Mark Cuban says he got into pharmaceuticals because some of his Republican friends asked if he had an Obamacare alternative
Shark Tank star Mark Cuban says his interest in the US healthcare system began after his GOP friends asked him if he could come up with a replacement for Obamacare.
"Going back to 2018 or 2017, being here in Texas, I had some Republican friends who were asking me questions like, 'Do you have any ideas how the Republicans can replace the ACA, Obamacare?'" Cuban said in an episode of the Hims House podcast, which aired on Tuesday.
"I'm like, 'No, but it's an interesting question. Let me see if I can come up with some ideas.' So that got me into healthcare. The ideas, you know, never got that far, but it really got me, turned me into a healthcare geek," Cuban added.
Cuban said his interest led him to pay for studies to find out why healthcare costs more in the US compared to countries like Canada.
"It became very obvious the more I dug in, that there was zero transparency, no transparency, and that there were a lot of vested interests that wanted opacity. They want it to be as opaque as possible so that people can't make good decisions when it comes to their healthcare," Cuban said on the podcast.
Back in 2017, Cuban detailed his own plan to fix Obamacare on his blog "Blog Maverick." Cuban called for a single-payer coverage system for chronic physical or mental illness and for any life-threatening injury.
"Everything not covered by the above can be covered by insurance sold on the free market, managed by the states, sold across state lines, without government interference," Cuban wrote.
Later, in 2022, Cuban cofounded Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drugs Co., a low-cost online pharmacy.
Unlike its competitors, Cost Plus Drugs keeps costs low by sourcing its drugs directly from manufacturers and eliminating the extra costs imposed by pharmaceutical middlemen. Customers pay a 15% markup to Cost Plus Drugs, as well as a fixed $5 labor charge for each medication and $5 for shipping.
"We are completely transparent, with the same price for anyone and everyone," Cuban told Business Insider's Hilary Brueck in a story published in August. "We believe that when all data is transparent, then the market becomes efficient. At that point, prices will drop significantly."
More recently, Cuban expressed support for President Donald Trump's push to slash drug pricing and said he would be willing to pitch in to make pharmaceuticals cheaper.
"Gotta be honest. The @realDonaldTrump EO on healthcare and in particular, drug pricing could save hundreds of billions," Cuban wrote on X in April.
Cuban also outlined five ways he thought drug prices could be regulated in that post. The post was a marked departure from Cuban's criticism of Trump on tariffs and other matters, as well as his strong support for then-Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential run against Trump in 2024.
"Put me in coach! I'm here to help," Cuban wrote on X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oregon lawmakers scale back proposal for unemployment strike payments amid blowback
Hundreds of educators, parents and students joined a rally Nov. 1. 2023 at Roosevelt High School in north Portland to support striking teachers. Teachers like them could soon receive up to 10 weeks of unemployment benefits under a compromise negotiated by Oregon lawmakers.(Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle) A particularly controversial measure that would give unemployment benefits to public and private Oregon workers during labor strikes survived a key Wednesday hearing after lawmakers agreed to cut the length of time in which workers on strike could cash checks by more than half. Senate Bill 916 would have limited striking workers to receiving benefits for 26 weeks, in line with the current caps on unemployment checks for Oregonians. But after the Senate rejected an amended version of the bill on Tuesday, a bicameral conference committee voted Wednesday to set a new cutoff at 10 weeks after a two-week waiting period. Committee members voted along party lines, with the sole Republican present voting against the amendments. 'I do feel like this is a massive compromise,' said Rep. Dacia Grayber, D-Portland, the bill's lead author. 'It's not something I'm entirely thrilled with.' The measure would be a first-in-the-nation move by Oregon, establishing a right to strike for public and private employees while ensuring them the ability to apply for unemployment benefits. Aside from traditionally strike-exempt public employees such as firefighters and police, workers such as nurses and teachers could claim benefits after two weeks of striking. The bill has been among this session's most controversial measures, laying bare deep divisions over how best to use the state's $6.4 billion unemployment insurance fund. The changes come after support for a Democrat-led bill collapsed in a concurring Senate vote on Tuesday amid concerns from Republicans and a key dissenting Democrat. It had already drawn opposition from school board leaders who help negotiate teacher strikes, business groups, and local government leaders who contribute to the state's unemployment fund. 'We have a healthy fund today due in no small part because all the agreements in the years have been honored,' committee member Sen. Daniel Bonham, R- The Dalles, told his colleagues before voting against the amended bill. 'It is a healthy enough fund that I don't know that this will be a massive draw on it, but again the kids will lose if teachers are incentivized to strike.' House Democrats got the bill over the finish line in their chamber last week, arguing that the benefits would be used sparingly and not as a tool to prolong strikes, but to shorten them. A change made in a House committee would cap benefits to eight weeks if the state's unemployment fund is at risk, and lawmakers also included an amendment that mandates deductions in backpay for benefits claimed by teachers during strikes. Grayber on Tuesday repeated a promise she has made to continue monitoring the bill's implementation if it were to pass, but also signaled that she hoped to move past concerns that the bill would promote misuse of the unemployment system or dramatically hamper school life and public facilities. She said she's been 'guided by the math' behind the bill from the beginning, a subtle nod to the estimates from the state's employment department that the bill would not change existing tax structures for businesses and government agencies paying into the state's unemployment funding. 'I have heard the opposition,' she said. 