The Senate confirmed Alex M. Azar II as the secretary of the health and human services, with a vote of 55-43. Azar graduated from Yale Law School, served as a law clerk under Justice Antonin Scalia, and was a former drug company executive. He will now be responsible for handling a trillion dollar budget that oversees Medicare and Medicaid, and the Obamacare health reform law.
His priorities include tackling the opioid epidemic, finding a way for healthcare providers to be paid by patient outcome rather than the number of tests run, and making healthcare more affordable. He is also under pressure to constrain drug prices; however, Azar himself has admitted that drug prices are too high, but has shown little action to change it, stating that lowering drug prices is a complex task. Under his watch in the company Eli Lilly, the price of Forteo was doubled, as well as additional drugs.
What do you think of this nomination? Do you think the HHS is in good hands?
Do you believe his experience as a former drug company executive is an asset or the opposite?
Sources:
NYTimes
The Washington Post
6 comments:
It seems ironic that under Azar's watch over the company Eli Lilly, the price of a drug was doubled, and yet one of President Trump's goals is to prevent drug companies from "getting away with murder" or charging very high prices for drugs. However, since Azar was the executive of a drug company, he has experience with drug prices and how that industry works, so I do think that he will be able to share some of that insight during his tenure as the secretary of the health and human services.
Azar’s commitment to decreasing drug prices is a bit questionable as he served as president of a pharmaceutical company, which of course would be against lowering prices of their products. However, Azar has worked in the Health and Human Services sector for many years, including as deputy secretary, under Bush. Azar has had substantial experience between working in and advancing challenges in HHS, and in the pharmaceutical industry. Because his priority of lowering drug prices despite his previous position in the drug industry, as well as his experience working directly in HHS for several years, I think his nomination is appropriate.
I believe that Azar's experience in the HHS and his former drug company make him well qualified for this position. His experience as a former drug company executive definitely raises some questions, but it could be an asset in some ways. He may seem less likely to lower prices simply because of that experience, but he also understands budgeting and the drug market. However, I also can't deny that decreasing drug prices seems like a conflict of interest for Azar, but I'm curious to see if his past experience will affect his actions.
Irony is the word. Trump looks at everyone in the room, and picks from the least qualified candidates. That is, I admit, an unfair statement. Azar clearly has experience within the health sector, I just worry he fights on the wrong side, promoting financial gain in the health sector, rather than, you know, public health. At this point I worry that the intensions of the cabinet members is to make money off their positions rather than promoting public good. Given that he is a Trump nomination I think he will stall as much as he can the implementation of Obama-care, directly breaking the Hatch act.
Like Haley previously mentioned, Azar does seem to have a conflict of interest. He is qualified for the position as secretary of HHS, but his experience as a former drug company executive does seem to clash with his current opinion on drug prices. Admittedly, funding scientific research and developing drugs is an incredibly expensive process, but I do believe that Azar certainly has the potential to follow through with his priorities. As we have learned in class, the position of a law clerk is competitive, prestigious and reserved for "the best," for lack of a better phrase.
I'm not really surprised that the Senate confirmed a candidate with such a clear conflict of interest, because voting against Trump's nomination would mean making the Republican party and themselves look bad, which noone wants. Unfortunately, I think that Congressmen are not exactly interested with these issues that don't affect them directly or don't make them look bad in front of their constituents, so nothing will be done about this either. Clearly, Trump's definition of bringing down the establishment means bringing big businesses into an even stronger role in the government.
Post a Comment