Novo rejects U.S. insulin price hikes report, has 'nothing to hide'

 Novo Nordisk on Wednesday rejected allegations by a U.S. congressional investigative committee that it has engaged in manoeuvres to increase net prices on life-saving insulin in tandem with competitors on the U.S. market.

The report by the House Oversight Committee, the main investigative body of the U.S. House of Representatives, alleged that Novo had raised its insulin drug prices to the detriment of diabetes patients between 2001 and 2019.

Referring to Novo, Eli Lilly and Sanofi, which account for some 90% of the U.S. insulin market, the report released in December cited internal documents saying the three drugmakers had "intentionally and strategically raised their prices in lockstep."

An Eli Lilly spokesperson said at the time of the report that the company offers discounts to make its insulin affordable. A Sanofi spokesperson said the price of its insulin product Lantus had declined by almost 45% since 2012.

And on Wednesday, Novo's Chief Executive Lars Joergensen denied the Danish company had engaged in such activities.

"We have nothing to hide, we feel we have done business in the right way in the U.S," Joergensen said.

"Our net pricing is actually declining quite significantly," Jorgensen said, adding: "For quite some years pricing has been going down on insulin, not going up."

The report contained graphs showing how Novo has raised the price on its rapid-acting insulin NovoLog by 628% since 2001 by hiking it 28 times. The price rises occurred in almost perfect lockstep with rival Eli Lilly's Humalog insulin product.

Similarly, Novo raised its prices for its long-acting insulin Levemir drug 18 times, by a total of 360% between 2006 and 2019. This happened in tandem with Sanofi's price hikes on its Lantus product, the report said.

"As companies raised prices on their drugs, internal data shows that net prices - prices after accounting for all discounts and rebates - also increased for most of the drugs," the U.S. report stated.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/1-novo-rejects-u-insulin-143519827.html

Frustrated by corporate handout 'Groundhog Day'? Blame the American Rescue Plan

 Another wild year of corporate giveaways might have you feeling like Bill Murray in “Groundhog Day,” but it shouldn’t be a surprise. We hate to say it, but we told you so.

During the first months of the pandemic, as the economy crashed and tax revenues plummeted, policymakers begged Congress to bail out state and local governments. Our research recommended that coronavirus relief funding come with a ban on states’ use of taxpayer dollars to poach jobs from each other, which wastes roughly $100 billion every year. Otherwise, Congress could end up underwriting every competitor in an economic race to the bottom.

Unfortunately, we were right. And we weren’t the only ones — researchers at Good Jobs First and the American Economic Liberties Project saw the same problem coming.

Since the passage of the American Rescue Plan (ARP), we’ve seen a surge in corporate handouts. The supersized deals that misuse taxpayer dollars are typically rushed through the approval process to limit transparency and prevent constructive discussion by wiser policymakers.

Let’s quickly review an (incomplete) list of recent giveaways:

There’s the combined $1.3 billion Ford Motor Company received from Tennessee and Kentucky and the $824 million General Motors got from Michigan. North Carolina – which gave out over $1.3 billion in 2021, including $846 million to Apple and $439 million to Toyota – just revealed another $228 million subsidy for Boom Supersonic.

So far the biggest spenders are Texas, which gave Samsung $1.2 billion; West Virginia, which gave Nucor Steel $1.7 billion; and Ohio, which just last week revealed during a Friday afternoon news dump that it wants to give Intel more than $2.1 billion.

We still don’t know how much Georgia promised Rivian, but one report indicates the number is “likely to be staggering.” Virginians are preparing to subsidize the Washington Football Team’s new stadium complex. Kansas policymakers are being pressured to approve nearly $2 billion for a mystery company. 

For the reader who looks at this list and only sees booming American economic growth, let us offer some points to consider: 

First, academic research shows that most subsidies don’t actually determine where a company locates or expands. Such decisions are based more on profitability fundamentals such as local workforces or access to suppliers and customers. It’s just financial common sense. 

Consider that North Carolina’s $846 million subsidy is less than a single day’s revenue for Apple. Michigan’s $824 million subsidy is barely three days’ revenue for GM. Major corporations don’t make mission-critical site selection decisions based on the potential for an additional day or two’s worth of revenues spread over decades. 

Second, on rare occasions when a subsidy does sway a company, it’s motivated a sub-optimal economic choice. Choosing a quick payout over the best place to do business means the company will do worse in the long term. That’s the opposite of what “economic development” is supposed to accomplish. 

Third, because subsidies give companies advantages over their competition or come with strings attached, they lead to less focus on serving customers. Taken all together, the wasted resources and political distractions reduce national economic growth.

After Congress passed ARP, we advised the Treasury Department that it should explicitly restrict state and local governments from treating relief funding as a $350 billion slush fund. The economic arms race between the states was bad enough to begin with.

Thankfully, the Treasury agreed. In its Final Rule released last month, it forbade the use of ARP funding for general economic development purposes.

