More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Republicans
Last answered 9 minutes ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Republicans.
No, limiting drug prices would also limit the investment in research and development into new life-saving drugs
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Sep 6, 2016. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Choose a demographic filter
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
Learn more about Drug Price Regulation
In September of 2016, US Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton released a proposal that would create an oversight panel that would protect U.S. consumers from large price hikes on long-available, lifesaving drugs. The proposal was in response to recent steep price increases on drugs including the AIDS drug Daraprim and the EpiPen. Proponents of drug price regulation argue that drug makers raise prices to benefit the value of their stock and invest little of their profits in the development and research of new drugs. Opponents of regulation argue that consumers rely on drug companies to develop new drugs and limiting prices will prevent new lifesaving drugs from being developed. Clinton's campaign cited Turing Pharmaceuticals LLC's raising the price of its AIDS drug Daraprim (pyrimethamine) and Mylan NV’s repeated steep price increases on EpiPen for severe allergy sufferers as “troubling” examples of price hikes that have attracted bipartisan congressional scrutiny. See recent drug price regulation news
More stances on this issue
The government would not have to regulate any drug price if the insurance industry did not exist. Drug companies would be bankrupt if anyone had to pay OOP for drugs. 9 months ago from a Republican in Roscommon, MI
Only to a certain degree, the company has to make a profit to pay it's bills too but shouldn't jeopardize life for the sake of stock holders. 11 months ago from a Republican in Atlanta, GA
Yes, but only life-saving drugs and a fair profit margin slightly higher than typical for industry should be targeted to encourage further investment in life-saving drugs. 11 months ago from a Republican in San Juan Capistrano, CA
It is not good to have government regulate private business but put a cap on profits. a percentage above cost and kept affordable. 11 months ago from a Republican in Los Angeles, CA