The most telling difference in the Pres candidates was drawn out by you: we have a President who passes a prescription drug benefit which is no real benefit at all except to Pharms who don't have do negotiate with the real payor (the government representing the taxpayer) but instead get to deal with smaller groups to negotiate the cost of drugs whose creation and development is subsidized by American taxpayers and drug takers when manufacture of those drugs is often outsourced to countries with cheaper manufacturing costs and those American drug takers/taxpayers in turn pay the highest prices for drugs in the world and are prevented from shopping for better prices and don't always have health insurance either and then their complaints against the pharmaceuticals are the object of the Administration who thinks that those Pharms will out of charity and kindness reduce the price to them some day. The medical establishment consumes almost 20% of the GNP. They have no incentive to control costs or lower costs but eventually the well runs dry. Ask the many who file bankruptcy to discharge medical bills for services they think they can't live without.
Your pro-pharmaceutical company guest should be reminded of Dr. Marcia Angell's (former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine) book called The Truth About the Pharmaceutical Companys: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It. In it she shows how it is the US Government that has spearheaded new research not the pharma companies---they just reap the profits. Furthermore! Talk about price controls---Bush's requiring that Medicaire pay full retail for drugs is the worst example of that I can think of! How about a price control that benefits us for once?