States probably think they can thumb their nose at the Treasury, because 20 have challenged ARP’s restriction on using relief funds for general tax cuts. Federalists have a good argument that this attempt to commandeer state tax policy is an overreach of congressional power. But its application to economic development subsidies should be considered a separate issue and upheld by the courts. States’ attempts to sway corporate relocation and expansion decisions intrinsically affect interstate commerce, the regulation of which was constitutionally delegated to Congress.

Because Congress seems uninterested in solving the arms race, some state leaders are taking matters into their own hands. Under the Constitution’s Compacts Clause, they’re developing an interstate compact that would allow states to credibly commit to ending all subsidy programs simultaneously. If Congress wants to help, it could provide preemptive consent.

Meanwhile, legislators in New York, Illinois and Florida are considering bills that would ban the use of nondisclosure agreements that keep taxpayers – and even elected officials – from knowing key details about subsidy deals before they’re approved.

Just about every day brings news of another subsidy that will reduce, rather than improve, future economic growth. It’s a figurative Sisyphean hell not unlike the one in the iconic movie that’s become synonymous with Feb. 2. Our escape, like that of Bill Murray’s character, will require abandoning self-destructive selfishness and embracing cooperation.

Michael Farren is a senior research fellow with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. John Mozena is president at The Center for Economic Accountability.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/592253-frustrated-by-a-corporate-handout-groundhog-day-blame-the-american-rescue

The tattered mission of Border Patrol

 Each year through the budgetary process, Congress allocates approximately $2 billion to Border Patrol. The funding is justified and defended by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which claims “DHS works to protect the American people and economy by preventing the illegal movement of people and contraband across U.S. borders while facilitating legitimate trade and travel.”

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the mission of the force is to, “Protect the American people, safeguard our borders, and enhance the nation’s economic prosperity.”

Further, the core values include a dedication to “defending and upholding the Constitution of the United States.” Integrity is touted as the “cornerstone” of the work agents do, guided “by the highest ethical and moral principles” bringing “honor to ourselves and our agency.”

But since President Biden took office in January 2021, the unofficial mission of Border Patrol has shifted to processing millions of illegal immigrants. This takes important time away from essential frontline patrols and drug interdictions. As a consequence, Border Patrol has become detached from its stated mission and priorities.

On Oct. 4, 2021, the Department of Homeland Security announced it was reimplementing Title 42, which requires the immediate expulsion of single adults. 

“The Department of Homeland Security will continue to process individuals in accordance with the updated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Title 42 Order. As part the United States’ COVID-19 mitigation efforts, DHS will continue to expel single adults and families encountered at the Southwest Border,” the Department of Homeland Security released in a statement.

Since then, the policy has hardly been enforced, and recent video footage obtained by Fox News shows thousands of single adult males being processed, put onto planes or buses and taken to cities across the country for release. Worse, Immigration and Customs Enforcement confirmed many of the men released have serious and violent criminal records. 

According to U.S. Code, “domestic transportation of unauthorized aliens, concealing or harboring unauthorized aliens, encouraging or inducing unauthorized aliens to enter the United States, and engaging in a conspiracy or aiding and abetting any of the preceding acts” is a federal crime. The federal government has engaged in the transport of countless illegal immigrants.

Tensions boiled over last week when agents openly confronted Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz about illegal immigration and how leadership is handling the situation. 

“Under this administration, in the last year, we’ve got the highest fentanyl deaths in the history of our country,” one agent said. “How many [fentanyl seizures] are we missing because we’re focusing on these families?”

“For evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. Good men are doing nothing. You’re allowing illegal aliens to be dropped off in communities,” another added.

Ortiz shot back by claiming he shows up every day to “carry out the mission,” but did not clearly define what that mission is or address concerns about Biden’s border policy violating the law enforcement agency’s official mission.

“We continue to do the job and the mission that we signed up for. We all signed up for it, we all raised our hand,” Ortiz said. “Everyday I wake up and I’m committed to this organization.” 

Meanwhile, calls for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to step down are growing louder as he knowingly mandates the violation of U.S. immigration law. 

“He has lost the trust and confidence of the men and women of DHS law enforcement,” former Acting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan said during a recent event at the Heritage Foundation. “I continue to speak with our frontline agents, and their anger, exhaustion, and frustration with this secretary are apparent. He has not only destroyed the most secure border in our lifetime—he has repeatedly lied to the American people about the cascading impacts to our country’s public safety, health, and national security.”

American taxpayers are owed a Border Patrol that lives up to its mission to protect the country — not one that simply processes law breakers through a system that ultimately places them into American communities. What’s happening at the border and the behavior of so-called leadership is anything but honorable. Worse, implementing President Biden’s open border agenda has forced agents to unwillingly violate their oaths and to disregard the law.

Katie Pavlich is the editor for Townhall.com and a Fox News contributor.

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/592382-pavlich-the-tattered-mission-of-border-patrol

Luján stroke jolts 50-50 Senate

 News of Sen. Ben Ray Luján’s (D-N.M.) stroke sent shockwaves through the Senate on Tuesday, underscoring the fragility of Democrats’ 50-50 majority.

Democrats are in the majority because they have 50 seats and the ability for Vice President Harris to break a tie. Luján’s absence leaves them at 49 seats until he returns, with his office saying he’s expected to make a full recovery.

