Price Changes in Washington Following the 2012 Liquor Privatization: An Update Through 2016 With Comparisons to California, Idaho, and Oregon.

BACKGROUND: Washington State ended their wholesale and retail monopoly on liquor on June 1, 2012, resulting in a 5-fold increase in liquor outlets in diverse store types. The legislation also included taxes at the wholesale and retail levels. This study seeks to investigate whether prices have changed from 2014 through 2016, as a follow-up to a previous study finding increases in prices from 2012 to 2014, compared to prices in other states. METHODS: We developed an index of 68 brands that were popular in Washington in early 2012. Data on final liquor prices (including taxes) in Washington and California were obtained through store visits and online sources between November 2013 and March 2014, and again between April and May 2016 for Washington only. Pricing data for Idaho and Oregon were obtained from the Statistics for Alcohol Management Database over both sampling periods. Primary analyses were conducted on the utmost brands available in the majority of the stores sampled. RESULTS: Liquor prices in Washington rose an average of 3.9% for 750 ml and 6.5% for 1.75-l containers overall from 2014 to 2016, while bordering states Idaho (+2.9%) and Oregon (+1.5%) experienced smaller increases for 750-ml and declines for 1.75-l containers (Idaho: -2.9%, Oregon: -4.9%). In the analyses of spirits prices in Washington compared to California, prices in California were 24.1% lower for 750-ml containers and 29.6% lower for 1.75-l containers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate liquor prices in Washington have increased since our 2014 assessment at a larger percentage than prices in the neighboring control states Oregon and Idaho, with varying effects on brands, container sizes, and store types. We demonstrate privatization is associated with a different pattern of prices across store types than seen in California.

The Pay-Twice Critique, Government Funding, and Reasonable Pricing Clauses.

The federal government subsidizes the research and development of prescription medications. Thus, a captivating critique of expensive medications is that prices are too high because of taxpayer co-financing. This critique is often framed in terms of "paying-twice"-first for the research and second through the above market pricing of resulting products. Reasonable pricing clauses-which place some kind of pricing limitation on the exercise of license or patent rights governing a federally funded medication-are one proposed policy tool for addressing the pay-twice critique. This article provides increased analytical clarity as well as historical context to present-day debates about the privatization of federally funded research and prescription drug pricing. It makes three arguments. First, despite its pervasiveness and intuitive plausibility, the pay-twice critique is subject to differing interpretations which has important implications for the appropriateness of proposed solutions. Second, despite their initial attractiveness, the costs, necessity, and effectiveness of reasonable pricing clauses render the wisdom of this policy tool uncertain. However, third, given continued interest in reasonable pricing clauses, the NIH's previous experience with such a policy offers some useful lessons.

Stakeholders' expectations and perceived effects of the pharmacy ownership liberalization reform in Sweden: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Reforms in the health-care sector, including the pharmacy sector, can have different rationales. The Swedish pharmacies were prior to 2009 organized in a state-owned monopoly. In 2009, a liberalization of the ownership took place, in which a majority of the pharmacies were sold to private owners. The rationales for this liberalization changed profoundly during the preparatory work, making it probable that other rationales than the ones first expressed existed. The aim of this study was to explore the underlying rationales (not stated in official documents) for the liberalization in the Swedish pharmacy sector, and also to compare the expectations with the perceived outcomes. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from key stakeholder organizations; i.e., political, patient, and professional organizations. The analysis was performed in steps, and themes were developed in an inductive manner. RESULTS: One expectation among the political organization participants was that the ownership liberalization would create opportunities for ideas. The competition introduced in the market was supposed to lead to a more diversified pharmacy sector. After the liberalization, the participants in favor of the liberalization were surprised that the pharmacies were so similar. Among the professional organization participants, one important rationale for the liberalization was to get better use of the pharmacists' knowledge. However, all the professional, and some of the patient organization participants, thought that the counseling in the pharmacies had deteriorated after the liberalization. As expected in the interviews, the post-liberalization pharmacy sector consists of more pharmacies. However, an unexpected perceived effect of the liberalization was, among participants from all the stakeholder groups, less access to prescription medicines in the pharmacies. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the political organization participants had an ideological basis for their opinion. The political stakeholders did not have a clear view about what the liberalization should lead to, apart from abolishing the monopoly. The perceived effects are quite similar in the different stakeholder groups, and not as positive as were expected.

[Assessment of prescriptive therapies and remedies - Experience and results].

In the years 2005-2015, a leading assessment institute conducted numerous assessments on behalf of two major German private health insurance companies concerning the necessity of prescriptive therapies and remedies. The findings are presented in this article, and the results vary significantly, depending on the prescriptive therapy assessed.

Analysis of Price Changes in Washington Following the 2012 Liquor Privatization.

