BROADSIDES

August 01, 2002

I'M OLD! GIMME! GIMME! GIMME! The AARP and die-hard socialists lost big yesterday when the shamelessly titled Greater Access to Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act died peacefully in its sleep on the Senate floor. This latest effort to force American earners to pay someone else's bills "would have provided broad coverage only to those with low incomes (less than twice the federal poverty level) or those with drug costs over $3,300 a year." Opponents estimated the cost of such a handout to be — hold onto your wallet — $395 billion over ten years; given that all government handouts balloon in cost, it's a sure bet that that figure would have skyrocketed. Fortunately, the Senate's cumbersome procedural and amendment rules left this budgetbuster eleven votes short of passage. The House passed another version several weeks ago, but the Senate roadblock yesterday should put the matter on hold at least for the rest of this congressional session.

Most everyone in Washington — Democrats, Republicans and the press — is on the Free-Meds-4-Old-Farts bandwagon, including President Bush; the only point of contention is how many hundreds of billions to spend on it. In all the panderous hot air swirling around this latest proposal for another taxpayer-funded freebie for seniors, there's one little fact purposefully never mentioned: there's no need for it.

As is always the case (that is, if government permits it), the effectiveness of the free market's philanthropic endeavors vastly outpaces government's socialistic attempts at coercing charity. Most, if not all, pharmaceutical companies (yes, the same pharmaceutical companies vilified by officeholders and bureaucrats) provide very generous patient assistance programs, most of which are listed here. Though each program differs a bit, generally anyone, regardless of age, who cannot legitimately afford medications may receive up to a three-month supply directly from the pharmaceutical company free of charge. All the patient has to do is ask. It's important to note that these programs do not involve the government, which has the same effect on proponents of big government as a crucifix does on Dracula.

The pharmaceutical companies are even assisting seniors who aren't poor enough to receive free meds nor wealthy enough to purchase them at the retail price. Most notable in this regard is Pfizer's Share Card program, which was launched in March of this year. Enrollment is free and open to any Medicare-eligible person with a gross annual income of less than $18,000. Once accepted, the patient can purchase a 30-day supply of any Pfizer medication (Dilantin, Zoloft, Viagra, Zyrtec etc.) for a mere $15. GlaxoSmithKline has a similar program which offers its products at a 30%-40% discount to qualifying Medicare-eligible customers. With the Pfizer and GSK programs, there is no third-party with deep pockets, such as the government and insurance companies, paying for the product on behalf of the consumer. Rather, the cost of the product is paid directly by the consumer; and as a result, the price, subjected to market forces, plummets.

Judging from the incalculable expense of the various government prescription entitlements under consideration now, one would think Congress and the president aren't aware that these many pharmaceutical company-funded programs exist. That's unlikely, however, since nearly all the programs are listed in detail on Medicare's website!

As Medicare's website and pharmaceutical websites demonstrate, the issue of affordable prescriptions for lower income seniors has been addressed and all but solved by the free market. The question is, why do Congress and President Bush pretend otherwise?

B. Sides @ 4:30 PM