California Public Employee Union Pensions Are Huge Hypocrites On Drug Prices

redstate
Posted at 1:00 pm on May 26, 2017 by Dan Spencer

Two huge California public employee union pension programs are trying to eat their cake and profit from it too. They are helping to make a stink out of drug prices, even as those same drug prices are helping to prop up their members’ retirements.

CalPERS and CalSTRS are available to public employees and public school teachers respectively. The pension systems are active members of the National Coalition on Health Care, which runs the Campaign for Sustainable Rx Pricing. That’s significant because NCHC, lead by former AARP heavy John Rother, has been hammering pharmaceutical companies over drug prices.

For instance, after President Donald J. Trump met with the heads of some drug companies, the coalition released a statement charging that “100% of Big Pharma’s earnings growth in 2016 came from price hikes rather than innovation.”

We could quibble about the substance of what NCHC puts out, but it’s worth asking what the California Public employees pension programs are doing as part of that coalition, given their investments.

CalPERS an CalSTERS actively profit off the drug companies that Rother and the Coalition attack. You don’t have to take my word for it, here are some numbers!

As Of June 30, 2016 CalPERS held at least $2.7 billion – with a b – worth of domestic equities in drug companies.

	Shares	Market Value
Johnson & Johnson	8091344	$981,479,966
Pfizer	19395322	$682,909,280
Gilead Sciences	4036451	$336,720,740
Abbvie	4,738,959	$293,388,976
Allergan	1127412	$260,533,621
Abbott Laboratories	4,208,253	$165,426,422
GlaxoSmithKline	404298	$17,522,275
Total		$2,737,981,280

(CalPERS 2015-16 Annual Investment Report)
Same date, same year, CalSTRS held at least $3.2 billion in domestic equities in those same drug companies.

	Shares	Market Value
Johnson & Johnson	8300271	$1,006,823,000
Pfizer	18339819	$645,745,000
Merck	8955425	$515,922,000
Bristol Myers Squibb	4782642	$351,763,000
Abbvie	4335014	$268,381,000
Celgene	2353188	$232,095,000
Abbott Laboratories	4569519	$179,628,000
Gilead Sciences	3886475	$324,210
Total		$3,200,681,210

(CalSTRS Domestic Equities)
These public employee union investments are what Al Gore might call an inconvenient truth and most of us would just call rank hypocrisy. Here’s a suggestion for those California public employee pension funds who are trying to have it both ways: Remove that plank from your own eye first. Or just send NCHC packing.


Thank You Mr Spencer and Redstate.

Goldman Analyst Downgrades J&J: Says "Sell"

FiercePharma has;

No Breakup For J&J? Goldman Analyst Says 'Sell'

Rubin pushed for Pfizer split, but J&J is more focused on M&A

October 10, 2012 | By Tracy Staton

Goldman Sachs analyst Jami Rubin can be tough to please. Particularly for companies that aren't jazzed about the idea of splitting themselves into smaller pieces. Hear that, Johnson & Johnson ($JNJ)?

Just in case J&J hadn't received the message, Rubin downgraded the stock to "Sell" yesterday. As Barron's points out, a sell rating on a big-time stock like J&J--one that pays a 3.5% dividend, no less--is a rare species. But Rubin ticks off her reasons with gusto--and, perhaps to add insult to injury, said she prefers Eli Lilly & Co. ($LLY) these days.

J&J's newly launched drugs--including the clot-fighter Xarelto and the prostate-cancer pill Zytiga--face new competition, Rubin says. Its pipeline lacks "transformational ... opportunities." Its management is too focused on M&A, not enough on sharing cash with shareholders. So, even with that 3.5% dividend, J&J offers a yield of only 7%, she figures.

Pfizer ($PFE), of course, is hiving off its non-pharma businesses to focus on prescription drugs, a strategy Rubin advocated. In fact, she's now agitating for even more sales--Pfizer's consumer health or generics business, for instance. And Abbott ($ABT) plans to spin off its drug business as a separate company, AbbVie, within a couple of months.

J&J, however, seems wedded to its conglomerate tradition, and its patchwork quilt of operating units. And that's the final straw for Rubin. J&J's "focus on M&A versus cash returns to shareholders or a break-up strategy [like Pfizer's or Abbott's] puts it at a disadvantage as other companies get more aggressive," Rubin wrote in a note to investors (as quoted by The Street). The verdict? Downgrade.

- read the Barron's piece
- get more from The Street

Related Articles:
Who's next on Big Pharma's biotech shopping list?
Abbott racks up $14.5B in financing for AbbVie spinoff
J&J to scout early-stage deals in 4 biotech hotspots

Thank You Fierce Pharma and Ms Staton


And of possible related interest:

Wiki has;

Asset Forfeiture

"Asset forfeiture is confiscation, by the State, of assets which are either (a) the alleged proceeds of crime or (b) the alleged instrumentalities of crime,"

..... .....

Issues

Proponents of seizure suggest that it is a necessary tool to prevent drug trafficking or other crimes. Statistics indicate that asset forfeiture has failed to prevent methamphetamine drug crime in South Africa [3]. Former United States president George H. W. Bush said, "Asset forfeiture laws allow [the government] to take the alleged ill-gotten gains of drug kingpins and use them to put more cops on the streets."

ED;  WHEN, the cops we already Have start busting these Drug Kingpins and seizing Their assets, rather than Protecting them, ... .


IF, Corporations enjoy the same protections as individual people when it comes to political donations/1st Amendment Free Speech Rights, Then, .....

They should Also be subject to the same penalties for Violating existing Federal Criminal Statutes that would toss Private Citizens into prison, and cost them the Seizure of their Assets. 

Health Care Cronyism: A Tribute

The Law