In last week's Liberty Update, we highlighted the Heritage Foundation's 2022 Index of Economic Freedom…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: More Economic Freedom = Higher Standard of Living

In last week's Liberty Update, we highlighted the Heritage Foundation's 2022 Index of Economic Freedom, which shows that Joe Biden has dragged the U.S. down to 22nd, our lowest rank ever (we placed 4th in the first Index in 1995, and climbed back up from 18th to 12th under President Trump).  As we noted, among the Index's invaluable metrics is how it demonstrates the objective correlation between more economic freedom and higher citizen standards of living, which this graphic illustrates:

 …[more]

May 19, 2022 • 12:53 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
U.N. Threatens U.S. Medical Innovation...and Our Economy Print
By Timothy H. Lee
Thursday, September 22 2016
Translation: The U.N. seeks to undermine property rights and medical innovation in the name of worldwide redistribution, with the U.S. patent system its obvious primary target.

Ponder this lopsided statistic for a moment. 

The United States, with just 4% of the world's population, generates 64.4% - nearly two-thirds - of all new prescription and biologic drug patents worldwide. 

Our nearest individual competitor, Japan, accounts for a distant second at 10.7%, and China merely 0.2%.  The entire combined European Union produces 24.8%, or about one-third of what we create, with remaining developed nations accounting for only 6.0%. 

That disparity isn't due to blind luck.  It's the direct result of America's current and historical standing as the world's strongest protector of patent rights and intellectual property. 

The U.S. Constitution, whose 229th birthday we celebrate this month, deliberately addressed patent and other intellectual property rights by granting Congress authority "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."  James Madison, writing in The Federalist 43, emphasized the relationship between intellectual property protections and social utility by noting, "The public good fully coincides in both cases with the claims of individuals."  And as Abraham Lincoln later observed, America's "patent system added fuel of interest to the fire of genius." 

But America's strong patent protections aren't mere historical or Constitutional law curiosity.  To this day, independent measures of worldwide intellectual property protections place the U.S. atop their surveys.   As just two examples, both the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Global Intellectual Property Center and the Washington, D.C.-based Property Rights Alliance again placed the U.S. atop their 2016 worldwide rankings. 

The fruits of America's legacy of strong patent protection are clear.  From the telephone to powered flight to radio to television to the Internet, no nation in human history rivals our record of invention.  And as noted above, America's astonishing lead in creating life-saving and life-improving drugs also manifests that legacy. 

One would think that America had earned the world's gratitude for that role as the world's medicinal wellspring. 

Instead, illustrating the old adage that no good deed goes unpunished, the U.S. finds itself the target of United Nations enmity and kleptocratic design. 

Last year, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon convened a "High-Level Panel on Access to Medicines" with the explicit intention "to review and assess proposals and recommend solutions for remedying the policy incoherence between the justifiable rights of inventors, international human rights law, trade rules and public health in the context of health technologies."  In its official statement, the U.N. openly acknowledged its goal of determining "how WTO members can tailor national intellectual property law, competition law, government procurement and drug regulatory laws and regulations to fulfill public health obligations": 

[W]hile the world is witnessing the immense potential of science and technology to advance health care, gaps and failures in addressing disease burdens and emerging diseases in many countries and communities remain.  The misalignment between the right to health on the one hand and intellectual property and trade on the other, fuel this tension.

Translation:  The U.N. seeks to undermine property rights and medical innovation in the name of worldwide redistribution, with the U.S. patent system its obvious primary target. 

The problem, as illustrated by the correlation between America's strong patent system and its gaping lead in medical innovation, is that intellectual property rights don't undermine access to medicine, they fuel it.  Without the incentive to invest in potential new medicines, they simply won't get created in the first place. 

How would weakening that incentive "advance health care," the U.N.'s alleged goal?   How will the U.N. redistribute medicines that don't get invented at all? 

Moreover, in addition to undermining the creative incentive for new medicines, the U.N.'s scheme threatens the American economy. 

Not only do 650,000 Americans work in the pharmaceutical sector, but each of those jobs supports five additional jobs in such sectors as manufacturing, transportation, retail and research.  Additionally, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, every $1 invested in new medicines saves $7.20 in healthcare spending, which stands to reason since new drugs often alleviate the need for surgery and other expensive treatments. 

It's unfortunate that over the decades, the U.N. has veered far from its founding ideal of promoting world peace among nations and today seems more interested in demonizing Israel or targeting such things as the U.S. right to keep and bear arms.  This latest scheme to free ride off of U.S. medical innovation and weaken its fruitful system of patent rights should not be tolerated by American citizens or their elected leaders. 

Quiz Question   
How many days does it take the average U.S. household to consume as much electrical power as one single bitcoin transaction?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"The trial of former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann crossed a critical threshold Friday when a key witness uttered the name 'Hillary Clinton' in conjunction with a plan to spread the false Alfa Bank Russian collusion claim before the 2016 presidential election.For Democrats and many in the media, Hillary Clinton has long held a Voldemort-like status as 'She who must not be named' in scandals…[more]
 
 
—Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University
— Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University
 
Liberty Poll   

Should any U.S. government agency have a function called the "Disinformation Governance Board" (See Homeland Security, Department of)?