/6/23]
  • Richard Fiesta, Executive Director of the Alliance for Retired Americans: “Merck’s ridiculous lawsuit is the equivalent of a toddler throwing a temper tantrum. Americans pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs and too many seniors must choose between putting food on the table and paying for their medicine. That is because corporations like Merck have been allowed to charge taxpayers whatever they want for their drugs.” [The Alliance for Retired Americans Press Release, 6/6/23]
  • Emily Gee, senior vice president for Inclusive Growth at the Center for American Progress: “This lawsuit is an insult to millions of patients in America who have been forced to ration their medications or forgo prescriptions altogether because of Big Pharma’s greed. For decades, Big Pharma has exploited its monopoly power to rip off hardworking Americans by charging prices in the United States that no other country in the world will agree to pay for the exact same drugs. President Joe Biden’s targeted law to lower drug prices puts an end to the most egregious excesses in the pharma industry; incentivizes drugmakers to actually invest in innovative therapies; and will lower drug prices for millions of seniors with cancer and diabetes, among other common conditions. The courts should reject this and similar lawsuits that appear to be nothing more than a ransom note for millions of Americans who need access to lifesaving medications they otherwise cannot afford.” [Center for American Progress, 6/21/23]
  • Margarida Jorge, Head of Lower Drug Prices Now: “This is nothing but a political stunt motivated by the same shameless greed that we’re used to seeing from drug corporations that have made decades of inflated profits at the expense of patients’ health and taxpayers’ hard-earned money. […] It’s time for big drug corporations like Merck to give up their monopoly control over prices and negotiate fair prices for the medicines we need.” [Lower Drug Prices Now Press Release, 6/6/23]
  • David Mitchell, Founder of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now: “Merck’s bogus lawsuit bemoans Medicare’s negotiation authority as ‘tantamount to extortion’ – but the truth is, Big Pharma companies like Merck are the ones who have been extorting patients for years, forcing them to pay unjustified prices or sacrifice their health. […] We believe that courts will see Merck’s lawsuit for what it is: a meritless attempt to maintain its ability to unilaterally set prices that are untethered to quality at the expense of patients. The truth is, implementation of Medicare negotiation is a desperately needed, long-awaited rebalancing of our drug price system that will help millions of patients obtain the medications they need at prices they can afford while ensuring continued innovation.” [Patients For Affordable Drugs Now Press Release, 6/6/23]
  • Tricia Neuman, Senior Vice President at the Kaiser Family Foundation: “It’s no surprise that drug companies have been gearing up to challenge #Medicare price negotiations in the courts, but a little surprising to see a lawsuit before CMS announces the names of the 10 drugs included on the list.” [Twitter, 6/6/23]
  • Max Richtman, President & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare: “Merck’s decision to sue the federal government today demonstrates that there is no bottom to Big Pharma’s greed and the corporate culture of putting profits before people. With its lawsuit, Merck has made it clear that one of the nation’s most profitable drugmakers wants seniors to continue paying sky-high prices for their vital medications. (Merck made $14.5 billion in profits last year.) […] Merck’s constitutional arguments are spurious at best; the Veterans Administration has been successfully negotiating prices with Big Pharma for years. Drugmakers can still remain profitable while abiding by the Inflation Reduction Act, which was a long-awaited and landmark piece of legislation to protect seniors from industry price gouging.” [National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare Press Release, 6/6/23]
  • Bill Sweeney, Senior Vice President at AARP: “Seniors and taxpayers are tired of being the piggy bank for the profits of big drug companies. Lawsuits like this are simply an attempt to keep high profits by gouging America’s seniors.” [CNBC, 6/6/23]
  • Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen: “Merck is claiming the U.S. Constitution requires the U.S. government and people to be suckers. That’s not true. This lawsuit is a desperate attempt by the industry to beat back popular legislation that would curtail Big Pharma’s ability to price gouge Medicare and secure monopoly profits. Full stop. While Big Pharma’s litigation gambit plays out, it is critical that the federal government continue its preparation for price negotiations. Delay in the commencement of long-overdue negotiations will result in billions of dollars in excess costs for taxpayers and consumers” [Public Citizen Press Release, 6/6/23]

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Disastrous Ruling to Restrict Abortion Access and Throw the Entire Drug Approval Process into Chaos

Washington, DC — Today, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled to sharply restrict mifepristone access nationwide. Not only does the case threaten safe and legal abortion access, but it lays the groundwork for any judge to be able to overrule the evidence-based and scientific FDA medication approval process. The draconian restrictions won’t take effect until the Supreme Court weighs in, but if it stands, millions of patients will suffer. The ruling will be most detrimental for women of color, people living in rural areas, and poorer Americans who face the steepest barriers to accessing care. 

