Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

28 miles to the nearest pharmacy? For many, that's the only option.

Closed pharmacy

Pharmacies are closing all across the United States.

J. Michael Jones/Getty Images

Pharmacies in the United States are closing at an alarming rate. The ACT Pharmacy Collaborative, a partnership between community pharmacy networks and academia, reported that 244 pharmacies closed in just the first six weeks of 2024. Similarly, Rite-Aid has closed 500 stores, CVS will close another 300 stores by the end of the year and Walgreens will close 1,200 over the next three years.

In my home state of Oregon, pharmacists are constantly facing untenable scenarios. At a recent hearing, a pharmacist from a rural community testified how a woman from a neighboring town called his pharmacy late in the day needing to urgently fill a prescription. Unfortunately, the only pharmacy in her town had permanently closed, so she was stuck frantically attempting to locate someone who took their insurance and had the medication in stock. His pharmacy had the medication, so while she drove 28 miles on rural roads, the pharmacy stayed open — 30 minutes after closing because that’s what pharmacists do. We take care of patients.


Afterwards, when the patient had the medication in hand and was counseled on how to use it correctly, the pharmacist checked to see how much was made from the prescription. To his dismay, in the end, the pharmacy was reimbursed $23 below the drug’s acquisition price. His pharmacy lost money for taking care of a patient that evening.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Now it might be easy to chalk this up as an isolated incident — an unfortunate anomaly or glitch in our health care system. However, instances like this happen on a regular basis and it has become commonplace to have a prescription reimbursed at an amount that is less than the cost to acquire and dispense the drug. Given the high cost of medications, this may come as a surprise. However, pharmacy benefit managers currently have an outsized influence on the financial health of many community pharmacies.

PBMs are middlemen — often invisible to the patient — that are located at the interface of drug manufacturers, payers and their employer-sponsors, and community pharmacies. They began over 50 years ago as a solution to help payers manage the complexity of prescription drug benefits. PBMs were highly efficient at claims processing, and they do play a role in helping payers process a high volume of relatively small claims. However, over time, the role of PBMs has evolved and expanded to where PBMs are now engaged in negotiating drug prices and determining which medications are covered by a plan’s formulary. They also operate their own pharmacies through closely affiliated partners. This gives PBMs considerable influence on how much pharmacies are paid, which drugs are covered and where patients can fill their prescriptions.

Simultaneously, over time, the PBM market has become highly concentrated. A report released by the Federal Trade Commission in July found that in 2023 the three largest PBMs companies processed approximately 80 percent of the prescriptions dispensed by U.S. pharmacies and that percentage rises to 90 percent if expanding to the six largest PBMs. All the major players are now vertically integrated with other parts of the health sector, often resulting in massive conglomerates where PBMs simultaneously play the role of plan, pharmacy and middleman. The FTC report highlights how PBMs impose “confusing, unfair, arbitrary, and harmful” contractual terms that influence the financial health of pharmacies.

PBMs have grown in such a way that it makes it nearly impossible for the average consumer — or even seasoned policy maker — to understand the problems and propose solutions. And when things are confusing, it is easy to become paralyzed and do nothing. However, in this case, doing nothing is simply not an option. Pharmacies are in crisis. The pharmacy from above has since closed, leaving another rural Oregon town with one less access point for patients.

Momentum for federal regulation that will bring more transparency and accountability to how PBMs influence the drug supply chain has built over the last few years. Multiple bills have come out of congressional committees with unanimous bipartisan support. The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and high-ranking Republicans have expressed support for PBM reform. Congress has now returned to Washington, creating a final and crucial opportunity to pass PBM reform in 2024. It must be done.

To be sure, as a pharmacist, I care deeply about my profession. However, I care even more deeply about the patients that my profession serves. It saddens me that if PBM reform does not pass, then many more pharmacies will close, and more communities will lose pharmacy access. It saddens me that people residing in those communities might need to hold their breath, cross their fingers and hope they are not the patient needing a pharmacy to stay open past close as they drive those 28 miles.

Irwin is a clinical associate professor at Oregon State University’s College of Pharmacy and a public voices fellow with The OpEd Project. She is also a former president of the Oregon State Pharmacy Association.

Read More

People voting
LPETTET/Getty Images

Attention must be paid to working and retired Americans

There is no question that the Democratic Party has lost touch with the working class. Candidates actually rarely use the phrase "working class," while they never stop saying "middle class." Working class, to most Democrats, feels like a pejorative term. Everyone, after all, wants to rise up to the middle class, which makes up 50 percent of the country.

The 35 percent of the public who fit into the working class, in Rodney Dangerfield's terms, don't get no respect.

Keep ReadingShow less
USA China trade war and American tariffs as opposing cargo freight containers in conflict as an economic and diplomatic dispute over import and exports concept as a 3D illustration.
wildpixel/Getty Images

Are Trump's tariffs good for the economy or will they increase prices?

As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to return to the Oval Office, there is much talk about tariffs as the foundation for his economic policy. Trump himself says he’s “a Tariff Man,” and in fact implemented tariffs on a number of countries in his first term. But what are tariffs exactly, and how do they work? What are the pros and cons?

There’s a lot at stake, and like many things “economic,” it’s kind of complicated. So let’s break it down.

Keep ReadingShow less
Man stepping on ripped poster

A man treads on a picture of Syria's ousted president, Bashar al-Assad, as people enter his residence in Damascus on Dec. 8.

Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

With Assad out, this is what we must do to help save Syria

This was a long day coming, and frankly one I never thought I’d see.

Thirteen years ago, Syria’s Bashar Assad unleashed a reign of unmitigated terror on his own people, in response to protests of his inhumane Ba’athist government.

Keep ReadingShow less
Men and a boy walking through a hallway

Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk, with his son X, depart the Capitol on Dec. 5.

Craig Hudson for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Will DOGE promote efficiency for its own sake?

This is the first entry in a series on the Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board created by President-elect Donald Trump to recommend cuts in government spending and regulations. DOGE, which is spearheaded by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has generated quite a bit of discussion in recent weeks.

The goal of making government efficient is certainly an enviable one indeed. However, the potential for personal biases or political agendas to interfere with the process must be monitored.

As DOGE suggests cuts to wasteful spending and ways to streamline government operations, potentially saving billions of dollars, The Fulcrum will focus on the pros and cons.

We will not shy away from DOGE’s most controversial proposals and will call attention to dangerous thinking that threatens our democracy when we see it. However, in doing so, we are committing to not employing accusations, innuendos or misinformation. We will advocate for intellectual honesty to inform and persuade effectively.

The new Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board to be headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, is designed to cut resources and avoid waste — indeed to save money. Few can argue this isn't a laudable goal as most Americans have experienced the inefficiencies and waste of various government agencies.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less