Prop. 61 ad will strike nerve
Ad targets public’s rising anger over costly prescriptions
WHAT’S THE AD
ABOUT? It supports Proposition 61, which would require the state to pay no more for prescription drugs than the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs pays for the same medication. The agency negotiates drug prices with pharmaceutical companies, paying on average one-quarter less for drugs than most other federal agencies.
WHO’S FUNDING THE
AD? The Yes on Prop. 61 campaign, which has so far raised $16.9 million compared to the opposition’s $126 million. The yes side is chiefly sponsored by the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the largest provider of HIV/AIDS medical care in the U.S. The no side is mostly backed by pharmaceutical companies such as Merck, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and Foster City-based Gilead Sciences. WHAT DOES THE AD SAY? Dr. Otto Yang, identi- fied as a “professor of medicine and AIDS researcher,” is dressed in a white lab coat and stethoscope. He asks viewers: “What if there were a pill to cure cancer but drug companies charged $10,000 a pill, or $1 million? Unfortunately, that is not too far off.’’ Yang then shows viewers a pill in his hand, which he says cures a deadly liver disease but costs more than $90,000 for a course of treatment. The doctor says that voters now have a chance to change that by voting yes on Prop. 61, which he says “will save Californians $1 billion dollars annually in drug costs.”
“The big drug companies are spending over $100 million dollars to make sure this act doesn’t pass,’’ Yang tells viewers. “Don’t let that happen. Vote like your life depends on it — because one day it might.’’
IS IT TRUE? The ad is mostly true but leaves out key details of the proposition. Still, it dramatically addresses the public’s rising anger over high-priced prescription drugs, so it will probably hit a nerve with Californians, many of whom have watched helplessly as their drug costs skyrocket.
Yang is a professor at the UCLA School of Medicine. But his LinkedIn account says he’s also the director of scientific research at the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Prop. 61’s chief sponsor. The ad does not mention that.
When Yang mentions the $90,000 drug that cures a deadly liver disease, he is most likely referring to one of two high-priced, lifesaving drugs marketed by Gilead Sciences. The Fos- ter City-based biopharmaceutical company has been widely criticized for the high prices of Sovaldi and Harvoni, both of which cure Hepatitis C, a liver disease. A 12-week-long course of treatment for each drug costs about $90,000.
Campaign records shows Gilead has contributed at least $4 million to defeat Prop. 61.
While the pro-61 ad attacks Big Pharma, it does not specify what the ballot measure will do, or say whom it will affect.
Proposition 61 would not apply to most consumers of prescription drugs. It would affect about 4.4 million Californians who get their medications through the state. They include fee-forservice Medi-Cal recipients; California’s 838,000 state employees and retirees; and 294,000 teachers and other employees of the University of California and Cal State University systems.