AIMS: In June, 2012 the state of Washington ended a wholesale and retail monopoly on liquor sales resulting in about five times as many stores selling liquor. Three-tier restrictions were also removed on liquor, while beer and wine availability did not increase. Substantial taxes at both the wholesale and retail levels were implemented and it was expected that prices would rise. METHODS: To evaluate price changes after privatization we developed an index of about 68 brands that were popular in Washington during early 2012. Data on final liquor prices (including all taxes) in Washington were obtained through store visits and on-line sources between November 2013 and March of 2014. Primary analyses were conducted on five or six brand indexes to allow the inclusion of most stores. RESULTS: Washington liquor prices rose by an average of 15.5% for the 750 ml size and by 4.7% for the 1.75 l size, while only small changes were seen in the bordering states of Oregon and Idaho. Prices were found to vary greatly by store type. Liquor Superstores had generally the lowest prices while drugstore, grocery and especially smaller Liquor Store prices were found to be substantially higher. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that liquor prices in Washington increased substantially after privatization and as compared to price changes in bordering states, with a much larger increase seen for the 750 ml size and with wide variation across store types. However, persistent drinkers looking for low prices will be able to find them in certain stores.

[Personalized medicine, privatized medicine? legal and public health stakes]. / Médecine personnalisée, médecine privatisée ? - Enjeux juridiques et de santé publique.

Personalized medicine is booming. It tends to provide a medical management "tailored" for groups of patients, or for one unique patient, but also to identify risk groups to develop public health strategies. In this context, some radicalization phenomenon can emerge, leading to not only personalized medicine but also privatized medicine, which can lead to a capture of the medical public resource. If the "privatization" of medicine is not limited to producing adverse effects, several potentially destabilizing phenomena for patients still remain. First, some objective factors, like the adjustment of scientific prerequisites, are emerging from personalized medicine practices (clinical trial, public health policy) and are interfering with the medical doctor/patient relationship. Another risk emerges for patients concomitantly to their demand for controlling their own health, in terms of patients' security although these risks are not clearly identified and not effectively communicated. These practices, related to a privatized medicine, develop within the healthcare system but also outside, and the government and legislators will have to take into account these new dimensions in drafting their future regulations and policies.

The modernization of American public law: health care reform and popular constitutionalism.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) transformed U.S. public law in crucial ways extending far beyond health care. As important as were the doctrinal shifts wrought by National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the ACA's structural changes to public law likely will prove far more important should they become entrenched. The struggle over the ACA has triggered the kind of "constitutional moment" that has largely replaced Article V's formal amendment procedure since the Prohibition fiasco. The Court participates in this process, but the definitive and enduring character of these constitutional moments' outcomes springs from broad popular engagement. Despite the Court's ruling and the outcome of the 2012 elections, the battle over whether to implement or shelve the ACA will continue unabated, both federally and in the states, until We the People render a clear decision. Whether the ACA survives or fails will determine the basic principles that guide the development of federalism, social insurance, tax policy, and privatization for decades to come. In each of these areas, the New Deal bequeathed us a delicate accommodation between traditionalist social values and modernizing norms of economic efficiency and interest group liberalism. This balance has come under increasing stress, with individual laws rejecting tradition far more emphatically than the New Deal did. But absent broad popular engagement, no definitive new principles could be established. The ACA's entrenchment would elevate technocratic norms across public law, the first change of our fundamental law since the civil rights revolution. The ACA's failure would rejuvenate individualistic, moralistic, pre-New Deal norms and allow opponents to attempt a counterrevolution against technocracy.

Commissions of audit in Australia: health system privatisation directives and civil conscription protections.

The use of commissions of audit as vehicles to drive privatisation policy agendas in areas such as health service delivery has become popular with conservative federal and State governments. Such commissions have characteristically been established early in the terms of such governments with carefully planned terms of reference and membership. The policy directions they advocate, unlike election policies, have not come under the intense scrutiny, wide public debate or the opportunities for (dis)endorsement afforded by the electoral process. Governments do, however, anticipate and often accept recommendations from these reviews, and use them as justification to implement policy based on their findings. This highlights the power entrusted to review bodies and the risks to the public interest arising from limited public consultation. An example can be seen in the proposed privatisation of important aspects of Australia's public sector, particularly including those related to health systems delivery, currently entering a new iteration through the work of the National Commission of Audit appointed in October 2013. The NCA follows on from various State audit commissions which in recent years have directed the divestment of government responsibilities to the private and not-for-profit sectors. Through a discussion on the formation of policy frameworks by the NCA and the Queensland Commission of Audit, this column examines the ideological thrust of the commissions and how they synergise to produce a national directive on the future of public sector health services. The practical impacts on health service procurement and delivery in critical areas are examined, using the case of the federally contracted out medical service for asylum seekers and two hospitals in Western Australia, a State which is well advanced in the privatisation of public hospitals. The column then examines the release to the media early in the NCA's process of the submission to introduce a $6 general practitioner co-payment as a means of testing the response of the medical profession and public. The column also examines how the civil conscription clause in s 51 (xxiiiA) of the Australian Constitution may serve to protect practitioner and patient rights should some of these privatisation changes to Australia's health system be challenged in the High Court of Australia.

