Freedom Line Blog

As the United States Senate Finance Committee convenes today for a meeting entitled “The Rising Cost of Health Care:  Considering Meaningful Solutions for All Americans,” the enduring adage of medical care applies:  Do no harm.

Specifically, as we’ve detailed at CFIF, we must especially avoid potentially catastrophic ideas like drug price controls (whether through so-called “Most Favored Nation” (MFN) programs or any other) and violations of patent and intellectual property (IP) protections in which the United States leads the world.  Indeed, our more free-market approach explains why America leads the world in lifesaving healthcare innovation, accounting for an astonishing two-thirds of all new drugs introduced to the world each year:

The reasons that MFN schemes would only exacerbate existing problems are several.

First, drug price controls depress innovation in foreign nations such as those in the European Union (EU) that practice them.  That’s because drug innovation requires massive investments in research and development (R&D), often exceeding $2.6 billion to bring each new potential drug to the consumer market.  Consequently, when foreign governments impose artificially low prices, they necessarily strip pharmaceutical innovators of the revenue required to fund new treatments.  As a result, fewer breakthrough therapies arrive, and the slowdown in medical advances can cost lives.

As noted above, that consequence isn’t hypothetical or open to debate.  To wit, the more market-oriented U.S. accounts for an astounding two-thirds of all new drugs introduced to the world, far above our share of the world’s population or economic production.  That’s no accident or coincidence.

Second, and partly as a consequence of the dynamic described immediately above, drug price controls reduce access to lifesaving drugs.  Nations that impose them suffer from delayed drug availability and restricted access, whereas the newest and most effective pharmaceutical innovations typically reach the U.S. market first.

To illustrate, of 270 medicines introduced in the U.S. from 2011 through 2018, only 53% became available in France, 64% in Britain and 67% of them in Germany.  Only 52% of that 270 became available to Canadians, 41% to Australians and 48% to the Japanese.

If the U.S. were to adopt MFN pricing, it would foolishly import those foreign delays and access restrictions, in turn reducing American consumers’ access to cutting-edge treatments.”

Along the way, the Committee should also highlight the perils of continued subsidies for ObamaCare and the potential benefits of other patient-centered reforms like health savings accounts (HSAs) and Section 340B reform.  Healthcare costs remain an important concern for Americans, and we must promote federal policies that improve matters for consumers and patients, not harm them.