In our Liberty Update this week, we highlight the latest illegal leak of thousands of supposedly confidential…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
ProPublica/IRS Leak: There's No Underlying "There" There

In our Liberty Update this week, we highlight the latest illegal leak of thousands of supposedly confidential Internal Revenue Service (IRS) taxpayer returns spanning over 15 years, confirming that the partisan and power-hungry IRS simply cannot be trusted to safeguard our sensitive records, let alone to begin collecting sensitive private information from nonprofit organizations on donors who contribute to them in violation of the First Amendment.

Getting to the substance of the ProPublica/IRS leaked documents themselves, former Senator Phil Gramm and U.S. Policy Metrics partner Mike Solon explain in The Wall Street Journal how there's nothing scandalous in the least in what they reveal:

ProPublica’s 'blockbuster' story showing that the wealthy 'pay income taxes that are only…[more]

June 18, 2021 • 04:40 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
President Trump’s ‘Most Favored Nation’ Executive Order Always Was and Still Is a Prescription for Disaster Print
By CFIF Staff
Friday, November 20 2020

ALEXANDRIA, VA – Today, President Trump announced new details about implementation of the "Most Favored Nation" (MFN) executive order.  The rule relies on an International Pricing Index (IPI) to determine MFN pricing for certain Medicare drugs, meaning the price controls of foreign nations, many of which have socialized medicine systems, will control reimbursement rates here in the United States.

Below is a statement by CFIF President Jeffrey Mazzella in response to today’s announcement:

“Reducing consumer costs in health care is important. But this ‘Most Favored Nation’ rule is the wrong approach. Indeed, the MFN rule is a prescription for disaster that hamstrings pharmaceutical innovators at the worst possible time: in the middle of a pandemic.

“Free-market and other center-right organizations remain united in our opposition to the MFN order. As a massive coalition of 80 such organizations wrote a few months ago, ‘Adopting these price controls will slow medical innovation, threaten American jobs, and undermine criticism of single-payer systems. In addition, a United States embrace of price controls will make it immeasurably more difficult to get foreign countries to pay their own way in the development of new medicines.’

“More specifically, price controls simply do not work, regardless of the product targeted or the country in which they’re attempted, and real-world experience establishes that pharmaceutical price controls are no different.  For example, other nations receive far fewer new lifesaving and life-improving drugs than American consumers, which enjoyed access to 96% of all new cancer drugs over the past decade. In contrast, only 56% of those same drugs became available in Canada, merely 50% became available in Japan and only 11% in Greece, as just three examples. The MFN rule threatens that access.

“Finally, the MFN rule contradicts the preferences of U.S. consumers and voters regarding the general role of government in health care. A recent national survey conducted by Public Opinion Strategies for CFIF measured the health care priorities of voters nationally and in 12 key swing states ahead of the November 2020 election.  It found that ‘voters, across party, overwhelmingly prefer the role of the federal government to be that of providing oversight and incentives to health care providers, prescription drug companies and health insurers to encourage competition to lower prices in the health care system (70%) rather than having the federal government set prices and determine what services and medicines are covered by private health plans (30%).’  

###

Quiz Question   
What is the current U.S. national debt?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"The Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision Wednesday ruled that a California law allowing union organizers access to farms to organize workers is unconstitutional because it in effect deprives farm owners of their property rights without just compensation.The six Republican-appointed justices ruled for the businesses while the three Democrat-appointed justices dissented, siding with state officials who…[more]
 
 
—Tyler Olson, FoxNews.com
— Tyler Olson, FoxNews.com
 
Liberty Poll   

In the first Supreme Court term with Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett all now on the bench, how satisfied are you with decisions in cases you care about?