SUBSCRIBE NOW Get a year of news PLUS a gift box!



Letter: The truth behind AARP’s push for price controls

Kerpen writes, "While AARP maintains that it merely supports Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s Medicare “negotiation” plan because it wants to lower seniors’ drug costs, that simply isn’t the case."

A person holds a letter with the text "letter to the editor" overlaid on the image.
We are part of The Trust Project.

Terry Wilcox’s op-ed highlighting AARP’s apparent conflict of interest with insurance giants brings much-needed attention to the real reason behind the AARP’s support for price controls in President Joe Biden’s spending bill.

RELATED: Recent AARP hit piece one of many lodged by Big Pharma

While AARP maintains that it merely supports Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s Medicare “negotiation” plan because it wants to lower seniors’ drug costs, that simply isn’t the case. In reality, the organization’s true motive is maintaining its billion-dollar relationship with UnitedHealthcare. UHC pays AARP about three times more revenue than the “senior advocacy” organization earns from its member dues. So, it should be no surprise that AARP is pushing for policies that benefit big insurance—even at the expense of seniors.

Medicare “negotiation” is a false description of the proposed scheme in Build Back Better. If manufacturers disagree with the price set by the government Washington, they will be slapped with a 95% excise tax, giving them no choice but to comply. That's not negotiation.

AARP doesn’t want you to know that such a system would inevitably result in dozens of fewer lifesaving and life-enhancing drugs being developed and made available to seniors. And the cost savings go to big insurance companies like AARP's corporate partners and to politicians, to drain out of Medicare and divert to new spending programs.


Furthermore, AARP opposes direct discounts at the point of sale when seniors pay for their medicines, as former President Trump proposed. You can bet if they honestly polled their members on that proposal, they’d likely find their members would widely support it.

AARP clearly doesn’t have its members’ best interests at heart. You can learn more at our website .

Phil Kerpen is the president of American Commitment, a policy advocacy organization.

This letter does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.

What to read next
Ingersoll writes, "I am a parent and teacher, and the increased number of mass shootings over the last few decades with nothing being done by our elected officials to counter this violence is maddening. I’m scared for my own children, my students, my colleagues and myself. My heart goes out to all those families suffering now, and for the rest of their lives, in Uvalde, Texas."
Hulett rails against The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and NBC as being biased. If his article was an objective attempt to say something meaningful, he would have included Fox News and right-wing radio as being biased as well. He did not, and we may correctly conclude that Hulett himself is biased.
Dunn writes, "They are outraged by the idea that women want the right to choose what happens to their own bodies. They tell them they are murderers if they choose abortion. But, they continue to support individuals who have the right to buy guns to kill. They support the gun lobbyists and elected officials who support the industry with no apology."
Larson writes, "For decades, laws have required shotguns to have a limit of three shells in the chamber. It was enacted to make hunting ducks more sportsmanlike. Yet today an assault rifle, designed as a weapon to kill people, can have from 30 to 100 shells."