Democrats’ new logic on drug pricing: Developing slightly fewer medicines is OK if it means lower prices

WASHINGTON — Democratic lawmakers in recent weeks have begun to advance an argument long seen as something of a third rail in U.S. politics: that slightly less biomedical innovation might be worth a dramatic reduction in drug prices.

The surprising candor has come amid pushback to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s high-profile drug pricing bill, which the trade group PhRMA this month said represented “nuclear winter” for the development of new medicines. Some Democrats, in response, have attempted to reframe the discussion in purely utilitarian terms, asserting that dramatically lower costs now justify a marginal reduction in new treatments in the coming decades.

“Three hundred forty-five billion dollars in savings versus the cost of eight to 15 fewer drugs over 10 years,” Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.) said at a recent hearing before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “I frankly think it’s worth it.”