After health reform, Lilly looking for more

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The health reform debate may have ended in Congress, but Eli Lilly and Co. remains active, sponsoring a talk about the positives of the bill—and calling for further government efforts to help pharmaceutical research and development.

The Indianapolis drugmaker is sponsoring a Sept. 16 “policy summit” in Washington where panelists, including Indiana University President Michael McRobbie, will discuss the job-creating potential of the new health law. The summit is being organized by the National Journal.

By extending insurance coverage to 32 million more Americans, the law would certainly create more paying customers for medical services and products—like Lilly’s medicines.

However, Lilly has already reported that it will forego as much as $400 million in revenue this year alone because the law also required drugmakers to give bigger rebates to federal health insurance programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Also, $2.3 billion annually in taxes on the drug industry will dampen some of the boost from expanding those with insurance.

The only places Lilly is adding jobs are in emerging markets, such as China, where Lilly sales are surging. But in such mature markets as the United States and Europe, Lilly is slashing 5,500 jobs by the end of 2011.

Most other major pharmaceutical companies have also eliminated thousands of jobs over the past three years.

Last month, Lilly officials participated in a conference in Bloomington, talking up a report that called for further incentives for medical research and development in order to not fall behind other countries. The report was funded by the Council for American Medical Innovation, or CAMI, an industry funded group.

“Millions of people with devastating illnesses like diabetes, cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease are banking on better treatments that only medical innovation can produce,” said Bart Peterson, Lilly’s senior vice president of corporate affairs and communications. “The priorities recommended by CAMI will provide a critical boost to the innovation effort in our country.”

The report calls for several industry-friendly proposals:

—Making the federal R&D tax credit permanent and larger.
—Developing a regulatory roadmap at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to help new drugs win approval. The past five years have seen approvals of new drugs wane, with Lilly suffering perhaps more than any other company.
—Federal money to improve math and science education in U.S. schools.

Such proposals are consistent with remarks made earlier this year by Lilly CEO John Lechleiter, who declared an “innovation crisis” in America.

Lilly is struggling through its own innovation crisis, having introduced just one drug to the market in the past five years. It has suffered repeated failures with experimental drugs in late-stage human trials, including two weeks ago when one of its Alzheimer's drugs actually worsened the disease in patients.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.