Watch Protect Our Care’s event with legal and public health experts discussing the dangers of Judge Kacsmaryk’s radical ruling in the Fifth Circuit from last spring here. In response, Protect Our Care Chair Leslie Dach issued the following statement: 

“This case remains a grave threat — not only to women’s health care but the entire U.S. drug approval process. Safe, effective medications could be ripped away by politically motivated lawsuits. The consequences of this ruling cannot be overstated, and millions of people will suffer unless this decision is reversed by the Supreme Court. Now all eyes are on the Supreme Court to put ideology aside and follow the law by overturning the Fifth Circuit’s erroneous and dangerous ruling.”

WATCH: Patients and Lawmakers Share What Inflation Reduction Act Means to Them on One Year Anniversary

One year ago today, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law, driving down health care and prescription drug costs for seniors and families nationwide. Protect Our Care’s “Lower Costs, Better Care” Bus Tour is underway now with patients sharing their stories across the country. For patients like Deborah, these provisions are a game-changer. Millions of people are already benefiting from the Inflation Reduction Act’s widespread savings, and the Biden administration is working tirelessly to implement the Medicare negotiation program to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors.

Watch Deborah’s Story Here.

Between lowering premium costs for families by $2,400 on average, capping insulin costs and providing free vaccines for seniors, and stopping drug companies’ egregious price hikes, the Inflation Reduction Act is already delivering relief to the American people. Soon, the law will limit the annual out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors to $2,000 and give Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices. By passing this historic legislation, Democrats like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Representative Susie Lee (D-NV) took on Big Pharma and won, giving people across the country peace of mind knowing they can afford the lifesaving care they need.

Watch Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Here.

 

Watch Rep. Susie Lee Here. 

Protect Our Care is continuing its nationwide bus tour, traveling nearly 8,000 miles with more than 30 stops for events with lawmakers, patient storytellers, and health care advocates. Follow along for more patient stories on social media and learn more about the bus tour here

One Year In, The Inflation Reduction Act is Lowering Health Care Costs for Families Across America

Washington D.C. – One year ago tomorrow, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law, driving down health care and prescription drug costs for seniors and families nationwide. Between lowering premium costs for families by $2,400 on average, capping insulin costs and providing free vaccines for seniors, and stopping drug companies’ egregious price hikes, the new legislation is already working for the American people. Soon, the law will limit the annual out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors to $2,000 and give Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices. 

While President Biden and Congressional Democrats fought tirelessly to pass the Inflation Reduction Act and provide relief to families across the country, every Republican in the House and Senate voted against it. The GOP gave into big drug companies’ one hundred million dollar lobbying campaign, turning their backs on the American people despite the law’s overwhelmingly popular health care measures. 

Millions of people are already benefiting from the Inflation Reduction Act’s widespread savings, and the Biden administration is working tirelessly to implement the Medicare negotiation program. Yet drug companies are pumping millions more into efforts to stop the implementation of the law, and they are going to court to challenge its core provisions. Republicans are also introducing legislation to repeal the law’s landmark prescription drug provisions.

To mark the anniversary, Protect Our Care Chair Leslie Dach issued the following statement:

“Last year, the lives of millions of seniors and families changed forever when President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law. By passing this historic legislation, Democrats took on Big Pharma and won to finally give people across the country peace of mind knowing they can afford the lifesaving care they need. The Inflation Reduction Act is already allowing families to sleep easier at night knowing they can go to the doctor without worrying about how they’re going to put food on the table or pay rent. Seniors can get necessary vaccines for free and insulin at a reasonable cost. Critically, Medicare will soon be able to negotiate for lower drug prices — a long-fought battle to help seniors and taxpayers alike. We must continue to work as President Biden and Democrats are only paving the way for more victories in the fight to make health care a right for every American.”

