By TOM McAVOY
THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN
DENVER - A Boulder legislator plans to introduce a bill next year to use the state's buying power to negotiate reduced prescription drug prices for Colorado's working poor.
Rep. Jack Pommer's proposal would cover people who don't qualify for Medicaid's federally controlled prescription rates and who aren't on any managed health insurance plan.
"It's an unfair twist in the market," Pommer said Thursday. "It forces people who are working but can't afford insurance and people on Medicare to pay the absolute highest prices for prescriptions."
Pommer relied on a Colorado Public Interest Research Group survey that found Colorado's uninsured pay 64 percent more than the federal supply price for 10 commonly prescribed drugs.
According to the survey of 19 states, filling prescriptions for the 10 common drugs costs $52.59 if purchased through Medicaid, but for the uninsured, $86.12 in Colorado and $90.21 nationally.
Colorado buys millions of dollars worth of prescription drugs for Medicaid recipients, giving the state the buying power used by private insurers to negotiate discounts, Pommer said.
Similar bills were introduced by Pommer and Rep. John Salazar, D-Manassa, in the last legislative session, but they died.
Salazar's HB1162 would have established a Colorado Council on Pharmaceutical Bulk Purchasing to negotiate discount prices on behalf of government agencies and other organizations wanting to participate in a pool insurance program.
Two other area legislators - Reps. Dorothy Butcher, D-Pueblo, and Buffie McFadyen, D-Pueblo West - sponsored bills intended to make prescription drugs more affordable. Their bills also died in the House Health, Environment, Welfare and Institutions Committee.
Friday, July 18, 2003
State drug discount proposed for uninsured
By Julia C. Martinez, Denver Post Capitol Bureau
July 18, 2003
A Democratic lawmaker on Thursday proposed to protect uninsured Coloradans from high costs of prescription medication by having the state negotiate lower prices on their behalf.
Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Longmont, said he will sponsor legislation again next year to create a program similar to one in Maine, which enables uninsured citizens to get a discount on retail pharmaceutical prices.
"We don't want to wait for the federal government. We can solve the problem in Colorado," Pommer said at a news conference at the state Capitol to discuss a survey released earlier this week.
Pommer estimated that 100,000 Coloradans lack prescription drug coverage, including thousands of seniors.
The national survey by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group found that uninsured Americans pay an average of 72 percent more than the federal government for 10 common prescription drugs. Uninsured Coloradans are paying an average of 64 percent more for prescription medications, the report said.
While the federal government is able to use its buying power to negotiate lower prices for its employees, veterans and retirees, uninsured citizens have no one to negotiate on their behalf, said Rex Wilmouth of CoPIRG, the local arm of the national consumer advocacy group.
"They are at the whim of the pharmaceutical industry," Wilmouth said.
In dollars and cents, for example, the average price charged to uninsured Coloradans for a 30-day supply of the cholesterol-lowering drug Zocor is $131.82. That is 94 percent more than the price charged the federal government, $67.81, the survey found.
For Celebrex, a medication for people with arthritis, the average monthly price for Colorado's uninsured is $166.54, 29 percent more than the federal supply price.
Denverite Martha Everett, 54, said that her eight prescription medicines cost $300 a month before she got help from the state's Indigent Care Program. She sometimes did not bother to get them refilled.
"It wasn't right for me to go without medication, but often I couldn't afford them," said Everett, a part-time employee of a Denver nonprofit agency.
The survey found that Denver ranks as one of the least expensive cities for uninsured consumers, yet prices also averaged 64 percent more than the federal price, roughly the same as statewide average prices.
Pommer proposed that the state use its buying power to obtain medicine for underinsured or uninsured Coloradans whose income is at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level. A similar measure he introduced in this year's legislative session was killed in committee.
Last month, the U.S. House and Senate passed differing versions of legislation to add drug coverage beginning in 2006 under Medicare. A conference committee will try to reach a compromise.
July 18, 2003
A Democratic lawmaker on Thursday proposed to protect uninsured Coloradans from high costs of prescription medication by having the state negotiate lower prices on their behalf.
Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Longmont, said he will sponsor legislation again next year to create a program similar to one in Maine, which enables uninsured citizens to get a discount on retail pharmaceutical prices.
"We don't want to wait for the federal government. We can solve the problem in Colorado," Pommer said at a news conference at the state Capitol to discuss a survey released earlier this week.
Pommer estimated that 100,000 Coloradans lack prescription drug coverage, including thousands of seniors.
The national survey by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group found that uninsured Americans pay an average of 72 percent more than the federal government for 10 common prescription drugs. Uninsured Coloradans are paying an average of 64 percent more for prescription medications, the report said.
While the federal government is able to use its buying power to negotiate lower prices for its employees, veterans and retirees, uninsured citizens have no one to negotiate on their behalf, said Rex Wilmouth of CoPIRG, the local arm of the national consumer advocacy group.
"They are at the whim of the pharmaceutical industry," Wilmouth said.
