Ohio’s Prescription Drug Issue: What You Need to Know

 

In November, Ohio voters will go to the polls to vote on Issue 2. Issue 2 is a deceptive and vaguely-worded ballot issue that would impose unworkable contracting requirements for state prescription drug purchases based on prices paid by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

 

It’s important to understand how Issue 2 would affect medical professionals and the patients they treat. Dr. Henry Wehrum is a physician who has been practicing in Ohio for more than 28 years. Like many of Ohio’s doctors, he worries that Issue 2 will have the opposite effect of what it intends.

 

“Issue 2 makes false promises about lowering drug costs,” Wherum said. “It’s being opposed by Ohio doctors, nurses and pharmacists because we believe it will actually increase drug costs for millions of Ohioans.”

 

More below:

http://www.columbusunderground.com/ohios-prescription-drug-issue-what-you-need-to-know

 

Or...

Issue 2 Saves Lives and Money

 

 

There’s a reason the Yes on Issue 2 campaign has been endorsed by Bernie Sanders and his Our Revolution organization as well as the Ohio Academy of Family Physicians, National Nurses United, Vote Vets, and Ohio’s Green Party. Senator Sanders and these organizations know voting yes on Issue 2, the Ohio Drug Price Relief Act, is an opportunity to say yes to saving lives and saving tax dollars.

 

More than 70 percent of Americans believe drug costs are unreasonable and that drug companies are putting profits ahead of people. Issue 2 changes the game by giving the State of Ohio the power to lower drug prices and show big drug companies that we are done letting them exploit patient pain for their profits.

 

While there may be much confusion around Issue 2, largely due to misleading advertising pushed by big drug companies, the decision is simple. Voting yes for Issue 2 will reduce drug prices for up to 4 million Ohioans and potentially save taxpayers $400 million in inflated drug charges that could be used to help schools, fix roads, and support our police and fire departments. That’s $400 million that goes back to Ohio instead of into the pockets of pharmaceutical companies.

 

More below:

http://www.columbusunderground.com/opinion-issue-2-saves-lives-and-money-ms1

I've been getting mailers from each side since at least April-May... not to mention commercials flooding the local newscasts. Last figure I heard was ~$14M spent at the end of June.

SO and I starting to do some research on this...no idea where to start.  Both sides, imo, have made this a very confusing issue.

Its not going to pass anyway, Issues like this always fail.

^ generally speaking, when you are pushing for an issue on the ballot, it's best for your cause to be on the no side.  most people will default to a no vote if they don't fully understand an issue.

 

I lean towards a “no” because their arguments about prices being higher for non-state purchased scrips make a lot of sense and I haven’t seen a refutation of that.  The part about legal fees getting paid by tax money is pretty much a show stopper as well.

 

I did get a little bit irked at the commercials harping on “California CEO Michael Weinstein” maybe being a little Willie Hortonish, despite the fact that the guy indeed seems shadier than a forest at midnight.

 

But “cousin Harvey” has really helped that strategy pay off, I suspect.

 

I've read so much about this and literally don't understand the actual pros and cons on either side.

 

I get what it is but like I have read, no one knows what the VA pays anyways.  If it was across the board, then sure that would be good, but it is only for Medicaid right?  I was reading something which I interpreted as Medicaid and the VA go together and bid on products at the same rate anyways, at least for a lot of them.

The endorsements say a lot about this issue. A comprehensive list can be found here:

 

https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Issue_2,_Drug_Price_Standards_Initiative_(2017)

 

There's not a whole lot of support for Issue 2, but there is a whole lot of opposition. A lot of the organizations in the coalition against it seem to be professional medical organizations, as well.

I have family that work in the business and have been told this initiative won't do anything for the average Joe in terms of day to day prices for their prescriptions at CVS. 

 

If there is any reason to vote NO, it's the ballot language allowing tax payer funds be used to let these 4 people defend the law in court should it pass.  This could cost the state billions if it goes through.  From Ballotpedia's "Fact Check":

 

 

Opponents of Ohio Issue 2 claim that the ballot initiative includes "an unprecedented provision granting [the promoters] the right to intervene at taxpayer expense in any legal challenges that may be filed against the measure."[1]

 

That is correct. Section G of Issue 2 grants four initiative proponents—William Booth, Tracy Jones, Latonya Thurman, and Daniel Darland—the right to intervene in a legal challenge to defend the initiative’s validity and requires the state to pay their reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses.[2]

 

^ generally speaking, when you are pushing for an issue on the ballot, it's best for your cause to be on the no side.  most people will default to a no vote if they don't fully understand an issue.

 

Right, no is always the default vote, especially when the yes side does a bad job articulating such a complex issue. To me this Weinstein guy is just wasting a ton of money on this.

It could put pressure on the legislature though... Look what happened with medical marijuana, even though the recreational issue went down in flames.

Still don't know how to vote...going to the poll later tonight.

cleveland.com

After a divisive and expensive campaign, Issue 2 fails at the polls

Updated 11:17 PM; Posted 7:54 PM

5-6 minutes

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - A campaign bankrolled by the pharmaceutical industry crushed the Issue 2 ballot initiative aimed at lowering drug prices in Ohio.

 

Issue 2 - the Ohio Drug Price Relief Act - sought to lower how much the state pays for pharmaceuticals to the price given to the Department of Veterans Affairs. Backed by the nonprofit AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Issue 2 faced an uphill battle from the onset.

 

What could have been a contentious Election Night ended quickly, with the race called before 8:30 p.m. Proponents conceded less than an hour after the polls closed.

 

With nearly all of the vote tallied by 11:15 p.m., the opponents led by an 79 to 21 percent margin.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2017/11/issue_2_vote_totals_1.html#incart_maj-story-1

I hate the feeling that Big Pharma "won" but the proponents wrote an issue that was way too complex.  The majority of people I talked to about it were confused and news reports reflected that.  I don't mind the basic premise of lowering drug costs, but the manner in which they tried to implement it was not good.

 

If it did pass, I still don't know if drug prices for non-state entities would rise or not.  It was just too confusing.

I hope that this issue will spur medical professional groups and consumer groups to get together to draft a better referendum.