Merck and CVS Paid $7.4M to Keep Your Drug Prices High

In the first three months of 2026, two of the largest players in the American healthcare system—pharmaceutical titan Merck and retail giant CVS Health—deployed a combined $7.47 million to ensure their profit margins remain a trade secret. While pharmaceutical manufacturers and pharmacy benefit managers often trade public barbs over who is responsible for rising drug costs, their Q1 financial disclosures reveal a tactical alliance. According to LD-2 lobbying filings, Merck reported $4.15 million in expenditures, a 22% increase over its previous quarterly average, while CVS Health reported $3.32 million. This spending surge was not a general branding exercise; it was a surgical strike against the Pharmacy Benefit Manager Accountability Act (HR 2147) and several drug-pricing transparency requirements.

According to FEC Form 3L filings, the influence went beyond corporate checks. In March 2026 alone, five registered lobbyists for CVS Health bundled a combined $184,000 for members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. This committee is the primary legislative gatekeeper for HR 2147. [Bundling] is a practice where lobbyists collect individual contributions from many donors and present them as a single package to a political candidate or committee. By delivering these funds in bulk, lobbyists ensure that the interests of their corporate clients, such as CVS Health and its PBM subsidiary Caremark, are prioritized by the lawmakers who draft the rules for the healthcare industry.

Merck’s LD-2 filings, signed off by CEO Robert Davis, explicitly list opposition to "transparency requirements regarding net-price negotiations" as a primary Q1 objective. This refers to the secret rebates and discounts negotiated between drugmakers and insurance intermediaries. If these prices were made public, it would reveal the true cost of Merck’s high-margin oncology drugs. Similarly, CVS CEO Karen Lynch directed her firm’s $3.32 million effort to shield Caremark from federal audits of "spread pricing." [Spread Pricing] is the practice where a PBM charges a health plan more for a drug than it pays the pharmacy, pocketing the difference as profit. By blocking transparency, CVS ensures the public remains unaware of the size of the "spread" it keeps on every prescription.

The strategy was bolstered by three former staffers from the House Energy and Commerce Committee who are now on the Q1 payroll for these specific firms. These "revolving door" hires provide the industry with intimate knowledge of legislative timing. Their impact was evident in March, when the Transparency in Drug Pricing Act was scheduled for markup. The 2026 FEC bundling disclosure threshold of $24,000 was met or exceeded by lobbyists representing both Merck and CVS across 12 specific committee offices. Shortly after these disclosures were filed, the transparency bill was stalled indefinitely in subcommittee to be "further studied."

Mainstream news outlets have largely covered the stall of these bills as a result of standard partisan gridlock or the complexity of healthcare economics. However, the data shows this was a $7.47 million industry intervention. While the public is told that healthcare costs are rising due to inflation or the high cost of innovation, the filings suggest a different reality: a system where the companies that set the prices and the companies that manage the benefits have successfully paid to keep their financial arrangements hidden.

For the average consumer, this $7.47 million shield means that premiums and out-of-pocket costs will continue to be based on inflated list prices rather than the actual negotiated costs. As long as Merck and CVS can buy silence in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the true cost of healthcare will remain a mystery to the people paying the bills. On Gen Us, you can use our Politician Tracker to see which members of the committee received bundled funds from these lobbyists and how their votes on HR 2147 have shifted since the Q1 spending spree began.