Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Free trade for medicine
[John C. Goodman, "Free trade tack for drug imports," The Washington Times, 31 January 2005.]
NCPA President John Goodman counsels a strong negotiating position for the U.S. in regard to prescription drug trade in this recent column:
Under free trade, citizens of different countries would tend to pay the same price for the same drugs. Today, these prices differ vastly, often because of government policies designed to protect special interests. The consequences for consumers can be surprising. Though Americans frequently pay higher prices for brand-name drugs, they often pay much lower prices for generics and drugs sold over-the-counter.
In an ideal world, government would get out of the way and allow markets to work. Short of that, we need an aggressive trade policy designed to level the playing field.
For starters, we should insist that other countries respect patent rights, including the right of the patent holder to refuse to sell. The economic purpose of a patent, after all, is to create a monopoly right for a certain number of years so inventors can recoup research and development costs. For politicians in other countries, it is tempting to seize the benefits of American R&D without contributing to the cost.
Second, we need to allow contract settlement of resale issues. Let the pharmaceutical companies negotiate the terms of sale and the right to resell in the market place. Aside from safety considerations, government's proper role is to enforce contracts, not dictate their contents.
Finally, other countries need to open their markets to American producers of generic and OTC drugs. We should not allow regulation to function as protectionism under another name.
[Matthew Hisrich, "Sebelius Is Practicing Black-Market Politics," The Wichita Eagle, 10 December 2004.]
[John C. Goodman, "Free trade tack for drug imports," The Washington Times, 31 January 2005.]
NCPA President John Goodman counsels a strong negotiating position for the U.S. in regard to prescription drug trade in this recent column:
Under free trade, citizens of different countries would tend to pay the same price for the same drugs. Today, these prices differ vastly, often because of government policies designed to protect special interests. The consequences for consumers can be surprising. Though Americans frequently pay higher prices for brand-name drugs, they often pay much lower prices for generics and drugs sold over-the-counter.
In an ideal world, government would get out of the way and allow markets to work. Short of that, we need an aggressive trade policy designed to level the playing field.
For starters, we should insist that other countries respect patent rights, including the right of the patent holder to refuse to sell. The economic purpose of a patent, after all, is to create a monopoly right for a certain number of years so inventors can recoup research and development costs. For politicians in other countries, it is tempting to seize the benefits of American R&D without contributing to the cost.
Second, we need to allow contract settlement of resale issues. Let the pharmaceutical companies negotiate the terms of sale and the right to resell in the market place. Aside from safety considerations, government's proper role is to enforce contracts, not dictate their contents.
Finally, other countries need to open their markets to American producers of generic and OTC drugs. We should not allow regulation to function as protectionism under another name.
[Matthew Hisrich, "Sebelius Is Practicing Black-Market Politics," The Wichita Eagle, 10 December 2004.]
Comments:
Post a Comment
