Issues & Insights

The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day For American Patients

Late last month the Trump administration delivered a blow to American patients and all consumers that have come to rely on the innovation and quality care that has made this country the best place in the world to be treated.

Unfortunately, in a bid to deliver a health care win amidst a coronavirus pandemic that has become increasingly tough to shake, the White House handed down several executive orders that will make life harder, not easier, for patients. To summarize, these mandates will undercut pharmaceutical innovation, threaten the safety of our country’s medical supply chain, and target the hospitals on the frontlines of the ongoing battle against COVID-19.

Thankfully, the administration did make one move that would maximize manufacturer discounts for patients, by requiring Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) to pass along rebate savings to seniors. This will result in real out-of-pocket savings for Americans.

But the newest order pushes for an international price index (IPI) pricing in Medicare Part B, called “favored nation status.” The name could not be more of a misnomer, either, as “favored nation” implies the lowest price cap among a mix of foreign countries in regard to particular drugs. And the lower the cap, the worse the ripple effects back up the supply chain and for patients in the long run.

In essence, the federal government will take the average price for certain drugs from a combination of foreign countries — all with partly or wholly socialized healthcare systems — and leverage Medicare’s status as the largest purchaser in the market to force companies to sell medicines and other treatments at or below that average threshold. But this is not as simple as it sounds, nor is it beneficial in making life better for patients.

Instead, since price caps in any form ignore natural market forces that determine prices based on supply and demand, manufacturers will no longer be able to recoup investment costs for bringing certain drugs to market and will be forced to either reduce supply or stop manufacturing the drugs altogether. For context, over the course of a decade, potential treatments require nearly $2.6 billion in total investment. Further, fewer than 15% of experimental treatments that enter clinical trials are even able to secure final FDA approval.

So what does this mean for consumers? In short, manufacturers may decide it simply is not feasible to invest billions in potentially breakthrough or lifesaving new ventures, stalling medical progress and needed innovation. For those that continue to manufacture certain drugs, they may have to do so at a lower volume, significantly limiting access for patients. Especially hurt in this scenario are those with rare and chronic conditions, whose new and existing medicines are often far more expensive than others due to niche market conditions.

We have seen price controls tried time and again both abroad and in our current halls of power. Our closest ally, Britain, is experiencing a massive overload in its health system to the tune of nearly 10 million untreated patients by year’s end due to the government’s need to restrict access and control costs with limited supply. At home, Nancy Pelosi’s banner drug bill incorporated the exact same pricing scheme just put forward by the president, but it was shot down at the time by the White House for being just a half-step short of socialism. That makes the president’s order even more confounding.

On the topic of mixed messages, drug importation was also included in the new wave of mandates. Cutting against his administration’s parallel push for “Buy American” mandates — which would attempt to move our entire pharmaceutical supply chain back to the United States precisely due to increased safety and independence — President Trump is instead now opening our borders to foreign drugs under the false assumption that price-savings will follow.

This is misguided on many fronts, the most notable of which is the threat to patient safety. In its current form, the importation executive order applies to Canada, which sources a shocking 85% of its drugs from other countries, including developing nations. Four former FDA commissioners, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, and the National Sherriff’s Association all oppose importation, as it exposes the U.S. supply chain to the very real threat of counterfeit and tainted drugs.

To make matters worse, this proposal has received stiff opposition from Canadian officials, too, who would need to raise their own domestic prices to ensure their government-controlled drug supply was not exhausted in a matter of months, thus offsetting any hope of importation leading to cost savings for American patients. And for some icing on the cake, the FDA does not currently have the capacity to ensure the safety of imported drugs.

To quote Judith Viorst’s famed children’s book, it has certainly been a “terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day” for American patients. It is imperitive that the current administration stand in opposition to damaging socialist proposals like it has done for three years. America needs its innovators, high-quality care, and a safe and reliable medical supply chain now more than ever. Most of today’s mandates accomplish just the opposite.

Gerard Scimeca, is an attorney and co-founder of CASE, Consumer Action for a Strong Economy, a free-market oriented consumer advocacy organization.______________

We Could Use Your Help

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.



  • It amazes me how in discussions about drug prices, the fact pharmaceutical companies spend billions annually, advertising drugs that require a prescription, is never mentioned. Eliminating that expense would certainly give those companies an opportunity to lower prices.

    Instead of using a distorted version of a once popular song to make me beg my doctor to give me a particular drug, a lower cost would impress me more.

  • This was obviously written by someone who knows the pharma thugs are about to lose some of their golden eggs that we American citizens are forced to provide them.

  • Here’s a novel thought:

    How about adopting the model of recapturing ROI over the long term…instead of slurping it all in up front? Each and every time I have invested in my business endeavors, it has been for the long haul. Certainly tends to make for much more disciplined investment decisions, strategies, and development expenditures.

    As Robe incisively points out, Big Pharma certainly has a prodigious volume of fat which could, and should be excised. Weeding out the recrement is, without doubt, always sound investment strategy.


  • novalog novarapid insulin from Canada delivered to your door in USA is about 45 bucks in the usa its about 450 bucks or more. its the same with all insulins and in Mexico I hear its even lower. This article is a joke. The usa is a rigged system, trump is crushing the criminals. Just try to find out what is what on your hospital bill good luck jack. China has dumped drugs attempting to make the world dependent and docile through cheep drugs with profits for the industry and bribes for the members of government/. Go ccp.

  • You cannot lower prices for medicare without raising prices for others unless you outsource to foreign makers that may or may not met FDA standards and certainly would prioritize their domestic market in time of shortage. All the costs of development including the failures need to be recoverable some way or investment in new drugs will decline. We tried to get foreign governments to pay more of their share in the USMCA agreement but Pelosi insisted that be removed from the treaty. The Canadians and Mexicans laughed as they readily agreed. Pelosi wanted to preserve her drug price talking point more than she wanted to lower drug costs for Americans.

    • But Canada and the rest of the world have no impact on that whatsoever? No one is making Pharma sell to Canada and Mexico for a loss. Why should the US citizen subsidize Canadian and Mexican healthcare?

  • The author belongs to an organization that promotes “consumer” interests, but a quick review of their involvement shows they are more concerned about deregulation. Not that that’s a necessarily bad thing, but it doesn’t always help the consumer. On top of that, CASE does not share who their financial donors are, bringing into suspicion that they are little more than a PR arm for big-Pharma, etc. He’s concerned that the price reductions for Americans will stifle innovation, but has no problem with US citizens subsidizing various nations that refuse to pay the full retail. US taxpayers are getting soaked up front through taxes supporting the research, then getting soaked on the backend because we have to subsidize Canada and the rest of the world. If CASE is truly for the consumer, release your donor and financial information.

  • “To make matters worse, this proposal has received stiff opposition from Canadian officials, too, who would need to raise their own domestic prices to ensure their government-controlled drug supply was not exhausted in a matter of months, thus offsetting any hope of importation leading to cost savings for American patients.”

    This misses the whole point of what he’s doing. The main thrust of the President’s action is to end American patients subsidizing the rest of the world. By allowing import from other countries, it will drive the prices up in those countries, while still coming in cheaper for Americans. It’s not price fixing to end the drug-subsidy scam that has been foisted upon the American public.

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

We Could Use Your Help

Help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left. Issues & Insights is published by the editors of what once was Investor's Business Daily's award-winning opinion pages. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on donate button above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!