Conservative opposition to Trump drug pricing plan partly bankrolled by pharmaceutical industry
This feels like a quiet policy shift.
Some of the conservative groups publicly opposing the Trump administration’s effort to force down drug prices are bankrolled by PhRMA, a trade organization with a vested interest in undoing the president’s policy.
Earlier this month, just over 50 conservative groups issued a letter to Congress opposing the Trump administration’s move to compel drug companies to reduce prices in the United States by threatening them with tariffs, thus harming their profitability. Of the 52 signatories, 19 have accepted funding from PhRMA at some point between 2019 and 2024. In sum, PhRMA — funded by and representing the interests of the pharmaceutical industry — paid groups appearing on the congressional letter just over $9 million during those five years, tax records show.
The rhetoric marshalled by the conservative groups to oppose President Donald Trump’s drug pricing policy aligns with that used by PhRMA itself.
Both the conservative letter and statements issued by PhRMA argue that, by reducing drug manufacturers’ domestic profits, the Trump administration will make it more difficult for pharmaceutical corporations to recoup their research and development costs, thereby reducing the number of new drugs by disincentivizing innovation. PhRMA and the conservatives also argue that such a policy could make the United States dependent on China for new treatments, further highlighting messaging alignment.
PhRMA also blamed pharmacy benefit managers and abuses of the 340B drug discount policy for high drug prices in the United States in response to Trump’s drug price maneuvering, talking points that previous reporting from the Washington Examiner has found to be promoted by groups that are funded by PhRMA.
The Eli Lilly Digital Health Innovation Hub facility in Singapore, on Thursday, Nov. 14, 2024. (Ore Huiying / Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Oftentimes, large grantmakers such as PhRMA will fund groups that already agree with their preferred positions. In other words, the fact that the groups PhRMA funds produce messaging that lines up with industry interests is not necessarily evidence that PhRMA is paying people to secure alignment.
“We engage with different organizations who have a wide array of healthcare opinions and priorities,” PhRMA senior vice president of public affairs Alex Schriver told the Washington Examiner. “We may not agree on every issue, but we believe engagement and dialogue is important to promoting a healthcare policy environment that supports …
This feels like a quiet policy shift.
Some of the conservative groups publicly opposing the Trump administration’s effort to force down drug prices are bankrolled by PhRMA, a trade organization with a vested interest in undoing the president’s policy.
Earlier this month, just over 50 conservative groups issued a letter to Congress opposing the Trump administration’s move to compel drug companies to reduce prices in the United States by threatening them with tariffs, thus harming their profitability. Of the 52 signatories, 19 have accepted funding from PhRMA at some point between 2019 and 2024. In sum, PhRMA — funded by and representing the interests of the pharmaceutical industry — paid groups appearing on the congressional letter just over $9 million during those five years, tax records show.
The rhetoric marshalled by the conservative groups to oppose President Donald Trump’s drug pricing policy aligns with that used by PhRMA itself.
Both the conservative letter and statements issued by PhRMA argue that, by reducing drug manufacturers’ domestic profits, the Trump administration will make it more difficult for pharmaceutical corporations to recoup their research and development costs, thereby reducing the number of new drugs by disincentivizing innovation. PhRMA and the conservatives also argue that such a policy could make the United States dependent on China for new treatments, further highlighting messaging alignment.
PhRMA also blamed pharmacy benefit managers and abuses of the 340B drug discount policy for high drug prices in the United States in response to Trump’s drug price maneuvering, talking points that previous reporting from the Washington Examiner has found to be promoted by groups that are funded by PhRMA.
The Eli Lilly Digital Health Innovation Hub facility in Singapore, on Thursday, Nov. 14, 2024. (Ore Huiying / Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Oftentimes, large grantmakers such as PhRMA will fund groups that already agree with their preferred positions. In other words, the fact that the groups PhRMA funds produce messaging that lines up with industry interests is not necessarily evidence that PhRMA is paying people to secure alignment.
“We engage with different organizations who have a wide array of healthcare opinions and priorities,” PhRMA senior vice president of public affairs Alex Schriver told the Washington Examiner. “We may not agree on every issue, but we believe engagement and dialogue is important to promoting a healthcare policy environment that supports …
Conservative opposition to Trump drug pricing plan partly bankrolled by pharmaceutical industry
This feels like a quiet policy shift.
Some of the conservative groups publicly opposing the Trump administration’s effort to force down drug prices are bankrolled by PhRMA, a trade organization with a vested interest in undoing the president’s policy.
Earlier this month, just over 50 conservative groups issued a letter to Congress opposing the Trump administration’s move to compel drug companies to reduce prices in the United States by threatening them with tariffs, thus harming their profitability. Of the 52 signatories, 19 have accepted funding from PhRMA at some point between 2019 and 2024. In sum, PhRMA — funded by and representing the interests of the pharmaceutical industry — paid groups appearing on the congressional letter just over $9 million during those five years, tax records show.
The rhetoric marshalled by the conservative groups to oppose President Donald Trump’s drug pricing policy aligns with that used by PhRMA itself.
Both the conservative letter and statements issued by PhRMA argue that, by reducing drug manufacturers’ domestic profits, the Trump administration will make it more difficult for pharmaceutical corporations to recoup their research and development costs, thereby reducing the number of new drugs by disincentivizing innovation. PhRMA and the conservatives also argue that such a policy could make the United States dependent on China for new treatments, further highlighting messaging alignment.
PhRMA also blamed pharmacy benefit managers and abuses of the 340B drug discount policy for high drug prices in the United States in response to Trump’s drug price maneuvering, talking points that previous reporting from the Washington Examiner has found to be promoted by groups that are funded by PhRMA.
The Eli Lilly Digital Health Innovation Hub facility in Singapore, on Thursday, Nov. 14, 2024. (Ore Huiying / Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Oftentimes, large grantmakers such as PhRMA will fund groups that already agree with their preferred positions. In other words, the fact that the groups PhRMA funds produce messaging that lines up with industry interests is not necessarily evidence that PhRMA is paying people to secure alignment.
“We engage with different organizations who have a wide array of healthcare opinions and priorities,” PhRMA senior vice president of public affairs Alex Schriver told the Washington Examiner. “We may not agree on every issue, but we believe engagement and dialogue is important to promoting a healthcare policy environment that supports …
0 Comments
0 Shares
29 Views
0 Reviews