“It's just a reminder that in a 50-50 Senate any unexpected development could be a challenge to our moving forward on an agenda that the Democratic caucus shares,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who said he was very optimistic that the 49-year-old Luján would make a full recovery.

Underscoring the narrow majority, Democrats on the Commerce Committee, which Luján is a member of, almost immediately yanked three nominations that were expected to get votes on Wednesday. An aide noted that the agenda was being "recalibrated to take into consideration the need for all Democratic votes in order to move certain nominees forward." 

The announcement appeared to catch senators off guard.

“Oh my god. I didn’t know that,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the No. 2 Senate Democrat.

Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), asked by reporters about Luján, said it was the first time that he was hearing the news.

“Oh, my God. I’ll find out. I did not know that, wow, ” Tester said.

Democrats still technically outnumber GOP senators for now.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is in quarantine for the week because of COVID-19. Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) also announced on Tuesday that he went into quarantine after testing positive for the coronavirus. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican, said that he expected Romney and Hoeven back next week. 

Luján’s office didn’t immediately respond to question about when he could return to the Capitol. But in a statement they said that Lujan—who at 49 is young by Senate terms—is “expected to make a full recovery.”

It’s not the first time that an absence has deprived Democrats of 50 votes and thrown the schedule into question.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) testing positive for the coronavirus, combined with the threat of a snowstorm, forced Schumer to delay, by a matter of days, votes on election-related legislation and an effort to change the legislative filibuster.

Democrats also delayed votes earlier this year after Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) was stuck in his car for roughly 27 hours as he tried to travel back to Washington, D.C., with the interstate at a standstill because of snow and ice.

Democrats are currently plowing through 20 nominees that Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has teed up for votes, which is expected to eat up the Senate floor for this week and next week.

Democrats can confirm Biden’s nominees without Lujan at the moment because of the GOP absences. If all GOP senators are present, they’ll need Republican help to confirm the nominees.

Other key pieces of the Democratic agenda are in limbo anyways, meaning they won’t be impacted by Luján’s absence.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) reiterated on Tuesday that the version of Build Back Better that passed the House is “dead.” Democratic leaders and the White House have been careful to sidestep committing to a demand from House progressives that they pass the bill by March 1.

Democrats are waiting for Biden to name his replacement to succeed Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court. He’s pledged to name his pick by the end of February but even once he does, it’s expected to take at least a month for the Senate to get to a final confirmation vote.

There are also bipartisan discussions happening on Russia sanctions and reforming the Electoral Count Act as well as a looming deadline to fund the government by Feb. 18.

But each of those, if deals come together, would likely get enough support that they could move through the Senate without Luján.

Schumer, speaking with reporters after the announcement, vowed that the Senate would stay on track.

“We look forward to his quick return to the Senate, and I believe the Senate will be able to carry forward with its business,” Schumer said.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/592391-lujan-stroke-jolts-50-50-senate

Clover Health upped to Market Perform from Underperform by Cowen

 Target to $7 from $3

https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=CLOV&ty=c&ta=1&p=d

Thermo Fisher beat boosted by nearly $2.5 billion in COVID-19 response revenue

 Shares of Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. TMO, +0.69% rallied 2.5% in premarket trading Wednesday, after the analytic and diagnostic instruments company reported big fourth-quarter profit and revenue beats, boosted by nearly $2.5 billion in COVID-19 response revenue. Net income fell to $1.66 billion, or $4.17 a share, from $2.50 billion, or $6.24 a share, in the year-ago period. Excluding nonrecurring items, adjusted earnings per share slipped to $6.54 from $7.09, but was well above the FactSet consensus of $4.93. Revenue increased 1.4% to $10.70 billion, beating the FactSet consensus of $8.71 billion. COVID-19 response revenue of $2.45 billion, which was 22.9% of total revenue, was up from $2.05 billion in the third quarter. The company said it would provide 2022 financial guidance in its post-earnings conference call with analysts later Wednesday morning. The stock has lost 6.6% over the past three months through Tuesday while the S&P 500 SPX, +0.41% has slipped 1.5%.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/thermo-fisher-stock-rallies-after-big-earnings-beat-boosted-by-nearly-25-billion-in-covid-19-response-revenue-2022-02-02

Boston Scientific Tumbles On Lackluster Guidance

 Early Wednesday, Boston Scientific (BSX) reported adjusted profit of 45 cents per share on $3.13 billion in sales for the fourth quarter. In response, BSX stock skidded.

On average, analysts polled by FactSet expected Boston Scientific to earn 44 cents per share on $3.11 billion in sales.

In the year-earlier period, the medical products company earned 23 cents per share and reported $2.71 billion in sales.

For the year ending in December 2022, Boston Scientific guided to 6%-8% sales growth, on both a strict as-reported and organic basis. That would fall from 20% growth in 2021. The company also expect to earn $1.73-$1.79 a share. BSX stock analysts projected adjusted profit of $1.87 per share and $12.93 billion in sales, up 9%.

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/bsx-stock-boston-scientific-earnings-q4-2021/