Comments on: Under The Influence

60 Minutes' Steve Kroft Reports On Drug Lobbyists' Role in Passing Bill That Keeps Drug Prices High

On tonight's program, Steve Croft's voice over identified Dan Burton as being from Illinois but he is from Indiana.

On tonight's program, Steve Croft's voice over identified Dan Burton as being from Illinois but he is from Indiana.

[elz523]

The cons at work again. Cons are supposed to be for limited government, evidently that doesn't apply to anything that lines the pockets of their friends.

This is revealing. How can a con defend not allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with the drug industry? I'd love to hear the answer.

[ranger215]

Thank you Steve Kroft for another in a long string of excellent reports. My only question is regarding the timeliness of the segment's airing. Was this segment 'supressed' by CBS management as long as it was to maintain the steady stream of drug company advertising revenue? Other than that, keep up the great work!

[gatorman442]

The representatives who passed this most expensive bill in history during the wee hours of the morning, know that they have sinned against humanity. They will suffer in hell for their terrible deed. They should be imprisoned for treason against their fellow man !

[deep_think]

60 Minutes got it wrong!! The 2003 Medicare Act already has the rules to cut drug prices, but the Bush Administration has decided not to enforce the them. For example, patients don't need the the more expensive cholesterol reducer, such as Lipitor, when a cheaper and inexpensive generic version is available. It's called therapeutic substitution, it's done in Germanu, and the 200s Medicare legislation allows it.

The 60 Minutes producers need to learn the real industry structure, especially how drug formularies work and ask the right questions of the policy makers and the Bush administration and put together a real expose!!!!!

[terrynugent]

Your story on Medicare Part D is by far the most biased, partisan piece of garbage I have ever suffered through, and that says a lot considering the source.

Taking a program that has givem 95% of seniors drug coverage with which they are highly satisfied and make it sound like some sort of criminal conspiracy is a a moral and journalistic outrage.

The Dems are so mad the Republicans passed Part D because the Democrats wanted to pass it!
The benefit would never have been passed with price controls, so seniors have gotten years of benefit thanks to the Republicans. In fact the program is UNDER budget, a hugely significant fact you witheld from the public. The VA program you so laud lost droves of Veterans to Part D because it doesn't cover many drugs they need.

If you so deplore the industry, stop taking their commercial dollars. If yu don't, you will reveal yourselves to the world as the miserable, despicable hypocrites you are.

[daddyandmomm]

Thank you so much for this story!! It shows how corupt Congress is and people that lobby should be illegal!! I'd like to see them pass a bill on that!! All the other countries in the world look at us and say "Money greedy America!!" Another price we have to pay for people turning their backs on God. Our Christian founding fore-fathers turning over in their graves!!

[michaela64]

Just another corrupt politician(s) who will have to answer to God for his/their love for money.

In Money We Trust!

[freshideas-2009]

I was pleased and surprised at Steve Kroft's hard-hitting story on the way Congress works, lured, and pressured by the money-laden and money-hungry lobbyists, in this case the powerful pharmaceutical industry. The reason I was surprised is that I see hundreds of pharmaceutical ads on TV every day, and the independence of this piece despite that potential muffler, the courage to tell it like it is, was indeed a breath of fresh air! Steve Kroft also did an excellent job of substantiating the allegations being made, with hard evidence, and allowing the views of the accused to be heard (ludicrous though they might be - that wasn't Steve's fault!) My only other comment is that I wish some investigative reporter would really delve into the European health care systems and why they get so much better results for so much less money. In part, at least, it is because they recognize that drugs are not the be-all of health care. Some - Germany, for example, have carefully researched traditional and herbal remedies and covered the ones proven safe and effective under their national health. Great Britain has a number of homeopathic hospitals - all covered under their national plan. Such alternatives are many, many times cheaper - and less dangerous - than prescription drugs, which injure or kill hundreds of thousands each year. Why isn't this being looked into? Maybe Steve's story has the answer.

