[mpen-dayton] MPEN Special Issue for Ohioans

FYI. Best, Munsup

P.S. Please reply back to me with 'unsubscribe' added to the subject line if you no longer want to receive my e-Newsletters. The convenient link to unsubscribe is no longer available due to security reasons to protect my email servers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• FW: September 2017 Capitol Brief
• FW: Tell Senator Brown and Senator Portman you don't want war with Iran
• FW: McConnell puts Senate integrity at risk for Trump's agenda (make a call!)
• FW: Issue 2 Information!
• FW: Additional Information About Issue#2 - Dayton Daily News Article

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Beth Tsvetkoff, Esq.; Executive Director, OHIO ALLIANCE OF YMCAS
Subject: September 2017 Capitol Brie

Please click here to see the September 2017 edition of the Capitol Brief, including:
  

• 2018 minimum wage increase;
• Newest Medicaid Managed Care plan ratings; and
• U.S. Supreme Court gerrymandering case.

You can find current and past editions of the Capitol Brief on our website, http://ohioymcas.org, under the News heading.

 

 

From: Rabbi Joseph Berman; Government Affairs Manager, JVP
Subject: Tell Senator Brown and Senator Portman you don't want war with Iran

How many more paths to war can we go down? On Friday, Donald Trump shoved us closer to confrontation with Iran, and it's up to all of us to force Congress to choose diplomacy instead. 

Act now and tell Senator Sherrod Brown and Senator Rob Portman: No new sanctions on Iran, and don't pass legislation to kill the Iran Nuclear Deal.

Everyone— from the the International Atomic Energy Association, to the U.S. Intelligence Community, to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson— agrees that sticking with the Iran Nuclear Deal is in everyone's best interest.

But on Friday, in a speech full of misleading falsehoods, Trump announced he was "decertifying" the Iran Deal. 

That kicks off a 60 day period in which Congress can reimpose sanctions with a simple majority vote. And Senate Republicans may also try to bring Democrats to the table to craft legislation that could be even worse. 

Write to Senator Sherrod Brown and Senator Rob Portman and tell them to resist Trump's war agenda: say no to sanctions, and no to legislation that would kill the Iran Nuclear Deal.

The Iran Deal isn't perfect, but it's infinitely better than Trump and Netanyahu's shared agenda of escalating conflict. 

The Israeli government and the U.S. both have an investment in preserving Israel's military edge. Israeli officials, AIPAC and other pro-Israel advocates have been drumming up fear of Iran's nuclear program for decades. Meanwhile Israel, the Middle East's principal nuclear power, has been quietly maintaining a nuclear program of its own and refusing to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

And, if irony has any meaning left, it's Trump who is not in compliance with the deal— he has already violated it by privately encouraging other nations to boycott trade with Iran. And now, by refusing to certify the Iran Deal, he is triggering an expedited consideration of snapback sanctions in order to advance that agenda of escalation, drastically increasing risk of another catastrophic U.S. war in the Middle East.

Grassroots power like yours defended the Deal back in 2015, and we can certainly do it again. Since the elections, progressives and all people who want peace and justice have exponentially improved our ability to influence Congress and compel them to defend us from Trump's agenda.

You and I have to make them hear us again. Click here to write Senator Sherrod Brown and Senator Rob Portman now and tell them: Don't put us on the warpath. Don't kill the Iran Nuclear Deal.

 

 

From: Katie O'Connell; Digital Communications Coordinator, People For the American Way
Subject: McConnell puts Senate integrity at risk for Trump's agenda (make a call!)

Donald Trump has a reliable ally in Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell who has repeatedly changed the rules to recklessly ram his agenda through the Senate. This time McConnell is threatening blue slips in order to confirm as many dangerous Trump judicial nominees as possible.

The blue slip process is a longstanding Senate tradition where senators must return their blue slip in order for a judicial nominee from their state to advance in the confirmation process. If a senator withholds their blue slip due to serious concerns about the nominee's qualifications for a lifetime court appointment, then the nominee does not move forward. McConnell is frustrated with Democrats doing their jobs and giving thorough consideration to judicial nominees -- so he's threatening to do away with the tradition altogether. He and Trump are ditching the checks and balances that protect our democracy.

Can you call Senator Rob Portman and urge him to stand up to McConnell's tyrannical attempts to undermine the blue slip?

McConnell needs to know that members of his party are feeling pressure from constituents on this important issue, and that he can't just change Senate traditions to keep Trump's extreme agenda moving. Judicial nominees are appointed to lifetime seats and have the power to make real and lasting change in people's lives... so decisions about their nominations should not be made lightly, and the rules shouldn't be broken to stack the courts with right-wing extremists.

