The U.S. travel technology firm Sabre may not ring an immediate bell, and perhaps you’ve not yet heard…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
On Sabre/Farelogix Merger, DOJ Mustn’t Undertake a Misguided Antitrust Boondoggle

The U.S. travel technology firm Sabre may not ring an immediate bell, and perhaps you’ve not yet heard of its proposed acquisition of Farelogix, but it looms as one of the most important antitrust cases to approach trial since AT&T/Time-Warner. The transaction’s most significant aspect is the way in which it offers a perfect illustration of overzealous bureaucratic antitrust enforcement, and the way that can delay and also punish American consumers. Specifically, the transaction enhances rather than inhibits market competition, and will benefit both travelers and the travel industry by accelerating innovation.  That’s in part because Sabre and Farelogix aren’t head-to-head market competitors, but rather complementary businesses.  While Sabre serves customers throughout the…[more]

January 13, 2020 • 03:53 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
CFIF Opposes H.R. 3, Pelosi’s Socialized Medicine Bill Print
By CFIF Staff
Friday, September 20 2019

ALEXANDRIA, VA – This week, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D - California) introduced H.R. 3, her long-anticipated, hyper-partisan scheme to impose a socialized drug pricing system and reorder American medical care to her liking.  In response, Center for Individual Freedom ("CFIF") President Jeffrey Mazzella issued the following statement:

"CFIF unambiguously opposes Nancy Pelosi’s legislation, which amounts to the worst and most far-reaching attempt yet witnessed to impose government control over Americans’ healthcare access.

"Pelosi’s proposal includes such mechanisms as foreign price controls, compulsory arbitration with government bureaucrats, a complete restructuring the popular Medicare Part D program and what amounts to a retroactive 95% tax on hundreds of the most commonly-used medicines in America.  As CFIF has long highlighted, America enjoys – by far – the most innovative pharmaceutical industry in the world, accounting for two-thirds of all new lifesaving and life-improving drugs globally.  But by importing price controls from foreign nations – which ignore drug patents to extort compliance – to America rather than exporting our more effective free market policies to their shores, American consumers would begin suffering the same drawbacks that consumers in those nations do.  Namely, unavailability of those critical lifesaving and life-improving drugs.

"As even the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) acknowledges, price controls suffocate innovation and delay the arrival of new drugs, or deny them entirely.  It’s therefore no accident that nations imposing price controls enjoy a fraction of the new pharmaceuticals that Americans access, and that America outpaces those countries in terms of cancer survival rates and other benefits.  Pelosi’s bill would also jeopardize nearly $1 trillion of pharmaceutical investment, research and development.

"All of this is far too high a price for Americans to pay on behalf of Nancy Pelosi’s socialized medicine pet project.  CFIF therefore opposes her proposed legislation in the strongest terms, applauds Members of Congress who have already voiced opposition to it and encourages all Americans to contact their Representatives and Senators to express their opposition as well."

CFIF is a constitutional and free market advocacy organization with over 300,000 supporters and activists nationwide. 

###

 

Question of the Week   
Which one of the following was the first African-American soloist to appear at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Near the end of his inflammatory opening remarks Tuesday, Sen. Chuck Schumer tried his best to scale the rhetorical heights. He declared the moment 'deep and solemn' and said, 'The eyes of the Founding Fathers are upon us.'If they're watching, they're probably rolling over in their graves. Day One of the Trump impeachment trial couldn't possibly be what they had in mind.Yes, it was that bad, as history…[more]
 
 
—Michael Goodwin, New York Post
— Michael Goodwin, New York Post
 
Liberty Poll   

Should witnesses be called for the Senate impeachment trial, which could take weeks or even months, or be restricted to the record and evidence already produced by the House?