In dollars and cents, for example, the average price charged to uninsured Coloradans for a 30-day supply of the cholesterol-lowering drug Zocor is $131.82. That is 94 percent more than the price charged the federal government, $67.81, the survey found.
For Celebrex, a medication for people with arthritis, the average monthly price for Colorado's uninsured is $166.54, 29 percent more than the federal supply price.
Denverite Martha Everett, 54, said that her eight prescription medicines cost $300 a month before she got help from the state's Indigent Care Program. She sometimes did not bother to get them refilled.
"It wasn't right for me to go without medication, but often I couldn't afford them," said Everett, a part-time employee of a Denver nonprofit agency.
The survey found that Denver ranks as one of the least expensive cities for uninsured consumers, yet prices also averaged 64 percent more than the federal price, roughly the same as statewide average prices.
Pommer proposed that the state use its buying power to obtain medicine for underinsured or uninsured Coloradans whose income is at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level. A similar measure he introduced in this year's legislative session was killed in committee.
Last month, the U.S. House and Senate passed differing versions of legislation to add drug coverage beginning in 2006 under Medicare. A conference committee will try to reach a compromise.
Democratic lawmaker proposes Maine-like prescription plan
Friday July 18, 2003
DENVER (AP) Uninsured Coloradans could gain some protection from high medication costs if the state negotiated lower prices on their behalf, a Democratic lawmaker says.
Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, said he plans to try again next year on legislation to create a program similar to one in Maine, which gives uninsured residents a discount on retail pharmaceutical prices.
``We don't want to wait for the federal government,'' Pommer said.
He estimated that 100,000 state residents, many of them seniors, lack prescription drug coverage.
A national survey by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group reported that uninsured Americans pay an average of 72 percent more than the federal government does for 10 common prescription drugs. Uninsured Coloradans pay an average of 64 percent more for the medications, the report said.
The federal government can negotiate lower prices for its employees, veterans and retirees, but uninsured Americans have no one to negotiate on their behalf, said Rex Wilmouth of the Colorado Public Interest Research Group.
``They are at the whim of the pharmaceutical industry,'' he said.
Martha Everett, 54, of Denver, said her eight prescription medicines cost $300 per month before she got help from the state Indigent Care Program. She sometimes could not afford to refill her prescriptions, she said.
``It wasn't right for me to go without medication,'' said Everett, a part-time employee of a Denver nonprofit agency.
Pommer proposed that the state negotiate for prescription-drug discounts for underinsured or uninsured Coloradans whose income is at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level. A similar measure he introduced this year was killed in committee.
DENVER (AP) Uninsured Coloradans could gain some protection from high medication costs if the state negotiated lower prices on their behalf, a Democratic lawmaker says.
Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, said he plans to try again next year on legislation to create a program similar to one in Maine, which gives uninsured residents a discount on retail pharmaceutical prices.
``We don't want to wait for the federal government,'' Pommer said.
He estimated that 100,000 state residents, many of them seniors, lack prescription drug coverage.
A national survey by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group reported that uninsured Americans pay an average of 72 percent more than the federal government does for 10 common prescription drugs. Uninsured Coloradans pay an average of 64 percent more for the medications, the report said.
The federal government can negotiate lower prices for its employees, veterans and retirees, but uninsured Americans have no one to negotiate on their behalf, said Rex Wilmouth of the Colorado Public Interest Research Group.
``They are at the whim of the pharmaceutical industry,'' he said.
Martha Everett, 54, of Denver, said her eight prescription medicines cost $300 per month before she got help from the state Indigent Care Program. She sometimes could not afford to refill her prescriptions, she said.
``It wasn't right for me to go without medication,'' said Everett, a part-time employee of a Denver nonprofit agency.
Pommer proposed that the state negotiate for prescription-drug discounts for underinsured or uninsured Coloradans whose income is at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level. A similar measure he introduced this year was killed in committee.
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
House OKs study of health insurance
April 23, 2003
House members on Tuesday approved creation of a commission to study the effects of health-insurance mandates despite objections from Democrats that the findings will be biased.
"Seven of the commission's nine members will be appointed by a governor who has publicly stated his opposition to mandates," Rep. Angie Paccione, D-Fort Collins, told her fellow representatives.
Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, agreed, saying the commission would lack legitimacy. He compared it to the deposed regime in Iraq.
"A year ago, Saddam Hussein held an election and won 100 percent of the vote," he said. "It was a joke. No one took it seriously."
But Rep. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, who sponsored the bill, said the commission's findings would be fair and balanced and wouldn't tilt toward the insurance industry's interests.
"The disconnect between the insurance companies and the commission will be complete," he said.
The House passed the bill 37-28. It now heads to Gov. Bill Owens for his signature.
House members on Tuesday approved creation of a commission to study the effects of health-insurance mandates despite objections from Democrats that the findings will be biased.
"Seven of the commission's nine members will be appointed by a governor who has publicly stated his opposition to mandates," Rep. Angie Paccione, D-Fort Collins, told her fellow representatives.
Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, agreed, saying the commission would lack legitimacy. He compared it to the deposed regime in Iraq.
