Online Archives

Wal-Mart has finally done what the Federal Government can?t or won?t do: make health care affordable.

In case you missed it, Wal-Mart, the nation?s largest retailer, recently announced a pilot program that lowered the price of nearly 300 generic prescription drugs to $4 for a 30-day supply. We?re talking drugs for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and other chronic diseases that millions of people use throughout the country. In one scenario I saw on the news, an elderly man who spent more than $350 per month on prescription drugs will now spend $16 per month. That?s a huge difference, especially for someone on a fixed income.

The program is being rolled out in Tampa and will eventually hit the Wal-Mart near you.

Target, a direct competitor, said it would immediately match the prices of Wal-Mart.

Why this sudden display of apparent common sense? It depends on with whom you talk.

Wal-Mart, never one of my favorite stores, has come under fire in recent times for many things, not the least of which is the health care it doesn?t provide its employees. Many critics see this move by Wal-Mart as a public relations ploy to generate good will in the marketplace.

But you and I know that Wal-Mart did this for one reason and one reason only: so they can make more money and drive other businesses under.

You see businesses like Wal-Mart, unlike, say, The United Methodist Church, are in business to make money.

Sure, they care about public perception and opinion, but the bottom line is the bottom line: profit and loss; dollars and cents. Wal-Mart made this move because it is a win-win situation: they can make money AND do good at the same time.

Clearly, this is not good news for the mom and pop drug store you and I grew up with. How in the world could Alsgaard?s Pharmacy compete with Wal-Mart on this level? They can?t.

When this program goes nationwide, you?ll begin to see the end of these types of stores. Like the hardware and grocery stores of old, with the sloping wooden floors that creaked only in certain spots, they will slowly disappear.

How do Wal-Mart and Target make money on this? Simple. They will cut out the middle-man. They will buy their drugs directly from the wholesale manufacturer (the drugs are made in India, Israel and the United States) and not from the retailers.

And who says they?re making money on the deal? Some analysts predict that Wal-Mart may actually be losing money on some of the $4 prescriptions. They don?t care about a small loss on the drug because that is just a tiny fraction of the income they generate every day.

Wal-Mart may just be doing a prescription drug version of a good old fashioned 'gasoline war,' where stations lower their prices simply to lure you in, knowing that you?ll buy stuff on your way out of the store that you don?t need.

If you?re like me, you pay a $10 co-pay for a generic drug. If it is a brand name, the prices double or triple. Will saving at least $6 out of pocket per prescription cause me to switch to Wal-Mart? I doubt it.

The real scenario, however, is this one: you?re not like me; you do not have health insurance. You cannot afford the $75 per month for the cholesterol medicine the doctor wants you to take and, as a result, your blood has become a perfect soup for a stroke or heart attack. Will saving $69 (or more) per month for a drug that could save and/or extend your life make you shop at Wal-Mart or Target?

I would.

So hooray for those companies doing good while also assuring return on investment for its shareholders. In the world of corporate greed versus improving health, it looks like a rare win for both, instead of merely the bottom line.

The sad news in all of this, though, is that it didn?t have to be this way. The United Methodist Church, for years, has called on the Federal Government to make health care affordable for everyone. Despite its 'best' efforts, Congress has failed to find a way where everyone, regardless of who they are, can find adequate health care.

And that, as the church says, is 'unconscionable.' Resolution #108, 'Correcting Injustices in Health Care,' reads: 'It is unconscionable that any human being should ever be denied access to adequate health care due to economic, racial, or class barriers.' This language was first adopted in 1992 and again in 2000.

Hear that again: The language was adopted by the church 14 years ago!

And further, 'Health Care is a basic human right' is the church?s statement, written in our Social Principles, ?162T.

So the Federal Government, instead of assuring this basic human right for one and for all, has abdicated its responsibility to the corporate giants. Some will say that the giants can do it cheaper and that the government shouldn?t be in the drug business. Maybe.

Personally, I?d rather see the care of Corporate Citizen America stay in the domain of the government (after all, isn?t the role of government to provide for the peace, protection and harmony of its citizens ? that?s why we pay taxes), rather than be housed as a profit-generator for corporate America.

It?s not that I don?t trust the likes of Wal-Mart, Target, CVS, Walgreens, et al. And, to be fair, I?m not sure how much more I trust the government. But the last time I checked, the government?s mission statement wasn?t to make a profit. And unlike corporate America, if we don?t like the way the government is running the store, we can change the managers.

Come to think of it, maybe it?s time we did that, too.