The Health Legislation Amendment Act 2013 (QLD) and Queensland's health assets privatisation dispute.

'New legislation in Queensland has provided a "pathway" for the privatisation of health assets and services in Queensland, which effectively realigns the health care system to the financial market. This column explores how this legislation contained the antecedents of the Queensland doctors' dispute when doctors roundly rejected new employment contracts in February 2014. It also argues that such legislation and its attendant backlash provides a valuable case study in view of the federal government's 2014 budget offer to the States of extra funding if they sell their health assets to fund new infrastructure. The move to privatise health in Queensland has also resulted in a government assault on the ethical credibility of the opposing medical profession and changes to the health complaints system with the introduction of a Health Ombudsman under ministerial control. The column examines these changes in light of R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2001] EWHC Admin 429, a case concerning the obligations of a private entity towards publically funded clients in the United Kingdom. In discussing concerns about the impact of privatisation on the medical profession, the column points to a stark conflict between the duty to operate hospitals as a business rather than as a duty to patients.

[Reform of forensic autopsy in the German Code of Criminal Procedure]. / Die dritte Anfrage: Zur Reform der gerichtlichen Leichenöffnung in der Strafprozessordnung.

The Federal Ministry of Justice has presented another proposal to rephrase the wording of Section 87 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO). The new version of Section 87 StPO is to be rejected as it would lead to a loss of institutional and professional standards. The bill is clearly influenced by a tendency towards privatisation for the benefit of a small group of specialists in forensic medicine mostly organised in limited liability companies and thus at the expense of institutes of legal medicine affiliated to universities or physicians working in the forensic service of regional courts. In the long run, this reform would not only jeopardize medicolegal research and teaching but also medical education and specialist medical training. For future severe negative consequences would have to be expected on the rule of law and legal certainty.

Urban governance and spatial inequality in service delivery: a case study of solid waste management in Abuja, Nigeria.

Spatial inequality in service delivery is a common feature in African cities. Several factors account for the phenomenon but there is growing attention towards urban governance and the role of the state. Urban governance policies such as privatization serve as key strategies through which the state regulates and (re)produces spatial inequality in service delivery. This study examined how governance practices related to privatization and the regulatory role of the state reinforce spatial inequalities in the delivery of solid waste services in Abuja, Nigeria. It focused primarily on the issue of cost recovery. Privatization became a major focus in Abuja in 2003 when the government launched a pilot scheme. Although it has brought improvements in service delivery, privatization has also increased the gap in the quality of services delivered in different parts of the city. Drawing on empirical data, the study revealed that little sensitivity to income and affordability, and to income differentials between neighbourhoods in the fixing of user charges and in the choice of the billing method is contributing to spatial inequalities in service delivery. Furthermore, the study suggests that these practices are linked to a broader issue, a failure of the government to see the people as partners. It therefore calls for more inclusive governance especially in decision-making processes. The study also emphasizes the need for a policy document on solid waste management, as this would encourage a critical assessment of vital issues including how privatization is to be funded, especially in low-income areas.

State capacity: the missing piece in child welfare privatization.

Privatization has been used to address the limited capacity of government to achieve positive results in child welfare systems. Privatized systems have not realized better outcomes than their public counterparts, however, and many states continue to struggle with implementation. In order to demonstrate that privatization is in fact an investment on the part of the state, rather than a solution to limited public resources, this article explores the relationship between state capacity and privatization and makes recommendations for more effective partnerships between the public and private sectors.

Patents, innovation, and privatization: Commentary on: "Data management in academic settings: an intellectual property perspective".

The framers of the U.S. Constitution believed that intellectual property rights were crucial to scientific advancement. Yet, the framers also recognized the need to balance innovation, privatization, and public use. The courts' expansion of patent protection for biotechnology innovations in the last 30 years raises the question whether the patent system effectively balances these concerns. While the question is not new, only through a thorough and thoughtful examination of these issues can the current system be evaluated. It is then a policy decision for Congress if any change is necessary.

Is a flat-line a good thing? On the privatization of Israel's healthcare system.

Israel presents an intriguing conundrum: on the one hand, it provides quality healthcare in a near-universal healthcare system; on the other, it has maintained healthcare costs level at approximately 7.7% of GDP. This comes at a time when all western nations struggle with one or both sides of the equation: how to offer affordable, good quality health care to the population while curbing the sharp rise in health related costs. This paper explains both how Israel has achieved this 'flat line" effect and the social and political costs of this achievement.