BACKGROUND:

The Inflation Reduction Act Turns One: Millions of Americans Are Saving On Health Care, With More To Come

One year ago, the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress made historic reforms to lower health care costs by passing the Inflation Reduction Act. The landmark law lowered the price of prescription drugs by giving Medicare the power to negotiate, capped the monthly price of insulin, and limited annual out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors. The Inflation Reduction Act also lowered the cost of health insurance premiums for millions of people who buy health insurance on their own. 

Polling shows that the health care measures in the Inflation Reduction Act are overwhelmingly popular among Americans, with over 80 percent of Americans supporting the provision that allowed Medicare to negotiate drug prices.

Americans from all backgrounds are benefitting from this bill. Between lowering premium costs by an average of $508 per month, capping insulin costs, and stopping Big Pharma’s egregious price hikes, the new legislation is already working for the American people. Soon, seniors’ drug costs will be capped at $2,000 annually, and Medicare will finally be able to negotiate lower drug prices. All of these provisions help seniors as well as people of color, rural populations, people with disabilities, and the LGBTQI+ community who have faced greater levels of poverty and worse health outcomes due to racism, discrimination, and other systemic barriers.

WHO BENEFITTED:

  • 1.5 million Americans on Medicare who use insulin are now charged no more than $35 per month for an insulin prescription.
  • 12.5 million Americans are saving an average of $508 on monthly health insurance premiums. 
  • 50.5 million of America’s seniors are able to receive the shingles vaccination and other recommended vaccinations free of cost.
  • Seniors on Medicare will be protected from drug company price hikes thanks to increased inflation rebates.

WHAT’S STILL TO COME:

  • By September 1, Medicare will announce the first 10 drugs that will have negotiated prices under the drug price negotiation program for prices effective in 2026. 
  • On October 1, Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries will have access to recommended vaccinations free of cost.
  • In 2024, 400,000 low-income seniors will receive more help affording prescription drugs through the Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy Program.
  • In 2024, seniors with the highest brand-name drug costs will see relief because their coinsurance is phased out, effectively capping their out-of-pocket costs at $3,250 for the year.
  • In 2025, out-of-pocket costs in Medicare Part D will be capped at $2,000, saving nearly 19 million Americans an average of $400 each year. 

THE TIMELINE:

2023 – Ends Outrageous Price Increases. The Inflation Reduction Act stopped Big Pharma from raising Medicare drug prices faster than the rate of inflation starting at the beginning of 2023. For example, Humira, a medication commonly used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, is one of the nation’s highest revenue-generating drugs, raking in $21 billion in sales in 2019. AbbVie, Humira’s manufacturer, has hiked the price of Humira 27 times, including in January 2021 when it raised its cost by 7.4 percent. Over the past 20 years, price increases for brand-name drugs in Medicare Part D have risen at more than twice the rate of inflation.

2023 – Insulin Capped At $35 For Seniors. The Inflation Reduction Act caps monthly insulin costs at $35 for Medicare beneficiaries, which helps 1.5 million Medicare enrollees who rely on insulin. Before this measure, on average, seniors with Medicare Part D or B who are not receiving subsidies pay an average of $572 every year for this life-saving medication — an unthinkable sum for many on fixed incomes. Patients who suffer chronic complications can expect to pay upwards of an additional $650 per year. Taking insulin as prescribed reduces the likelihood of costly complications such as vision loss, heart disease, and kidney disease. Republicans in Congress blocked this measure from being a universal insulin cap to help millions more Americans.

2023 – Health Insurance Premiums Lowered For Over 16 Million Americans. A record-breaking 16.4 million Americans enrolled in an ACA marketplace plan in 2023. Right now, 14.8 million, or 90 percent with an ACA plan, are receiving enhanced premium tax credits, making their coverage affordable and accessible. The Inflation Reduction Act saves an average middle-class family of four $6,604 on their yearly premiums.