'I very much look forward to moving past what feels like a worst-case scenario focus that we've maintained for several weeks now.' Oregonians who have lost a job can currently apply for unemployment weekly checks ranging from $196 to $836. The bill would allow benefits to kick in immediately if workers are locked out of facilities by their employer during negotiations. Sen. Mark Meek, D-Gladstone, is a sponsor of the legislation, but withdrew his support when it came up short in a 15-14 Senate vote on Tuesday. In a brief interview after the hearing, he declined to comment on whether he supported the proposed changes. He referred to another attempt at a transportation and infrastructure funding bill that the Legislature has taken up in the final weeks of the session: 'If there's time to pass a transportation package, there's time to get this right,' he said. The new amendment pushes the bill closer to a similar law passed in Washington that caps benefits at six weeks, but which doesn't go so far as to protect public employees like Oregon's proposed legislation. New Jersey and New York have also passed laws in recent years to provide unemployment benefits to striking private sector workers, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar effort in 2023 over fiscal concerns. Another bill extending benefits to striking workers in Connecticut is currently sitting on Gov. Ned Lamont's desk, but he is expected to veto it. The bill passed out of committee on a 4-1 vote. Rep. Lucetta Elmer, R-McMinnville, was excused. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Senate GOP unveil long-awaited SNAP proposals for Trump bill
Senate Republicans on Wednesday rolled out a suite of proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as a key component of President Trump's 'big beautiful bill' – but it dials back some of the proposals sought by the House that drew intraparty concerns. The new legislative text from the Senate would require states to cover some of the cost of SNAP benefits, which are currently completely funded by the federal government, if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent beginning in fiscal 2028, while allowing states with rates below that level to continue paying zero percent. It also proposes states with higher payment error rates cover a greater share of benefit costs. If the error rate is 6 percent or higher, states would be subject to a sliding scale that could see its share of allotments rise to a range of between 5 percent to 15 percent. The House, by contrast, called for all states to cover 5 percent of the cost of allotments in its agricultural proposal passed as part of a broader plan to advance Trump's tax agenda last month, with states that had higher payment error rates having to pay anywhere between 15 to 25 percent. The softened proposal comes as Senate Republicans expressed concerns about how the House pitch would have impacted states. 'This bill takes a commonsense approach to reforming SNAP-cutting waste, increasing state accountability, and helping recipients transition to self-sufficiency through work and training,' Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman (R-Ariz.) said in a statement on Wednesday. 'It's about being good stewards of taxpayer dollars while giving folks the tools to succeed.' 'At the same time, our farmers and ranchers are facing real challenges,' he said. 'This legislation delivers the risk management tools and updated farm bill safety net they need to keep producing the safest, most abundant and affordable food, fuel, and fiber in the world. It's an investment in rural America and the future of agriculture.' Like the House bill, the Senate bill would also decrease the administrative cost the federal government is required to pay to help cover program operations in the states by 25 percent, but beginning in fiscal year 2027. The proposals in both chambers also seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future and beef up work requirements, as well as farm provisions that GOP leaders have argued will make it easier to craft a bipartisan farm bill in the months ahead – although Democrats have said otherwise. Republicans on the Senate Agriculture Committee estimated the recent legislation would generate $144 billion in net savings in the years ahead as the party looks to ramp up cost-cutting measures in Trump's plan amid concerns about the overall deficit impact of his tax priorities.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Dems reject Newsom's cuts to healthcare for undocumented immigrants
Nearly a month after Governor Gavin Newsom proposed pausing the expansion of publicly funded healthcare for undocumented Californians, Democratic lawmakers are drawing a line in the sand. This week, legislative leaders in both the Assembly and Senate advanced a new budget proposal that pushes back against some of the governor's most controversial cuts. At the heart of the disagreement is Newsom's plan to pause the 2026 Medi-Cal expansion for low-income undocumented residents and require the 1.6 million undocumented Californians already enrolled to begin paying $100 monthly premiums. Citing the state's projected $12 billion deficit, Newsom has said these proposals are difficult but necessary. 'There are investments we're making we cannot continue to make,' Newsom said during his budget presentation last month. But state Senate Budget Committee Chair Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) assured the public this week, 'No one is going to be kicked off healthcare.' Wiener argued that undocumented Californians – who work, pay taxes, and have deep roots in their communities – deserve continued access to Medi-Cal coverage. The Democrats' budget plan would delay the Medi-Cal pause until summer 2027 and reduce proposed premiums from $100 per month to $30. Senator Akilah Weber-Pierson (D-San Diego) emphasized that maintaining coverage was a promise California made: 'We are not disenrolling anyone from Medi-Cal.' Republicans, however, have raised concerns about cost. Senator Kelly Seyarto (R-Murrieta) warned that healthcare spending for undocumented individuals – estimated at $10 to $12 billion – is unsustainable. 'We have to figure out how to make that work better… this is the second runaway train,' Seyarto said, making a passing reference to the state's unfinished high-speed rail project. To help close the budget gap, some Democrats are now discussing the possibility of raising taxes on large corporations. Senators Caroline Menjivar (D-San Fernando Valley) and Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Pasadena) said it's time to consider taxing the wealthiest businesses rather than cutting services for vulnerable populations. 'If corporations are getting huge tax breaks at the federal level, we need to start talking about taxing them at the state level,' Pérez said. Still, Republicans insist spending reforms should come first. Senator Roger Niello (R-Fair Oaks) dismissed the idea of a tax hike, saying, 'That's not a viable solution. Clearly it is a spending problem.' The legislature and governor have until June 15 to finalize and pass a budget. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