Please take a minute to call Sen. Portman now and demand they protect the integrity of the Senate and its traditions>>

 

 

From: David Greer
Subject: Issue 2 Information If Your Vote is No!

Ohio Issue 2, the Drug Price Standards Initiative, is on the ballot in Ohio as an indirect initiated state statute on November 7, 2017.^[1]

	A "yes" vote supports this measure to require state agencies and programs to purchase prescription drugs at prices no higher than what the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) pays for them.
	A "no" vote opposes this measure to require state agencies and programs to purchase prescription drugs at prices no higher than what the VA pays for them.

Overview

What would Ohio Issue 2 do? "

Issue 2 would require the state and state agencies, including the Ohio Department of Medicaid, to pay the same or lower prices for prescriptions drugs as the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)—a department that negotiates drug prices with companies and typically pays 24 percent less than other agencies for prescription drugs.^[2] Specifically, it would forbid state agencies to enter into any purchasing agreement with drug manufacturers unless the net cost of the drug is the same or less than that paid by the VA. Issue 2 would apply in any case in which the state ultimately provides funding for the purchase of drugs, even if the drugs are not purchased directly by a government agency. Examples of such cases include the Ohio Best Rx Program and the Ohio HIV Drug Assistance Program. Issue 2 would also allow the measure's petitioners to have a direct and personal stake in defending the law from legal challenges, require the state to pay the petitioners' reasonable legal expenses, and require the petitioners to pay $10,000 to the state if a court rules Issue 2 unenforceable.^[1]

Is Issue 2 the same as California Proposition 61?

Issue 2 and California Proposition 61 are almost identical.^[3][4] Appearing on California's November 2016 ballot, Proposition 61 was designed to restrict the amount that any state agency could pay for drugs, tying it to the price paid by the VA. While most of the two initiatives' provisions are comparable, Proposition 61 would have exempted Medicaid managed care plans from its drug price regulations, whereas Ohio Issue 2 would not. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the top financial backer of the campaign supporting Issue 2, provided funds for Proposition 61.^[5] Voters in California rejected the measure, 53 to 47 percent.^[6] Opponents raised $109 million in their effort to defeat Proposition 61, while supporters received $19 million.^[7] Proposition 61 triggered the most expensive ballot measure conflict of 2016.

State of the ballot measure campaigns

As of October 4, 2017, Ohio Taxpayers for Lower Drug Prices, the campaign supporting Issue 2, had raised almost $6.23 million, 99.99 percent of which came from the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. A total of $1.87 million was spent to collect the 184,354 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a cost per required signature (CPRS) of $10.13.^[8] Opponents organized as Ohioans Against the Deceptive Rx Ballot Issue and raised $16.23 million from Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and a PhRMA subsidiary.^[8]

Points of contention

The following sections summarize the areas of disagreement between the support campaign, Ohio Taxpayers for Lower Drug Prices, and the opposition campaign, Ohioans Against the Deceptive Rx Ballot Issue, regarding Issue 2.

Disclosure of VA drug prices

Issue 2 would require the state to purchase prescription drugs at prices no higher than what the VA pays for them. To require the state to purchase drugs at prices no higher than the VA, the state would need access to information on the amount the VA pays for each drug. Matt Borges, Campaign Manager of Ohio Taxpayers for Lower Drug Prices, said cases in which drug prices are not disclosed are few and far between. He added, "This is something we can absolutely figure out." Dale Butland, Communications Director of Ohioans Against the Deceptive Rx Ballot Issue, disagreed, saying, "If we can't know the lowest price of the VA, then you're setting up a standard that is impossible to meet."^[9]

The Plain Dealer and Cleveland.com contacted an official at the VA regarding whether the information was publicly available. The newspapers stated that a VA spokesperson provided an answer: "some pharmaceutical contracts between the VA and private companies are not public record, depending on how the contract is structured." Information on the federally-mandated 24-percent discount is available online. Information on other discounts the VA receives is available or unavailable to the public depending on the contract between the VA and drug manufacturer. The VA spokesperson did not provide the newspapers with the number of drugs with prices not disclosed to the public.^[9]

VA drug discounts vs. Ohio drug discounts

The VA receives a federally-mandated 24-percent discount on drugs. The state government also negotiates drug prices, including for Ohio Medicaid. Dale Butland, communications director of the opposition campaign, said, "Medicaid drugs, which account for 75% of the drugs Ohio buys, already get a 23.1 percent federally-mandated discount. ... and then, just like the VA, Ohio negotiates additional voluntary discounts and rebates with the drug companies."^[10] Matt Borges, campaign manager of the support campaign, responded to the claim that the initiative would not decrease drug prices for the state, saying, "If this wouldn't actually bring prices down in Ohio, which you're saying it won't, and it wouldn't have a ripple effect through the marketplace so people would save money, why would the drug companies have spent $126 million to defeat this issue in California? Why are the drug companies spending $2 million a week to defeat this measure in Ohio?"^[11]

Impact on consumers not receiving discounts

Issue 2 would require state agencies and programs, not private insurance plans, to purchase prescription drugs for the same or lower prices than the VA. Matt Borges of the support campaign and Dale Butland‏ of the opposition campaign disagreed on how Issue 2 would impact consumers who purchase healthcare on the private market or receive healthcare through an employer.