"A year ago, Saddam Hussein held an election and won 100 percent of the vote," he said. "It was a joke. No one took it seriously."
But Rep. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, who sponsored the bill, said the commission's findings would be fair and balanced and wouldn't tilt toward the insurance industry's interests.
"The disconnect between the insurance companies and the commission will be complete," he said.
The House passed the bill 37-28. It now heads to Gov. Bill Owens for his signature.
Thursday, March 27, 2003
Open teacher contract talks
Thursday, March 27, 2003 - If you're talking about public money, the public ought to be able to listen.
It's a simple concept, really.
A bill approved by the state House of Representatives this week would shed some much-needed sunlight on teacher contract negotiations by opening them to the public.
Now, they mostly happen behind closed doors, even though millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake.
Watching negotiations between a teachers' union and a school board may sound as dry as learning the Pythagorean theorem, but there's much at stake beyond money in those sessions. Vital school-district policies, such as class sizes, also are discussed.
The public, including hard-line union folks, anti-tax crusaders and John Q. Citizen, should be allowed to watch the process. After all, it's their money.
House Bill 1314, sponsored by Rep. Rob Fairbank, R-Littleton, and Sen. Andrew McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, still must be approved by the Senate and signed by the governor. Yet even at this stage, the bill certainly has proven the adage that politics makes strange bedfellows.
It's comical to watch Republicans call for more sunlight on public proceedings. They're usually the first to smirk and furrow their brows when a reporter elbows into a previously secret meeting using Colorado's Sunshine Laws, specifically, the state's open-meetings act.
And Democrats, who are generally very cozy with labor unions, have stolen a familiar Republican battle cry to back their union buddies: It's about local control, stupid.
At least one Democrat goes so far as to predict citizen upheaval should the negotiations be open.
"If we have these negotiations open to the public we're going to have a potentially dangerous, potentially frightening situation," said Rep. Mike Merrifield, D-Manitou Springs. He noted that school boards, unlike the statehouse, don't have a sergeant-at-arms to keep order.
Come on, Mike. Have more faith in Coloradans, especially your constituents.
We've survived blizzards, oil busts, tornadoes, floods and, from 1960 to 1998, a 38-year Super Bowl drought. We can survive teacher-contract negotiations without hand-to-hand combat.
Democratic insistence that teacher negotiations should be a local-control issue doesn't wash, either. With that argument, the state's open records and meetings laws shouldn't apply to municipalities and towns either unless they saw fit.
After all, openness is a state mandate. Are Democrats suggesting that cities be allowed to close the public out of meetings? Of course not.
"I think we should have faith that the school boards will do what they were elected to do," said Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder.
Generally, we do have that faith until our public servants violate it.
Coloradans are trusting folks, but we want to verify by watching government in action - from the governor on down.
It's a simple concept, really.
A bill approved by the state House of Representatives this week would shed some much-needed sunlight on teacher contract negotiations by opening them to the public.
Now, they mostly happen behind closed doors, even though millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake.
Watching negotiations between a teachers' union and a school board may sound as dry as learning the Pythagorean theorem, but there's much at stake beyond money in those sessions. Vital school-district policies, such as class sizes, also are discussed.
The public, including hard-line union folks, anti-tax crusaders and John Q. Citizen, should be allowed to watch the process. After all, it's their money.
House Bill 1314, sponsored by Rep. Rob Fairbank, R-Littleton, and Sen. Andrew McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, still must be approved by the Senate and signed by the governor. Yet even at this stage, the bill certainly has proven the adage that politics makes strange bedfellows.
It's comical to watch Republicans call for more sunlight on public proceedings. They're usually the first to smirk and furrow their brows when a reporter elbows into a previously secret meeting using Colorado's Sunshine Laws, specifically, the state's open-meetings act.
And Democrats, who are generally very cozy with labor unions, have stolen a familiar Republican battle cry to back their union buddies: It's about local control, stupid.
At least one Democrat goes so far as to predict citizen upheaval should the negotiations be open.
"If we have these negotiations open to the public we're going to have a potentially dangerous, potentially frightening situation," said Rep. Mike Merrifield, D-Manitou Springs. He noted that school boards, unlike the statehouse, don't have a sergeant-at-arms to keep order.
Come on, Mike. Have more faith in Coloradans, especially your constituents.
We've survived blizzards, oil busts, tornadoes, floods and, from 1960 to 1998, a 38-year Super Bowl drought. We can survive teacher-contract negotiations without hand-to-hand combat.
Democratic insistence that teacher negotiations should be a local-control issue doesn't wash, either. With that argument, the state's open records and meetings laws shouldn't apply to municipalities and towns either unless they saw fit.
After all, openness is a state mandate. Are Democrats suggesting that cities be allowed to close the public out of meetings? Of course not.
"I think we should have faith that the school boards will do what they were elected to do," said Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder.
Generally, we do have that faith until our public servants violate it.
Coloradans are trusting folks, but we want to verify by watching government in action - from the governor on down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
