Andrew Quinlan | Posted: Sep 23, 2020 10:48 AM The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
For a long
time, other nations have been free riders on America’s innovative
pharmaceutical industry. Worse, they have enacted socialist price controls to
limit what they pay knowing that the largest market would pick up the slack to
ensure a steady supply of new lifesaving drugs. It needs to stop, but President
Trump’s recent executive order is not the right way to do it.
Earlier this
month, the president signed his “Most Favored Nations” Executive Order to test
a program limiting prescription medication payments made through Medicare Part
B and Part D to the lowest rate paid in similarly developed OECD member
nations.
The idea
behind it is that other nations are getting a deal from pharmaceutical
companies and that the U.S. should get at least as good an arrangement as any
other nation. But this is a flawed way of thinking about the problem.
Other
nations are not getting deals; they are engaging in theft via price controls.
The fix is to stop them from doing so and protect U.S. innovators, not to also
engage in theft by imposing those same price controls domestically.
The latest
drugs can take months or even a year longer to arrive in countries with
socialist healthcare systems. Patients suffer as a result, but the central
planners have decided they are willing to accept that and other trade-offs to
keep costs down.
Forcing
those trade-offs on American patients accustomed to care on demand without all
the delays and shortages associated with socialized systems would be bad
enough. But in some cases, the new price control regime may even drive prices
higher.
If the U.S.
is the most important market for manufacturers seeking to recoup development
costs, then it may sometimes make sense to leave the foreign markets altogether
to avoid setting a low U.S. price. The revenues that would have come from those
markets, even when suppressed by price controls, would then need to be made up
for by charging U.S. customers even more.
While it is
possible that enough drugs avoid foreign markets to put pressure on governments
to stop manipulating prices, remember that they’ve already accepted substandard
care as the bargain for a socialized system. Perhaps one day patients force
them to reconsider, but it could require decades of higher drug prices in the
U.S. before that happens, if ever.
Another
likely consequence is less innovation. Some drugs in this new price environment
will no longer be cost effective to be developed. Patients again will suffer.
Beyond the
issue of foreign market interference, there are better ways to lower drug costs
for U.S. consumers. It is estimated to cost billions to bring new drugs to
market. A variety of government interventions contribute to this expense. Lower
barriers to entry would lead to more competition and lower prices.
Getting
foreign jurisdictions to pay for their share of pharmaceutical innovation by
putting a stop to price manipulation is a noble goal. But it should not come at
the expense U.S. industry and patients.
Andrew F.
Quinlan is co-founder and president of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity.
No comments:
Post a Comment