[freshideas-2009]

I was pleased and surprised at Steve Kroft's hard-hitting story on the way Congress works, lured, and pressured by the money-laden and money-hungry lobbyists, in this case the powerful pharmaceutical industry. The reason I was surprised is that I see hundreds of pharmaceutical ads on TV every day, and the independence of this piece despite that potential muffler, the courage to tell it like it is, was indeed a breath of fresh air! Steve Kroft also did an excellent job of substantiating the allegations being made, with hard evidence, and allowing the views of the accused to be heard (ludicrous though they might be - that wasn't Steve's fault!) My only other comment is that I wish some investigative reporter would really delve into the European health care systems and why they get so much better results for so much less money. In part, at least, it is because they recognize that drugs are not the be-all of health care. Some - Germany, for example, have carefully researched traditional and herbal remedies and covered the ones proven safe and effective under their national health. Great Britain has a number of homeopathic hospitals - all covered under their national plan. Such alternatives are many, many times cheaper - and less dangerous - than prescription drugs, which injure or kill hundreds of thousands each year. Why isn't this being looked into? Maybe Steve's story has the answer.

[chezchas]

Re: PhRMA and the drug benefit. Mr. Pollack displays a breathtaking ignorance about how the non-negotiation language was added to the drug bill. Bill Clinton proposed it in his 1999 version and every Democratic bill thereafter (including those sponsored by Tom Daschle and Nancy Pelosi) included the language. The reason: precisely because--said the Democrats--they didn't want Medicare to be as limited as the VA in the drugs it offered. Pollack is also wrong when he talks about how the VA "negotiates" drug prices: it doesn't. By law, the VA price controls its limited drug choices, statutorily receiving at least 24% off of commerical pricing.

[rjstolba]

What can the average American do to STOP the crooks who sell our votes to the highest bidder? And don't tell me to write my Congressional reps. That doesn't work!!!! Tauzin isn't the only greedy sleeze in the Congress. Both sides follow the same GOD--the almighty buck. What happened to integrity, decency. honor, morals, etc? They never stop amazing me. I always think that one day they will all wake up and realize what they are doing to us and to themselves. Pardon my naivete.

[wagsreed]

In the opening commentary of this interview, Steve refers to Dan Burton as a Rep. from Illinois. I live in Fishers, IN and unfornately Dan Burton is my Rep.. If Illinois is interested in him, they can have him. Just let them know he normally doesn't show up to vote .....

[bfnelms]

Of course, as a good journalist Katie Couric should have scheduled the interview with the Edwards last Sunday.

Of course, she should have asked the hard questions: How did you and your wife make the decision to continue your campaign when the recurrence of cancer became known? How do you respond to Rush Limbaugh who says, "...."? What will you tell potential supporters and financial backers who ask how you will react if (God forbid!) your wife's cancer worsens during your campaign or during your presidency (if you were to be elected)?

Each of these questions could have been asked once--and thoughtfully. Instead what we got was a harangue. The same questions over and over again, in a cold, snippy tone, with the underlying assumption that Mrs. Edwards is dying--now.

If only she had ever, once shown the same insistent tone in questioning members of the Bush regime, esp. the VP . . . . But no, never!

So, so long 60 Minutes. You fallen to a journalistic low. Henceforth, I will go elsewhere for unbiased coverage--or, at least, for coverage that labels its own bias.

Neoconservatism is NOT news. It's opinion. Some people say it's even neo-fascism. Some people . . . . Hmmm, wonder who they might have been.

(Google it!)

[bfnelms]

How I would like to hear Steve Kroft on Congress's response to pharmaceutical lobbyists.

BUT until I see or hear an apology from Katie Couric (or preferably a resignation) regarding her non-professional, biased, neoconservative approach to her interview of the Edwards, no morfe 60 Minutes for me.

It is simply journalistically unforgivable to lead off questions with "people say." Thos of us who know her know that she was simply activing as a shill for Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly and "journalists" of their ilk--of which she is clearly just one more.

What she did not do was to admit publicly that she continued to work, making millions a year, while her husband was dying of cancer. What she did not do was cite the positive examples of people like Lance Armstrong. What she did not do was to give John Edwards the chance to talk about a single issue beyond defending himself against charges of negligence of his wife and children. (Will she show the same concern for the first (and second and third) wife of such candidates as Newt Gingerich, Rudy Guliani, John McCain?

[cantshutup]

shouldn't this be in the politics or u.s. news section?????