TWO ROADS FOR PHARMA POLICY, PUBLIC TRUST — We hope you're settled in for a long day and a long week as votes are tallied in what could be the most consequential presidential election in history for public health, drug policy and the future of health care institutions. Just a few things that hang in the balance: — Jobs for scores of career scientists. President Donald Trump signed an executive order last month that would strip protections shielding thousands of federal employees from quick firings. It's still unclear how many people the order could impact — and how much stock staff should even put in it if Trump loses — but agencies are drafting their lists of high-ranking employees that could fall under the new schedule right now, officials tell Prescription PULSE. FDA could be particularly vulnerable. Tensions between the agency and Trump's inner circle have grown over the past couple of months, as White House aides have sparred with the FDA over efforts to fulfill the president's vow of a coronavirus vaccine before Election Day, Adam Cancryn and I report. Multiple top FDA officials have raised concerns about the executive order directly to Commissioner Stephen Hahn in recent weeks, voicing sharp opposition to the prospect of determining which employees would be eligible, said two health officials with knowledge of the matter. ...And Trump also has his sights on ousting top infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci after the election. NIH staff think the order "absolutely" is aimed at Fauci, said one senior official. But the longtime NIAID director's job status means he has to be fired by NIH Director Francis Collins or HHS Secretary Alex Azar — not Trump — and "for cause" in a decision that he can still contest. — Confidence in the FDA. Nearly half of voters across party affiliations believe that Trump is pressuring the agency to move too quickly on Covid-19 vaccines. Public skepticism about potential coronavirus shots has snowballed this year as FDA's decisions on a range of purported coronavirus treatments are thrown into the political crosshairs — and as Trump accuses agency scientists of working against him. The election has kicked political rhetoric up a notch. "Let me be clear: I trust vaccines, I trust scientists, but I don't trust Donald Trump," Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said in September. Drug prices. Trump has not delivered on his 2016 promise to slash drug costs for consumers and take pharmaceutical companies to task for "getting away with murder." But he's still trying: Four executive orders this summer revived and in some cases reworked ambitious plans to eliminate rebates, import cheaper medicines and tie payments to lower prices paid abroad. Each plan has a long way to go, including likely legal challenges, long rulemaking procedures and implementation struggles. Despite Trump's promises to crack down on the industry, a second Trump term could be much easier — or at least more navigable — for pharmaceutical companies than a Biden presidency. Biden hasn't offered many details just yet but said in October that he wants to implement a German-type model for reviewing drug costs. That approach could see drugmakers negotiating directly with the government and justifying high prices. GOP lawmakers liken that approach to social drug controls, but Democrats in Congress endorse government negotiation and would be glad to see any kind of momentum behind H.R. 3, Speaker Nancy Pelosi's drug pricing bill that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) refuses to take up for a vote. "HR 3 would clearly be disruptive to the biopharma industry by allowing federally dictated pricing of prescription drugs in the US," wrote Cowen analyst Eric Assaraf in a note to investors. That said: An ambitious pricing reform bill is unlikely to be top priority as long as the coronavirus pandemic continues. And more than anything, it would rely on flipping the Senate so that the bill could actually get out the door and to the president's desk. IN TRUMP WIN, A CABINET PURGE — Trump and his top aides are planning a huge overhaul of his Cabinet if he wins a second term, scuttling officials in key health-related jobs whom Trump views as disloyal, slow-acting or naysayers, reports POLITICO's Nancy Cook. Already, the White House and administration officials have started to vet names of health care experts who could take over the agencies running many elements of the government's pandemic response and overseeing the country's health insurance system, according to two Republicans close to the White House. Who could go: The administration could see the departures of figures like HHS Secretary Alex Azar, CDC Director Robert Redfield, National Institutes of Health head Francis Collins and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services head Seema Verma. That's in addition to Fauci, who Trump can't directly fire but who he's hinted he will push out post-election. Some, like Verma, may leave on their own terms to return to their home states, while others, like Collins, may retire. Except: Inside the White House, there is a debate over whether it is prudent to make changes to the health care team in the middle of a once-in-a-century global pandemic. Yet aides have repeatedly criticized or clashed with officials at the CDC, HHS and Food and Drug Administration during the more than seven months of life under Covid-19. |
No comments:
Post a Comment