In a letter yesterday to GAO, Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), Pete Stark (D-Calif.) and John Lewis (D-Ga.) voiced concerns that the companies are “artificially raising prices for certain pharmaceutical products in expectation of new reforms that could otherwise reduce prescription drug prices or price growth by encouraging patients and the government to be more efficient purchasers.”

Any price gouging is unacceptable, but anticipatory price gouging is especially offensive. We request that the GAO prepare on an expedited basis a report that analyzes recent trends in prescription drug pricing. In addition, we request that you prepare a proposal to ensure ongoing monitoring of pharmaceutical manufacturer pricing practices, and periodically report to the Congress on your findings.

Not that the pharmaceutical industry is taking the Times’ report sitting down. In a statement released Monday, Ken Johnson, senior vice president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said the price increases represent “the natural result of market forces.”

At a House panel hearing today, Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who heads the Ways & Means Oversight Subcommittee, revealed the results of the panel’s investigation into the top recipients of federal help under the Wall Street bailout.

The results: 13 of the top 23 recipient companies owe back-taxes totaling more than $220 million. Two of the companies owe more than $100 million each. “How can this be?” Lewis asks in a statement. “If we looked at all 470 recipients, how much would they owe?”

Testifying before the panel was the bailout’s chief overseer, Neil Barofsky, who told lawmakers that the companies, as a condition of receiving TARP funds, must affirm that their tax payments are current, according to the release.

Lewis was quick to point out that federal law prevents the panel from revealing which companies are delinquent. He also made it clear that the Treasury Department, though asked to testify before the panel, declined its invitation.

And here we thought only the Bush administration did that.

The House Ways and Means Committee approved its portion of the $825 billion stimulus package Thursday afternoon, including $275 billion in tax cuts.

While the original bill would allow businesses to recover taxes paid over the last five years based on losses suffered in 2008 and 2009, the Ways and Means panel amended the proposal so that more businesses become eligible for that break, according to the Wall Street Journal:

In a package of amendments to the recovery package unveiled Thursday, House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) proposed a series of changes that would give businesses greater flexibility to claim the credit, ensuring wider participation, congressional aides and corporate lobbyists said. [...]

To pay for the changes, which threatened to drive up the ten-year cost of $16 billion carry-back proposal, the chairman proposed to limit the overall value of the tax benefit. Under his proposal, businesses claiming the tax break would be allowed to carry back 90% of current losses, not 100%, as originally proposed.

The amended bill passed the committee by a vote of 33 to 23, strictly along party lines.

“I don’t think we’ll do it in the first 100 days,” Stark said.

That might leave some health care reform advocates worrying about what will be possible a year or more from now. President-elect Barack Obama has said he wants to make the economy and energy reform his first two priorities from the White House, with health care reform a near third. But the public’s enthusiasm for new presidents traditionally wanes in the second year, creating some urgency to make early moves.

Stark’s comment will surely raise the eyebrows of Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.), both of whom are currently working on comprehensive health reform plans to take up next year. The two powerful lawmakers were probably banking on Obama to expend some of his precious political capital on some version of a major health reform bill. If Stark is right about the timing, the question will be: How far will that political capital go?

You remember the tale: First it was reported in July that Rangel, the 19-term Democrat representing Harlem, had paid less rent than he should have for four New York apartments. Since then, he’s made headlines for seeking private-sector donations on congressional stationary to create the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York. It was also discovered that he’s failed to report some real-estate income on his tax returns.

Last week, the news got worse, when The New York Times reported that Rangel had fought to preserve a multi-million offshore tax break for an oil-drilling company (Nabors) whose CEO has pledged $1 million for CCNY’s new school of public service. The story raises eyebrows because Rangel has long-pushed to close offshore tax shelters. From the Times:

But in 2007, when the United States Senate tried to crack down on the companies, Mr. Rangel, who had recently been sworn in as House Ways and Means chairman, fought to protect them. The tax shelter for the four companies was preserved, saving Nabors an estimated tens of millions of dollars annually and depriving the federal treasury of $1.1 billion in revenues over a decade, according to a Congressional analysis by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

Responding to the latest report, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.) issued a bland statement late Wednesday (that is, just hours before Thanksgiving when no one would be reading) to say that she’s “been assured” that an ethics investigation into Rangel’s doings will be complete by Jan. 3. “I look forward to reviewing the report at that time,” Pelosi said, without tipping her hand.

The findings of the investigation could be significant: The Ways and Means Committee oversees tax policy and Medicare, among other things. Both items are high on the list of reforms floated in recent weeks by President-elect Barack Obama. Republicans have already made a stink about Rangel, asking that he be removed as W&M’s head. Then again, next in line for the chairmanship is Rep. Pete Stark — a Berkeley Democrat who’s also one of the most liberal guys in town.

What will Obama inherit next month? Only time to tell.