Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree 100%. The approach I like is what I call "lowest negotiated price". How it would work is that buyers (i.e. insurance companies) could still negotiate for a lower cost, but whatever that cost ends up being is the cost _everyone_ pays. This allows buyers to continue to try to get a better price if they can, while likely making sure the price that is agreed upon is fair to all.
There is evidence that this would actually increase prices across the board. How do we know? Such a system already exists. The price that Medicaid plans pay is either 23% less than the average price paid or the “best price” (if lower). When this was instituted, drug companies actually pulled back on their discounts to non-Medicaid accounts, so as to not trigger the “best price”.
I agree that on non-generic drugs that the price would likely remain high - however if everyone paid the same rate (low or high) then it would at least discourage some of the type of pricing we see now where a procedure is provided below cost to a specific group of users to make sure those members (i.e. customers of specific insurance companies) are able to be kept "in network", while charging much, much higher rates to others to make up the difference.