Borges said the initiative would have a "ripple effect through the marketplace," as consumers demand the government to require similar discounts in the private marketplace. He also said Issue 2 would not increase drug prices for individuals and families with private healthcare. He stated, "... when this discount was mandated on the VA, the drug companies didn't raise prices on everyone else then. You know why? Because they care a lot about the regulatory environment that they're in."^[10]

Butland said the initiative would increase drug prices for consumers with private healthcare, as companies look to make up profits. He stated, "If you tell a company, whether that company makes drugs or whether they make automobiles ... that they have to sell their product to a certain segment of the population at a low price—lower than market price—what happens to prices for people who aren't covered under that edict? … What I'm telling you is cost shifting isn't some nefarious scheme dreamed up by the drug companies. It's basic economics."^[10]

Legal defense of Issue 2

Section G of Issue 2 was designed to address legal defense of the measure. Section G states, "... the committee of individuals responsible for the circulation of the [initiative] petition … have a direct and personal stake in defending" the initiative from legal challenges. The committee is composed of four individuals, known as the proponents, including William Booth, Tracy Jones, Latonya Thurman, and Daniel Darland. Booth, Jones, and Thurman are employees of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.^[1]

Ohioans Against the Deceptive Rx Issue, in a campaign fact sheet, said this provision of Issue 2 was unprecedented and gave promoters "the right to intervene at taxpayer expense in any legal challenges that may be filed against it if it becomes law. This provision would give the sponsors a blank check to defend any part of the law, and require that their legal fees be reimbursed by taxpayers whether they win or lose."^[12]

Dennis Willard, spokesman for Ohio Taxpayers for Lower Drug Prices, said Section G was included in Issue 2 because "if someone sues — and the only people who would sue would be the drug companies who are trying to protect their profits — the people who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to save taxpayers $400 million would have a right to be in the courtroom, too."^[13]

 

 

From: David K. Greer
Subject: FW: Additional Information About Issue#2 - Dayton Daily News Article

FYI: Disclaimer - Like most articles off of the Internet, there are always links with additional information.  I say that to say that the information below has additional information associated with it but this shared information is a summarization of the initial article!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We've been hearing a lot from readers about State Issue 2.

TVs in Ohio have been flooded with ads for the issue on the November ballot and viewers are confused.

Both sides in the ads have said that they will lower drug costs.

Who is right?

The answer to this question really depends on where in the supply chain you are looking at the "cost" of drugs.

RELATED: Helping you understand Issue 2

Issue 2, if passed, would only lower what Medicaid and other state-run health plans pay for drugs — and therefore would reduce the amount of tax dollars spent on prescription drugs.

It would not directly impact how much drug manufacturers charge for the drug from the outset. It wouldn't change how much pharmacies pay to stock the drug, or how much customers on various health plans spend out-of-pocket.

And it wouldn't have any direct impact for the majority of Ohioans who are on private or employer insurance or on Medicare, which is a federal program.

That being said, the two sides each say there would be collateral consequences that could cause drug prices for everyone to go up or down.

Voting no, according to the No campaign, will not lower drug prices. It would simply maintain the current system and status quo on drug pricing.

But they say that a Yes vote could actually increase drug prices for some people.

This could happen in a few ways. Drug companies could simply increase the list price of drugs as they have been doing, because Issue 2 doesn't stop them from charging whatever they want. And if the average price goes up, so too does the VA price.

Drug companies could also stop giving out the additional discounts they currently give to the VA and Medicaid. And for some health plans, like the state retirement programs, the pressure to get state costs down to the VA level could result in cost shifting in which the state charges the retirees a larger share of their prescription costs.

RELATED: Yes vs No: What both sides are saying on Issue 2

According to the Yes campaign, those increases are all just scare tactics being used by the pharmaceutical companies funding the other side. They say that voting yes for Issue 2 will cause not only the state programs to pay lower prices for drugs, but will lead to others like Medicare and private insurance plans to demand those same low prices, eventually bringing down costs across the market.

 

End of MPEN e-Newsletter