  • Coverage for Communities of Color Expanded To Address Health Care Equity. The Center on Budget Policy and Priorities estimates the increased savings continued under the Inflation Reduction Act will cause a sharp decline in the uninsured rate across every racial group. The extended premium savings provided in the Inflation Reduction Act have made more than 65 percent of uninsured Black adults eligible for zero-dollar premium plans and 75 percent eligible for plans less than $50 a month. For uninsured Hispanic and Latino adults, now more than 68 percent are eligible for zero-dollar premium plans and nearly 80 percent can access plans for less than $50 a month. Health coverage access is imperative to reducing racial disparities in health coverage across the nation. 
  • Premiums For Low-Wage Workers Eliminated. The Inflation Reduction Act ensures no Americans with incomes at or below 150 percent of the federal poverty level buying their coverage on the Marketplace pay a premium.
  • Costs For Rural America Cut. Thanks to the provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act, roughly 65 percent of rural Americans have access to zero-dollar premium health coverage and more than 76 percent are able to find a plan for less than $50 a month, narrowing the coverage differences between rural and urban America.

2023 – 50.5 Million Americans Can Receive Free Shingles Vaccinations. Thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, 50.5 million seniors are eligible for no-cost shingles vaccinations. In 2020, nearly 4 million Medicare beneficiaries received the two-part shingles vaccination. With a single shot of Shingrix costing $212, seniors on Medicare Part D are saving over $400 on average on vaccinations in 2023. The high out-of-pocket cost of the shingles vaccine has been a key factor in low vaccination rates, especially among Black and Latino communities. This extends an important affordable preventive service to seniors on Medicare; Americans with private insurance can typically receive shingles vaccinations at no cost.

2023 – Better Coverage of Vaccinations For Medicaid Recipients Benefit Over 94 Million Americans. The Inflation Reduction Act also requires state Medicaid and CHIP programs to cover vaccines recommended by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices without out-of-pocket costs. This will allow an estimated 4 million adults to gain access to no-cost shingles vaccines. More accessible vaccinations will particularly help low-income families who rely on Medicaid, many of whom are people of color and people with disabilities. 

2023 – Low-Income Seniors Will Receive Inflation Rebates For Drug Prices That Rise Faster Than The Rate Of Inflation. Seniors on Medicare are experiencing drug cost savings due to the inflation rebate drug manufacturers are required to pay the federal government if their drug prices rise faster than the rate of inflation. An analysis by KFF showed that half of all drugs covered by Medicare had list price increases exceeding the rate of inflation in 2020.

2023 – Medicare Will Announce First 10 Drugs That Will Be Negotiated. The Biden administration is implementing the Medicare drug price negotiation program that is supported by over 80 percent of Americans — the most popular provision in the entire Inflation Reduction Act. This fall, the first 10 drugs that will be negotiated will be announced, and the first round of negotiations will occur during 2023 and 2024. The prices that are negotiated will be effective starting in 2026. 

2025 – The Inflation Reduction Act Will Save Seniors On Medicare Nearly $400 Annually On Prescription Drugs. The Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act will save Americans an average of $396 thanks to the $2,000 annual cost cap, which begins in 2025. To help seniors with the highest drug costs starting in 2024, over 38 million Americans will save an average of $462 because they will no longer have to pay a 5% coinsurance when they reach the catastrophic phase of the Part D benefit.

One Year Later: Latest Polling Confirms Voters Believe Lowering Prescription Drug and Health Care Costs Most Powerful Part of Inflation Reduction Act

August 16 marks the one-year anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act, and there is so much to celebrate. Between lowering premium costs for families by $2,400 on average, capping insulin costs, and stopping drug companies’ egregious price hikes, the new legislation is already working for the American people. Soon, seniors’ drug costs will be capped at $2,000 annually, and Medicare will finally be able to negotiate lower drug prices.

It is increasingly clear how deeply the public supports the Inflation Reduction Act — and especially its health care elements. Polling continues to show that the Inflation Reduction Act’s health care provisions are the most supported measures in the entire bill, driving the law’s overall popularity across parties. Over 80 percent of voters support the Inflation Reduction Act’s prescription drug negotiation program. At the same time, voters overwhelmingly reject the GOP war on health care, including Republicans’ plan to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act’s prescription drug pricing measures. 

The Inflation Reduction Act comes as Americans are still struggling to afford their medications. According to a July 2023 KFF poll, nearly 30 percent of adults have reported difficulty affording prescription drugs, with another three in ten adults reporting not taking their medicine as prescribed in the past year due to the cost. Lower-income adults are more likely than those with higher household incomes to report experiencing these cost-related prescription drug issues. Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act decrease the cost of prescription drugs and put the power back in the hands of Americans.

