Legislators Undecided On Law Preventing Big-Chain Pharmacies
You’d think that a bit of in-state protectionism that’s preventing we North Dakotans from enjoying lower-cost prescription drugs from places like Target and Wal-Mart would be an easy target for overturning, but apparently many of our legislators haven’t made up their minds yet.
The Associated Press, in a pre-session survey of the North Dakota Legislature, asked lawmakers whether they believe the state’s pharmacy ownership law should be repealed, kept or changed. Thirty-eight of the Senate’s 47 members and 80 of the 94 House members replied.
Fourteen senators said the law should be kept, 12 said they were undecided and nine said it should be abolished. Three senators said the law should be kept, with additional exemptions.
Among House members, 32 favored retaining the pharmacy ownership law, while 27 were undecided. Sixteen said it should be repealed, five said it should be kept with additional exemptions.
One of the exemptions is for hospital pharmacies, which need not be owned by pharmacists as long as they serve only the hospital’s own patients.
I really don’t see how anyone can say that locally-owned pharmacies provide a level of care better than what Wal-Mart or Target. But even if that’s true, what threat would Wal-Mart and Target pose? If local pharmacies are really doing a better job then they’ll keep their customers, right? That’s how free markets work.
What’s really at play here is local pharmacies not wanting to compete. But that’s just not a good enough reason for protectionism that keeps them from having to compete. The public, at large, is best served through competition between private businesses. Thus, abolishing this silly law is the best way to serve the North Dakota public.
