https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/19/us/politics/pelosi-drug-prices.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FU.S.%20Congress&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=10&pgtype=collectionLast week, Speaker Pelosi announced a bill that would allow the US to negotiate prices of insulin and 250 other drugs for users of Medicare. Private insurance plans would also have to follow, facing large fines up to 95% of the profit of the drug if they also don't comply with the regulations. The first committee to discuss the bill will be the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which will hopefully get it to the floor in the next month. However, Republicans in the Committee currently don't support the bill, as they feel it is a move that Pelosi is making to appeal to the representatives on the extreme left. In the past, President Trump supported reducing drug prices during his previous presidential campaign. Some do believe there is a bipartisan solution, which is challenging to find since the continuation of polarization beginning in the 1980s. Pelosi noted that Trump has told her that this is one of his priorities, which leaves Washington stunned if these powerful people decide to work together. Trump could still issue an executive order, and avoid having to work with Congress or Pelosi, but it remains unclear what he will do, since he wants to deal with it in a bipartisan fashion, according to one of his tweets. Some worry about getting the bill passed in the Senate, but Trump could influence his party in favor of passing the bill.
Questions:
1. What do you think the consequences are, both positive or negative, of Trump choosing an executive order over working with Pelosi and Congress?
2. What are different ways that Pelosi can use to try and make sure her bill doesn't get killed in committee or on the Senate floor?
3. Why is the bill going through the Energy and Commerce Committee first?
1. A positive consequence of Trump choosing an executive order is that Congress would not be an issue. It's unlikely that Pelosi will be able to get the Senate to cooperate with her. However, if Trump chooses an executive order, it may create a precedent that encourages future presidents to overextend their executive power.
ReplyDelete2) Pelosi could try to target liberals and centrists to make sure that she has a pretty large support group. She currently has many liberals who do not support her because they believe it is not radical enough and the centrists and conservatives believe it is too radical. Convincing liberals and centrists will help her case. She could also turn to Donald Trump for support, who has said on many occasions that he wants to lower the cost of drugs. Finally, she can work to compromise on her policies, which she has already begun to do, for example with the third party deciding factor which she took out of her proposal.
ReplyDelete-Monique
Delete1) A positive result of Trump choosing an executive order would be that the drug plan would be imposed faster and does not have to pass through Congress, which can take a long time. However, if Trump chooses an executive order over working with Pelosi and Congress, it will show that Presidents can simply use executive orders to pass any legislation that they want immediately and can lead to other presidents abusing this power.
ReplyDelete1. A positive outcome of Trump choosing an executive order would be that he could get what he wants without Congress' approval by issuing this rule. After giving the executive order, it would be almost the same as a law. This way would be much easier and quicker than waiting for the approval from congress. However, consequence would that the future presidents would think of the executive order as their backup plan if they know that Congress would not agree with them.
ReplyDelete3. Created in 1795, the energy and commerce committee was one of the first standing committees. Over time, this committee has developed the broadest jurisdiction among all committees ranging from telecommunications and interstate and foreign commerce to food and drug safety and public health. Since Nancy Pelosi’s bill to decrease the prices of drugs falls into both the food and drug safety and public health spectrum, the bill must first pass the Energy and Commerce Committee.
ReplyDelete3. The House Committee on Energy and Commerce has developed one of the broadest jurisdictions of any congressional committee, and it has legislative oversight over five Cabinet departments and seven independent agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services--which includes the Food and Drug Administration. Since this bill concerns drug prices, it falls under the jurisdiction of this committee, and it represents a continuation of the key role this committee plays in guiding the House on matters of commerce, marketplace interests, and public health.
ReplyDelete- Danielle
DeleteA positive of Trump choosing to do an executive order other than cooperating with Pelosi, is that he will be able to push through with his ideas much faster with less chaos surrounding the issue. However, a possible negative is that it might set a precedent for Presidents and poor democratic skills. It is important to talk it out with people of your opposite party, but if Trump does an executive order, the idea of his as powerful and untouchable by reason will be upheld.
ReplyDelete1. Trump choosing an executive order would give him more power through Congress by pushing ideas forwards much faster. As though getting the law to Congress, it would still take a long time for the law to pass. But, Trump's executive order could set up a reputation for future presidents that abusing this power could get them what they want. This order as president would also set up the idea that Trump as president is not willing to listen to new ideas and that this power can be abused, which is not true.
ReplyDelete1. If Trump chose to make an executive order, it would push through the plan immediately rather than taking much time and debate in Congress. However, the negative consequences of this would be that the next president could easily undue the executive order, making it much more of a temporary plan with little long-term effects, and it could also further the divide between Trump and Pelosi and the House of Representatives in Congress. If they were to work together, it would strengthen the relationship and make it easier to pass policies potentially.
ReplyDelete1. I think if Trump tries to use an executive order to get around congress, it will heighten political tensions even more, first and foremost. Also, now that Trump has been impeached, this action could be called into question in the ensuing trial. Even though executive orders are constitutional, in this case it could be Trump checking the power of congress, which senators judging the trial could view negatively and could fuel the campaign to oust Trump. In a larger scope, I think that avoiding working with congress brings up constitutional questions of what the president is allowed to do and is a big way of getting around just working with people, which I believe would be the best course of action.
ReplyDelete1. One positive of Trump using an executive order would be that it would happen faster and without risk of the senate striking it down. The negatives would be a missed opportunity to have some sort of bipartisan legislation and to work with Pelosi. It also might encourage presidents in the future to take this path instead of working with congress, which could lead to executive overreach.
ReplyDelete3. The bill is going through the energy and commerce committee first because it has extremely broad jurisdiction. The committee oversees food and drug safety, public health, consumer protection, and a variety of other areas. Lowering drug prices relates to public health because increasing drug prices have negative and potentially deadly impacts on many people nationwide. Because this committee oversees public health and drug safety, it is understandable why the bill is going through energy and commerce first.
ReplyDelete