Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) re-introduced the Say No to Drug Ads Act to eliminate tax breaks for pharmaceutical companies airing direct-to-consumer commercials.  First introduced by Nadler in 2002, the bill is designed to protect consumers from drug companies attempting to steer consumers away from generic versions of drugs in order to boost profits.  In his recent State of the Union address, President Obama highlighted unnecessary corporate subsidies, saying: “We’ll reduce taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies.”

“Direct-to-consumer drug ads are not Public Service Announcements,” said Nadler.  “They are designed solely for the benefit of drug companies seeking to make profits from consumers.  Moreover, drug ads routinely treat mind-altering pharmaceuticals as cavalierly as candy bars.  By eliminating these unnecessary perks to drug companies, we can save taxpayer dollars for more appropriate and beneficial uses.” 

The Say No to Drug Ads Act would help consumers and doctors make more informed choices in selecting from available medications.  According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 91% of Americans say they have seen a commercial or read an advertisement about a brand-name drug, and eight in ten doctors reported being asked by patients about diseases and medications that were advertised on television. 

Drug companies regularly tout benefits of their products while downplaying – or inadequately explaining – health risks in order to lure in potential customers.  Instead of encouraging health and wellness, these ads promote medicating, regardless of whether the medication is necessary.  This bill won’t stop drug companies from advertising, but it will stop them from disseminating ads without paying their fair share of taxes.  The pharmaceutical industry spends an estimated $4.7 billion on drug ads annually.

 ###