I recently posted two blogs (one here and one here) on the Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision. This decision provoked the expected hyperbolic distortions from the left, mostly designed to perpetuate their “war on women” campaign trope. If refusing to pay for something that can be purchased at the local CVS for $30 qualifies as a war on women, then what liberals in Arkansas are doing to three women must be the Armageddon.
Under democrat Governor Mike Beebe, the state Medicaid office has denied payment to Chloe Jones, Elizabeth West, and Catherine Kiger for a life-saving cystic fibrosis drug called Kalydeco, which can cost up to $300,000 per year. These three women have filed suit against the liberals in Arkansas to get access to the drug. This is the liberal vision of healthcare and, indeed, state-controlled decision making over all aspects of your life other than what birth control or abortifacient method you get to use. In their bizarre world-view, it’s a “war” on a woman to have her employer opt not to pay $30 for an abortifacient, which she can drive to the local drug store and purchase over-the-counter for about the cost a high end bottle of shampoo, but perfectly OK to refuse to pay for a drug that enables that same woman to breathe.
It is important to note that Kalydeco falls into a category of drugs called “orphan drugs.” These are drugs approved by FDA with a particular designation and market exclusivity for diseases with fewer than 200,000 patients in the US. In the case of Kalydeco, it is approved for cystic fibrosis patients with a particular gene mutation that occurs in about 1,000 people in the US, including the three women on whom war is being waged by liberals in Arkansas. Given the very few number of patients, manufacturers of orphan drugs have to charge high prices to make back the development costs. At $300,000 per patient and 1,000 patients, the total addressable market for Kalydeco is only about $300 million, which is very small by drug standards. Any smaller and there is not enough profit to justify developing the drug. I sense that is precisely what liberals want in their healthcare vision. The fewer new drugs there are, the less work it is for them to deny them to patients in need.
I feel like a broken record, but the liberal hypocrisy is just astonishing. They go categorically berserk about the alleged intervention in a woman’s contraceptive choices by a court decision that, practically speaking, did nothing to limit a single woman’s choice of anything. The economics of contraception are such that the female employees of Hobby Lobby will have to change absolutely nothing as a result of the SCOTUS decision. They might have to forego a few lattes at Starbucks if they need to purchase a Plan B pill on their own dime. These same liberals then applaud the denial of life-saving medications to women with serious, but rare diseases that will ultimately kill them.
Tell me again who’s waging a war on women?