It’s not every day you see GOP senators joining hands with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the independent lawmaker from Vermont known for his strong socialist leanings. But in the Senate, an odd unity has formed between some Republicans and Sanders over a controversial drug pricing bill aimed at regulating Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs).
The bill, spearheaded by Sanders, wants to tighten the rules on PBMs, middlemen responsible for negotiating drug prices and health benefits. It’s all under the banner of providing “transparency,” a term with bipartisan appeal. “Patients and employers are overpaying for prescription drugs, which, by the way, also costs taxpayers money. The PBM Reform Act provides this transparency,” says Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), a bill co-sponsor.
— Mary Lou Masters (@MaryLouMasters) September 14, 2023
However, not everyone in the GOP camp shares the same enthusiasm. Organizations like the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW), a conservative watchdog, are pushing back hard. They’ve even launched a multimillion-dollar campaign targeting Republicans who support the bill. Tom Schartz, CCAGW President, asserts, “We’re not sure why any Republican would support anything Bernie Sanders touts relating to health care.”
The core of the rift lies in how Republicans perceive government involvement in the healthcare sector. Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mitt Romney (R-UT) have opposed the bill, echoing that more regulations could lead to more significant inefficiencies. Paul noted, “Instead of lowering drug prices, this bill likely will put more money in the pockets of the big pharma CEOs.”
What makes PBMs an interesting battlefield is their crucial role in the healthcare supply chain, as highlighted in an op-ed by Sens. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). They wrote that PBMs link “pharmaceutical companies that manufacture prescription drugs, health insurers that cover them, pharmacies that sell them, and patients who rely on them.” However, their consolidation of power over the years and opaque fee structures have raised questions about their contribution to escalating healthcare costs.
While it’s not surprising that Sanders would seek to regulate PBMs, the split among Republicans does raise an eyebrow. The broader question is: Should Republicans compromise their market-driven ethos to achieve short-term reductions in drug prices?
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), another co-sponsor, answers in the affirmative. His office says, “This bipartisan bill will demand transparency from a healthcare industry player that is pocketing massive amounts of money that should be utilized to lower the cost of drugs for Kansans.”
Yet, this debate signifies more than just the future of PBMs or drug pricing; it exposes a fault line within the GOP. In a climate where every issue risks becoming hyper-politicized, Sanders’ bill offers a litmus test for Republicans. Will they move closer to bipartisan compromise at the expense of foundational conservative principles, or will they hold the line against what some see as unwarranted government intrusion?
As the Senate grapples with this legislative tangle, the nation watches closely, fully aware that the eventual outcome will have lasting implications for healthcare costs and the soul of the Republican Party.