NAVIGATOR

Voters Overwhelmingly Support The Inflation Reduction Act’s Measures To Reduce Prescription Drug And Health Care Costs. According to a new Navigator poll, health care provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act are 4 of the 5 most popular items in the landmark bill. An overwhelming 82 percent of voters support capping insulin costs for seniors to $35 per prescription a month, 81 percent support giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices, 77 percent support capping drug costs at $2,000, and 76 percent support lowering health insurance premiums. Overall, Americans support the Inflation Reduction Act by 43 points (66-23). 

Many of the reforms that have the most public support are also the ones the public is most likely to associate with the Inflation Reduction Act, including Medicare negotiating lower drug prices (81%), capping insulin (79%), and limiting drug costs (73%).

The survey shows that Republicans overwhelmingly support the prescription drug provisions passed by President Biden and Congressional Democrats. Despite Republican lawmakers introducing legislation to repeal these policies, 71% of Republicans support Medicare drug price negotiation and 70% support capping out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors at $2,000 per year. 

When asked if the Inflation Reduction Act will help families like theirs, a majority of voters (52%) said yes it would.

This poll not only shows policies that lower health care costs are the most popular, but people also identify the Inflation Reduction Act as a health care bill.

PUBLIC POLICY POLLING

Majority of Republicans Oppose Repealing The Inflation Reduction Act’s Health Care Provisions. A new PPP poll on behalf of Protect Our Care shows that 52 percent of Americans believe Republicans are waging a war on health care. Regardless of party affiliation, people overwhelmingly support health care measures of the Inflation Reduction Act and do not want them repealed. Even Republican voters largely oppose repealing health care provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, including Medicare’s new power to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs (61%) and free access to vaccines like the shingles vaccine for seniors (57%). Other key findings:

  • 74% oppose taking away free access to vaccines like the shingles vaccine for seniors, including 80% of Independents, 57% of Republicans, and 80% of seniors over the age of 65. Only 17% overall support it.
  • 75% oppose taking away Medicare’s new power to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, including 82% of Independents, 61% of Republicans, and 78% of seniors over the age of 65. Just 17% overall support it.
  • 73% oppose taking away the $35 per month cap on the price of insulin for seniors. This includes 84% of Independents, 57% of Republicans, and 77% of seniors over the age of 65. Only 16% overall support it.
  • 60% oppose eliminating the $2,000 annual out-of-pocket limit on how much seniors have to pay for prescription drugs, including 63% of Independents and 58% of seniors over the age of 65. Only 27% overall support it.

KFF

A Majority of Americans Don’t Trust Pharmaceutical Companies to Price Their Drugs Fairly. According to a July 2023 KFF poll, most adults, including majorities across partisans, cite profits made by pharmaceutical companies as a “major factor” contributing to the price of prescription drugs. Adults are least trusting when it comes to drug pricing, with one in five (22%) saying they trust drug companies “a lot” or “somewhat” to price their products fairly. Key findings:

  • 78% of people don’t trust drug companies to “price their products fairly” (including 39% who trust “not too much” and 39% who trust “not at all”).
  • People see drug company profits as the driver for high drug costs. 83% of people say “profits made by pharmaceutical companies” are a “major factor” contributing to the price of prescription drugs – far more than 54% say the cost of research and development, and 45% say the cost of marketing. This extends to Democrats (84%), Independents (78%), and Republicans (89%).
  • 73% say on regulation there is “not as much as there should be” to limit the price of prescription drugs. Only 14% say there is “too much regulation.”
  • Nearly 30 percent of adults have reported difficulty affording prescription drugs, with another three in ten adults reporting not taking their medicine as prescribed in the past year due to the cost.

