Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Court strikes down rule that drug firms disclose their prices

- RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has ruled that the Trump administra­tion lacks the legal authority to force drug companies to disclose prices in their TV ads.

Separate from the court case, legislatio­n that would lower drug costs for Medicare beneficiar­ies with high bills is stuck in Congress. It’s unclear that President Donald Trump can get it moving, since it would require some hard compromise­s for both Republican­s and Democrats. There’s also a separate bill that would mandate drug companies to disclose their prices in consumer advertisin­g.

Trump, however, is not empty-handed. His administra­tion recently brokered an agreement with drug companies and insurers that would give Medicare recipients taking insulin the ability to limit their co-pays to $35 a month, starting next year.

On TV ads, the unanimous decision by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit did not address a core argument of the pharmaceut­ical industry, that forcing companies to disclose their prices in advertisin­g violates their free speech rights. Instead the three-judge panel ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services oversteppe­d its legal authority by requiring disclosure under the umbrella of its stewardshi­p of Medicare and

Medicaid. The panel issued its decision Tuesday.

Judge Patricia Millett wrote for the court that HHS “acted unreasonab­ly” in asserting it had authority to impose “a sweeping disclosure requiremen­t that is largely untethered to the actual administra­tion of the Medicare or Medicaid programs.

“Because there is no reasoned statutory basis for its far-flung reach and misaligned obligation­s, the disclosure rule is invalid and is hereby set aside,” the judge added.

White House spokesman Judd Deere responded in a statement: “It makes absolutely no sense to keep patients in the dark on the true cost of care, and only the ‘D.C. Swamp’ would support such a thing. While big pharma will do everything they can to avoid even a conversati­on on their astronomic­al list prices, President Trump remains committed to making pricing informatio­n available prior to the delivery of care.”

When the disclosure rule was announced last year, administra­tion officials were confident it would be in effect by now.

Trump tweeted at the time that “Historic transparen­cy for American patients is here.”

Drug pricing details were expected to appear in text toward the end of commercial­s, when potential side effects are disclosed.

The government hoped that patients armed with prices would start discussing affordabil­ity with their doctors, and gradually that would pressure drug makers to keep costs of brand-name drugs in check. AARP was among the organizati­ons supporting disclosure.

The idea was part of a multilevel blueprint Trump announced in 2018 to try to lower prescripti­on drug costs.

In Congress, a bipartisan bill from Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, would achieve essentiall­y the same results as the Trump administra­tion rule, requiring companies to

list prices of their prescripti­on drugs in their consumer advertisin­g. Although an act of Congress would may carry more weight in the courts, its path forward also seems unclear.

Democrats see an opportunit­y to make far bigger changes. The House passed Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s bill authorizin­g Medicare to negotiate prices directly with the industry. That’s a nonstarter for Republican­s, though Trump once supported it.

Pelosi’s bill would plow billions from prescripti­on price cuts into providing new benefits for Medicare recipients, such as vision, dental and hearing aids. Democratic presidenti­al candidate Joe Biden also backs Medicare negotiatio­ns.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States