IBJNews

Q&A

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

As an Eli Lilly and Co. lobbyist in Washington, D.C., Jay Bonitt is hoping the Congressional “super committee” charged with trimming the federal budget doesn’t turn to the Medicare prescription drug program, known as Part D, to do so. Bonitt, Lilly's vice president of federal affairs, said the program is under budget and helps spur drugmakers to further innovation. While Lilly does not reveal how much revenue Lilly gets from the program, its biggest stars get the biggest boost from the program: Zyprexa, Cymbalta, Humalog and Evista.

IBJ: Cuts to Medicare are clearly one of the options as the super committee tries to find $1.2 trillion in savings over 10 years. Can you give your best sense for what’s on the table about Medicare Part D at this point in time?

A: I wish I could. As you can imagine, this town is just rife with rumors and speculation. Sen. [Max] Baucus (D-Montana) said he put $3 trillion out there: $1 trillion of that was in revenue raisers, another $500 billion was in Medicare [cuts]. But my understanding it was no more than a one-page plan. So we don’t know the details.

IBJ: President Obama released a plan in September that would require drugmakers to give Medicare the same generous rebates for low-income patients they give the Medicaid program. How would those price cuts—estimated at $135 billion over 10 years—impact Lilly?

A: That would be a substantial impact. We haven’t been able to determine the exact number. To impose these rebates would have a devastating impact on the industry and on innovation. If we incur a lot more cost, with the imposition of Medicaid-type rebates or a tax, then that’s less revenues that will be available for innovation.

IBJ: Medicare Part D is only six years old, and clearly Lilly and its peers did plenty of innovating before the program was created. How would scaling back its payments put innovation at risk?

A: When I first came to Lilly back in 1994, I think most of the studies showed that it cost you around $300 million to bring a drug to market. Today, the most recent Tufts University study that I’ve seen put it at about $1.2 billion now. It’s just a very, very expensive process, and it gets more expensive.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

  2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

  3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

  4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

  5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

ADVERTISEMENT