Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Another one pops

Posted in:

Illinois

* Yesterday, we discussed three opposition research reports on Bruce Rauner. The lindane story finally popped late last night, and now the baby medicine story is in Crain’s…

The story is about how GTCR LLC, the private-equity firm that Mr. Rauner headed before he got in the gubernatorial contest — he’s the “R” in the name — increased thirteenfold the price of a medication used for premature infants with a heart defect. The huge hike, to nearly $1,500 from $77.77 for a three-vial treatment, came two days after GTCR gained rights over one of the few competing products. […]

“By acquiring its only competitor in the treatment of a serious heart condition affecting premature babies, Ovation has been able to charge dramatically higher prices for its drugs,” Acting FTC Bureau of Competition Director David P. Wales said in announcing the action. “While Ovation is profiting from its illegal acquisition, hospitals and ultimately consumers and American taxpayers are forced to pay millions of dollars a year more for these life-saving medications. The action taken today is intended to restore the lost competition and require Ovation to give up its unlawful profits.”

The FTC lost the case before Judge Ericksen. And it lost an appeal. In effect, Judge Ericksen ruled the two drugs weren’t competing against each other because physicians testified that the effectiveness of each drug, not its price, is what determined usage. And since the two did not share a market, there was no monopoly and no monopoly violation. […]

No, I don’t think Bruce Rauner hates old people, beats up women and wants sick babies to die, as Mr. Quinn’s ads suggest. But does his bottom-line fixation on making money leave enough room to care about those things? It’s a fair question to ask.

* Interestingly enough, commenters seemed in agreement that the other story, about workplace violence, strip clubs and the profit motive über alles, was by far the most interesting and outrageous to them…

I read the second link first also, and thought “Oh my God!” This sort of stuff is the death knell for a candidate if enough people find out about it.

And…

Rubbing toxic ooze in kids’ hair is bad. Republicans can see past it though.

But GOP voters are generally unaccepting of candidates who condone - nay, applaud - using the company account to visit strip clubs.

So, maybe that one’ll see the light of day, too.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:25 pm

Comments

Rich -

I apologize.

I hadn’t read this story until a few minutes ago.

I am a little surprised that not a single news network picked up on the fact that Rauner wasn’t the least bit troubled by the fact a company exec was spending money to take folks to strip clubs.

That will not play well with a lot of folks. Particularly married women. Although his biker pals may think it makes him one of the guys.

But I know that the Harley riders across Illinois also have big hearts, raising money for abused and neglected kids, leading toys for tots drives.

And I think they will be pretty disgusted when they find out that Rauner profited by raising the cost of a life-saving drug for premature infants from $78 to more than $1500.

So, while the Rauner strip clubs story is an easier one to tell on television, and certainly get an instant reaction from Rauner’s base.

I think the profiteering off of premature infants - although perfectly legal - is more devastating on all fronts. It simply makes voting for Rauner unconscionable.

BTW, this is the same guy who was kicking Quinn over deaths at DCFS a few weeks ago, so stop the whining about unfair attacks before it starts.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:37 pm
I think the Ovation story is the game-changer. Gouging premature babies for life-saving medicine?

The comments from the Bush appointees to the FTC make it so.

Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:39 pm
Really Rich….. Reporting - yes. Journalism - no. Maybe you need a vacation.

Comment by State Worker Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:41 pm
My sense is that Rauner voters *like* these stories. They don’t care if people are hurt. That’s okay to them. Babies, old folks — it’s all just noise.

What matters is that someone has enough testicular virility to actually move forward and hurt people.

The same can’t be said for Quinn — or most other candidates.

Rauner gets the win for the pain.

Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:43 pm
The table is set for Joe Slade White.

They have shown this very specific cycle, against this very specific candidate, they can make Ads that send the Rauner positive spiraling… if the get the service.

They have articles now. The work should have already begun.

It’s all there.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:43 pm
There’s a pretty colorful new Russ Stewart column up at his website which, if Stewart has his way, may read as a series of autopsies (first of the Rauner campaign, then of IL after Quinn wins). But there’s some inside scoopage from “sources close to the Rauner campaign” that are interesting perusal. Recommended.

Comment by ZC Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:46 pm
Greg’s story was interesting though because there seems to have been a lot of investment made on these drugs. It may not matter politically, but perhaps there was a good reason to raise the prices.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:47 pm
Rauner also caused McKinney the most pain. That’s why he’s leaving? Voters love this stuff.

Pain is what makes it real.

http://davemckinney123.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/why-i-left/

Comment by Frenchie Mendoza Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:47 pm
@Frenchie,

Thanks for the link. Wow. What a letter. Unfortunate.

Comment by How Ironic Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 1:53 pm
https://capitolfax.com/2014/10/22/mckinney-resigns-from-sun-times-i%e2%80%99m-convinced-this-newspaper-no-longer-has-the-backs-of-reporters-like-me/

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 2:03 pm
ZC - that was a pretty good article. Based on Mr. Stewart’s article, it remains to be seen how Bruce Rauner does. No one can be a worse “bang for your own buck” candidate that Tony Sanchez. That dude lost the 2002 gubernatorial election in Texas by 18% after spending $60 million of his own cash. John Corzine underwhelmed on his way to a win in 2005 after spending $38 million of his own money.

Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 2:06 pm
Great letter by McKinney Frenchie.

Comment by Been There Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 2:09 pm
I also am not saying Rauner wanted to see vulnerable people suffer–no way.

What I’m saying is that Rauner came onto the Illinois political scene calling lots of good people corrupt, and saying that certain groups of people are destroying Illinois. He has a thing for calling others corrupt, incompetent. Waste, fraud, abuse, etc.

Perhaps far more importantly, Rauner said that he’s been successful in everything he’s done, and is hands-on.

Well, okay, let’s have a look at the very thing Rauner will bring to state government–his business experience.

Rauner couldn’t name one job that his companies created at a critical time, during the debate. That’s the so-called softball that he couldn’t hit.

Some of his companies were riddled with problems that management should have tried to address. Also, did the nursing home executives really sell part of the nursing home company, the lawsuit-ridden part, to an unsuspecting graphic artist designer?

So many bad Rauner company stories are coming out that my head almost hurts trying to keep up with them.

Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 2:16 pm
“hospitals and ultimately consumers and American taxpayers are forced to pay millions of dollars a year more for these life-saving medications”

Um, that’s how the whole pharma industry works, folks. *EVERY* (on-patent) pill you take is subsidizing the use of that same drug in other countries. Without the “price gouging” of Americans, Pharma would essentially cease R&D.

You have a problem with a drug price going up (except in a case of anti-competitive actions, which *two* courts determined this was not), then you have a problem with Pharma in general. Take up the issue with your Congresscritters.

Comment by Chris Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 2:43 pm
If Only..if only the Quinn team could have given this issue TV time and some legs 2 weeks ago. The Shark has been jumped however, and Rauner will roll right on to victory.

Comment by SlapshotII Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 2:44 pm
This isn’t 1995 anymore. The Republican senator from louisiana, vitter used a hooker, he was re-elected easily. They have another congressman down there who 3 months ago was busted on video having an affair in his congressional office. That was also the deep south. This is Illinois, different ball game.

I think these stories about what these companies did are bad, but just because you have them doesn’t mean they’ll be used effectively. A lot of the stuff Obama used on Romney related to companies he’d owned/outsourced/fired his 2002 opponent had had and not used effectively the way ted kennedy had in 1994. Specifically I’m thinking of an ad about laid off mill workers in the midwest.

Rich has spent a lot of time going after Rauner for not hitting quinn earlier, but I really don’t think quinn took Rauner seriously enough early enough the way Obama did with mitt. Maybe it’s because he beat brady, but quinn ignored the fact, probably now until too late that Rauner to his credit has shown over the last several years an ability to grow as a candidate and I think has passed the test.

We’ll see, but this seems too little, too late and without the firepower it needed.

Comment by Shore Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 3:39 pm
Rauner’s approach to life makes me feel the need to wash my hands over and over and over and over again. he is a slimy, greedy jerk.

Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 3:42 pm
yeah we all get it. rauners a ruthless tycoon. Problem for Quinn is voters are starting to think we need a ruthless tycoon to fix the state.

Comment by Nathan R. Jessup Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 4:03 pm
It’s not illegal “price gouging” to raise the cost of a life-saving drug 3000% in one day, because it was still being prescribed by some doctors at the new price?

And controlling the one similar drug and raising its price 1500% the same time, was not illegal “market control”, because while doctors chose the two to treat the same symptoms and cases, they worked with slightly different mechanisms, and thus they weren’t proven to be technically “competitive?”

Those fine legal arguments might work for Rauner’s company to avoid prosecution and fines.

But who had to pay these exorbitant costs to save babies’ lives? Insurance companies, individuals, and taxpayers. We did. And how many decided they just couldn’t afford these astronomical price increases at all?

This isn’t the mythical “free market” or cost rationales at work, because remember the company under the former owners priced these same drugs at a tiny fraction the week before Rauner’s company took control. That is nothing but profit-driven pricing in a severely limited market.

Comment by walker Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 4:06 pm
===* Interestingly enough, commenters seemed in agreement that the other story, about workplace violence, strip clubs and the profit motive über alles, was by far the most interesting and outrageous to them . . . . I read the second link first also, and thought “Oh my God!” This sort of stuff is the death knell for a candidate if enough people find out about it.===

But the entire concept of ripping parents off for baby medicine can be told with just one headline:

“Rauner company raised cost of life-saving drug for babies 1,300%”

This story may seem more

Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 6:52 pm
Nathan R. Jessup,

Win or lose, Pat Quinn has made quite a comeback. The same people are for ruthless tycoons that have always been for ruthless tycoons. You might have been able to make that argument more effectively in 2010.

Comment by James Knell Wednesday, Oct 22, 14 @ 9:45 pm
So pealing back the drug industry business model makes ordinary people gasp with horror. What do you think causes Americans to pay on average $225 for Celebrex (pain) vs. $51 in Canada; $3,903 for Copaxone (MS) vs $862 in England; $6,214 for Gleevec (Cancer) vs. $1,141 in Canada? Let me guess—wilful ignorance coupled with spending most of the political process concerned about BS.
Rauner operated no different than 98% of other American billionaire drug company executives, the only difference is he thought his “business success” would be a positive running for Governor.

Comment by Louis Howe Friday, Oct 24, 14 @ 7:32 am