this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
480 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

59237 readers
3447 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like a toothless threat, following through would upset too many campaign donors.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 21 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

It's not toothless. There is an existing law that allows the government to issue their own licenses for drugs still under patent developed using at least some amount of tax payer money under certain circumstances. It's pretty broadly worded in the law when this can be done, so previously regulations were made to define the circumstances more precisely. The administration is issuing a new regulation that says one of those circumstances will now include if the drug is high priced limiting its access. Because new regulations issued by the executive branch have a mandatory public comment period after they are proposed before they take effect, its not active quite yet but will be soon (that's why every headline about this is using the dumb vague word of threaten). The drug companies are already promising to sue to try and overturn the new regulation. So yeah it's got teeth.

[–] bitcrafter@programming.dev 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Thank you, I came to this comment section hoping someone would explain what exactly the basis in law was for this.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This is the specific law Biden is trying to derive the authority from if you're interested in more:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The corporate christofascist supreme court will overturn any executive power expansion as long as their team is not the executive.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 3 points 11 months ago

Maybe. Hopefully not. All the more reason to follow every little process for new executive regulations flawlessly when enacting it, like the 6 month comment period. A lot of people are saying just do it immediately. But that'd just be giving the pharma companies and republicans an easy out to strike it down in the courts.