In our current health care system, the Medicare Part D program helps ensure seniors and people with disabilities have access to the prescription medicines they need. While more than 90% of seniors are very satisfied with their Part D prescription drug coverage and want to protect it, we also must tackle rising out-of-pocket costs for patients at a time when net prices for brand medicines are declining.
There are different proposals in Congress that address prescription drug pricing and out-of-pocket costs for patients. However, some proposals – under the guise of government “negotiation” – would actually repeal the key provision of Part D called the “non-interference” clause that protects robust coverage, choice of plans and access to medicines for seniors and people with disabilities. The decision to address prescription drug pricing in this way could ration patients’ access to medicines when better solutions exist to lower patient out-of-pocket costs.
Recent Morning Consult/PhRMA polling data reveals that voters are not single-minded on the issue. They want to get a better deal on medicines – lower costs at the pharmacy counter – but they do not want to sacrifice access or innovation. The bottom line is that voters have real concerns about what “negotiation” means for their access to medicines and strongly support protecting access.
Voters want to keep the current provision in the Medicare law that protects access and choice for seniors and people with disabilities.
Voters do not want to sacrifice access and innovation.
Non-partisan, public polling shows similar findings about so-called Medicare negotiation overall: The more voters find out about it, the less they support it.