If trump decides to go after pharma prices, is that a good or bad political move

[Matty]

It would garner much opposition from his own party and also will make him unpopular in some states that have lots of pharmaceutical industry.

[Hermit For Peace]

He said they were getting away with "murder" so let's see some action, Trump. Who cares if it's a good or bad political move....it's the right thing to do.

[publicunofficial]

He might have a fight in Congress but his supporters will be behind him regardless, and depending on how he implements it it might give him some actual support on the left.

It would be a good idea and very good policy, so I feel confident in saying that it won't happen. At best he'll give a speech at a rally and throw some line like "Folks, the drug prices, they are insane. They're insane. They need to be lower. I will make them lower. Believe me." and that'll be the end of it.

[Crumpets]

There's good ways to go about lowering pharma prices and bad ways. The good ways require a sophisticated knowledge of the healthcare economy, and expert political maneuvering to get Congress, the public, and the pharmaceutical industry on board. The bad way would just be a bill saying "pharmaceutical companies, lower your prices or else!" Which sounds more like Trump?

[Badger]

I can't see him doing it to much extent until the Hasert Rule and unrestrained fillabuster are done away with. Even if he could theoretically support and pass tough legislation with overwhelming Democratic support, unless a majority of the Republican caucuses support the measures it'll never get to the floor.

Besides, does anyone really believe President Trump cares remotely as much as candidate Trump about <snicker> limiting corporate gouging? That's his people!

[Horus]

It's the right move.

[politics_king]

It's the right move.

I'm with you. My mom had a business partner who was involved with that, and got his pharmaceuticals from Canada? It was cheaper and business was good. But laws were put into place and the Feds raided his office. Why would we reject Canada's drugs? They're probably better than ours and I'm just stating what I think is a fact. Because you want it to stay in-house and prop-up an industry. Being Pragmatic on issues isn't a bad thing because you analyze the whole situation.

[Person Man]

I can't see him doing it to much extent until the Hasert Rule and unrestrained fillabuster are done away with. Even if he could theoretically support and pass tough legislation with overwhelming Democratic support, unless a majority of the Republican caucuses support the measures it'll never get to the floor.

Besides, does anyone really believe President Trump cares remotely as much as candidate Trump about <snicker> limiting corporate gouging? That's his people!

The pun helped me start my day!

[KingSweden]

Forget politics, it's good policy. The Presidrnt would have my support on such a move, and he has my support on little else. I'm skeptical anything would come of it, however

[RINO Tom]

Forget politics, it's good policy. The Presidrnt would have my support on such a move, and he has my support on little else. I'm skeptical anything would come of it, however

If he follows through on all of his economic promises, this isn't the last time you'll hear this from the left.

[Vcrew192]

I can't see him doing it to much extent until the Hasert Rule and unrestrained fillabuster are done away with. Even if he could theoretically support and pass tough legislation with overwhelming Democratic support, unless a majority of the Republican caucuses support the measures it'll never get to the floor.

Besides, does anyone really believe President Trump cares remotely as much as candidate Trump about <snicker> limiting corporate gouging? That's his people!

The "evil corporations" were also against backing out of the TPP and renegotiating NAFTA but that hasn't seemed to stop Trump. I think you're miscalculating his interests.

[RINO Tom]

I can't see him doing it to much extent until the Hasert Rule and unrestrained fillabuster are done away with. Even if he could theoretically support and pass tough legislation with overwhelming Democratic support, unless a majority of the Republican caucuses support the measures it'll never get to the floor.

Besides, does anyone really believe President Trump cares remotely as much as candidate Trump about <snicker> limiting corporate gouging? That's his people!

The "evil corporations" were also against backing out of the TPP and renegotiating NAFTA but that hasn't seemed to stop Trump. I think you're miscalculating his interests.

I'm sure they'll be able to sleep at night with whatever free trade deal he supports instead.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The real way to go after big pharma is to permit imports of cheaper drugs that do the job, and we know he's not going to permit that under his agenda.

So it's probably a good political move, because everyone thinks drugs are too expensive (and they are in many cases), but it's not going to net any measurable results.