Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton unveiled a plan Tuesday she said would prevent pharmaceutical companies from charging exorbitant prices for prescription drugs, but associations representing both drug makers and health insurers said what she is proposing would hurt medical innovation.

According to USA Today, Clinton's plan would force pharmaceutical companies to reinvest more profits into drug research while also allowing for more imported and generic drugs. In addition, she would give Medicare the ability to negotiate drug prices and cap out-of-pocket expenses for people with chronic health problems. http://usat.ly/1NM1Eyn

Clinton pointed to the headline-grabbing example of Turing Pharmaceuticals and its acquisition of the rights to manufacture a drug used to treat toxoplasmosis, an infection that could be deadly to people with impaired immune systems. The company raised the price of the drug from $13.50 per pill to $750 per pill virtually overnight, leading to accusations of price gouging. (Turing has since claimed the cost of the drug was actually $18 per pill before the increase.)

The Generic Pharmaceutical Association distanced itself from Turing. In a statement, CEO Chip Davis stressed that the company was not a member of his association nor has any relationship with it. He also said that no single company represents the pharmaceutical industry "which has an undeniable record of patient savings and access."

Davis didn't comment on Clinton's plan. Instead, he pointed to the $1.46 trillion in health savings he said generic drugs generated for during the most recent decade. He also outlined several policy proposals GPhA believes would further reduce generic drug costs.

"Generic medicines are a critical part of system-wide efforts to hold down healthcare costs," he said. "It is important to remember that FDA-approved generic drugs remain significantly more affordable than costly brand drugs while being just as safe and effective." http://bit.ly/1V9ke9D

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America also sought to separate itself from Turing. In a statement, the association said the company was not a member of PhRMA "and we do not embrace either their recent actions or the conduct of their CEO."

However, PhRMA came out swinging against Clinton's plan, accusing her of trying to "turn back the clock on medical innovation." The association said that implementing the candidate's proposals would "result in fewer new treatments for patients, cost countless jobs across the country and could end our nation's standing as the world leader in biomedical innovation."

"These proposals are driven by the false notion that spending on medicines is fueling overall health care cost growth and ignores how the current marketplace for medicines helps keep spending in check," PhRMA said in a statement. "In reality, the share of health care spending attributable to medicines is projected to continue to grow in line with overall health care cost growth for at least the next decade." http://onphr.ma/1Val0Og

MORE CEO DATELINE

• Association survey: Nearly a quarter of women sexually harassed while in college
• Teleworking on tap for Pope Francis visit
• Egg industry group building coalition to fight animal rights activists
• CUNA board rejects proposed overhaul for the association
• API: Majority of Americans disagree with Keystone XL pipeline delay