First, some background: during the last Administration, the Talking Points Memo (now more formally known as "TPM Media LLC") series of web-outlets did a fabulous job of covering, almost alone, the early days of the US Attorneys' firing scandal. And as a result, TPM publisher Josh Marsall has a Polk Award on his mantle, to back his street cred -- as a first rate investigative web-journalist.
That said, for many of us who've watched pay for delay deals unfold for several years now, this article contains no startlingly-new insights. However, it does very effectively remind us what most of us thought when we first put all the pieces together: this sure smells like an anti-competitive practice, and one that the law ought not countenance. Do go read it all, over at Josh Marshall's fine web-estate -- written by Zachary Roth -- but here is a snippet:
. . . .Republicans and their allies in the business community talk a good game about the virtues of free-market competition. But, as we've seen in the debate over the public option, that stance often goes out the window when corporate profits are at stake.And now we've got another example -- one of the sleaziest and most blatantly self-serving yet.
Over the last few years, drug-makers have embraced a startlingly simple tactic for fending off competition from generic brands: paying them off. In a nutshell, the company that holds the patent on a profitable drug strikes a deal with the maker of the cheaper generic brand: you hold off on marketing your generic for several years, and in return, we'll give you a share of our profits on the drug. . . .
Truly -- do go read it. It will remind you of what an ordinary American should see -- when he or she looks closely at this mostly-pernicious practice. [Some of our earlier coverage of this topic may be found here.]
No comments:
Post a Comment