DOJ, Health Care Groups File Briefs to Stop Big Drug Companies’ Efforts To Derail the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program

Protect Our Care Joins Public Citizen and Leading Health Care Advocates to Protect Medicare’s Power to Negotiate Lower Drug Prices

With Medicare slated to begin negotiating lower prescription drug prices with big drug companies in the coming weeks, drug companies and their mega lobbying group allies are desperately suing the federal government in an effort to protect their profits by halting the popular program. In one lawsuit, a group of national, state, and regional Chambers of Commerce has moved for a preliminary injunction and asked the court for a decision on their case by October. In response, the U.S. Department of Justice and leading health care groups filed briefs to deny the preliminary injunction and protect the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Read more about the cases here

These meritless lawsuits are about one thing: protecting drug companies’ outrageous profits. According to STAT, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent nearly $30 million in lobbying efforts in 2021. While they rake in billions, U.S. drug prices are up to four times higher than prices in other high-income countries, leading patients in America to cut pills and skip doses to make ends meet. 

Medicare drug price negotiation is projected to lower costs for seniors and save taxpayers by tens of billions of dollars, but big drug companies are eager to protect their outrageous prices and outsized profits. Drug companies that manufacture drugs likely to be eligible for negotiation have a history of exploiting the patent system to protect their monopolies and keep competitor drugs off the market, spend millions on lobbying, and increase their list prices at rates that far exceed inflation.

Here are excerpts from the DOJ and Health Care Advocate Briefs:

Protect Our Care, Public Citizen, and Others Filed an Amicus Brief In Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction: A Preliminary Injunction Goes Against the Public Interest & Would Enjoin the Negotiation Process at the Expense of Seniors. “In short, high prices make access difficult for many, harming their finances, their health, and their ability to enjoy life. A preliminary injunction would extend these concrete, irreparable harms by severely disrupting the statutory timetable and process for achieving lower prices, and thus create a substantial risk that Congress’s 2026 deadline for implementation of the program will not be met. In marked contrast, because manufacturers of drugs selected for negotiation in the first year of the program do not have to make drugs available at the negotiated price until 2026, plaintiffs’ claim could be remedied after final judgment, if plaintiffs were to prevail, without risk of irreparable harm. The equities and the public interest thus strongly favor allowing the drug price negotiation program to move forward while plaintiffs’ lawsuit is pending.” [Protect Our Care, Public Citizen et al. Brief, 8/14/23]

Federal Government’s Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion: “Derailing the [Medicare Negotiation Program] Would Inflict Grave Harm to the Government, Medicare Beneficiaries, and the American Taxpayer.” Writing in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction halting the drug negotiation program in Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce et al. v. Becerra et al., the federal government wrote: “Not surprisingly, drug manufacturers lobbied hard against legislative efforts to seat the Secretary at the negotiating table. And now that their lobbying failed, manufacturers and interest groups have run to court, filing multiple suits around the country challenging the statute on its face. […] Just as a defense contractor could not build an aircraft carrier and force an unwilling Pentagon to buy it (at any price), so too manufacturers cannot force their drugs onto the government at unilaterally dictated rates. […] At bottom, Plaintiffs’ objection to the Negotiation Program is little more than ‘a dispute with the policy choices’ made by Congress, masquerading as constitutional theory. […] After years of effort, Congress has finally enacted a law that builds on time-tested models to reduce costs and put Medicare on a path toward fiscal sustainability. Derailing that program before it starts would inflict grave harm to the government, Medicare beneficiaries, and the American taxpayer.” [Opposition to Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce et al. v. Becerra et al., 8/11/23]

Federal Government’s Motion To Dismiss: The Chambers Of Commerce Want to Halt Medicare’s Ability to Negotiate a Better Deal For Patients and the American Taxpayer. “[T]he U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its affiliates are, by some metrics, the largest lobbying enterprise in the United States; they filed this lawsuit to achieve through the courts what they tried and failed to achieve through the legislative process. Plaintiffs seek a court order that would nullify key provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), in which Congress authorized Medicare to try and negotiate a better deal for patients and the American taxpayer on some of the pharmaceutical industry’s most lucrative drugs. […] Structuring their business to depend on government dollars does not vest manufacturers with a constitutional right to taxpayer funds. […] To the extent that AbbVie will ever suffer any financial injury, it would not be until 2026, when any new prices would take effect. And actual price negotiations are necessary for the Court to evaluate whether, for example, the (mostly unidentified) manufacturers that Plaintiffs purport to represent really will face “prices so low as to deprive [them] of their property without due process of law,” […] which requires knowing, most obviously, what those prices will be.” [Motion to Dismiss in Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce et al. v. Becerra et al., 8/11/23]