• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Galen Institute

  • Home
  • About Us
    • Mission and History
    • Grace-Marie Turner bio
    • Who was Galen?
    • Donate to Galen
  • Activities
    • Core Activities
    • Commentary and Oped Tutorial
    • Our Book
    • Galen Guides
  • Contact Us
  • Major Papers
  • Broadcast Interviews
  • Health Policy Consensus Group

Why Life-Sciences Innovation Is Politically ‘Purple’

POSTED BY Galen Institute on February 22, 2016.

The United States has long had the world’s most effective and competitive system for discovering and developing new drugs—and for more than a half century, there has been a bipartisan consensus that there are two reasons for that success: First, the federal government provides robust funding for scientific research, mostly through the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Second, the U.S. system encourages vigorous innovation in the private sector by providing strong intellectual property protections and a drug reimbursement system that together allow companies to earn sufficient revenues to reinvest in highly risky research and development. But today that consensus is fraying as populists on the left and libertarians on the right question both the policy means and the end result. If the center cannot hold and the longstanding bipartisan policy framework falls apart, then the future of U.S. biomedical innovation will be in peril.

Many on the left have long voiced concerns about drug prices, but most of these have acknowledged that the U.S. system for discovering and developing drugs has worked well and that America has benefited by constantly improving drugs and fielding a globally competitive biopharmaceutical industry (biopharma). Now that view is under attack from an ascendant camp that may be fairly described as “drug populists.” These left-wing advocates complain that biopharma companies charge too much for drugs and that government should impose price controls, weaken patent protections, and shorten the term of intellectual property protection for the clinical test data related to new biologic drugs (known as “data exclusivity”). This is part and parcel of a larger policy agenda for the federal government to assume a significantly increased role in drug development, and the biopharma industry to be significantly hemmed in. These populists embrace the view that health care is a fundamental human right, and they deeply distrust the private sector, which leads them to argue that health care should be a government responsibility—and that government should not only provide insurance through a single payer plan, but also direct and fund development of new medicines.

Read the full report here.

Filed Under: Innovation

Primary Sidebar

SEARCH

NEW

An American Renaissance in the Care of Health

Our Annual Report

New Paths to Progress

The Laffer Curve

Subscribe to our Newsletter

* = required field
unsubscribe from list
(After subscribing, you will receive a confirmation email which is frequently found in the junk mail folder.)

Recent Newsletters

09/13/2024 - A Sea Change — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
08/23/2024 - Kamala the Chameleon — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
07/25/2024 - The Big Reset — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
06/27/2024 - Big Ideas — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
06/21/2024 - Drip. Drip. Drip. — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
05/31/2024 - A Diversion — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
05/24/2024 - In Memory — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
05/17/2024 - High on Politics — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
05/10/2024 - Breaking the Bank — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter
04/22/2024 - We Interrupt This Program…. — AmericanHealthCareChoices newsletter

Categories

Social Media

Like Us On Facebook

Twitter:
@gracemarietweet
@galeninstitute

Copyright Galen Institute at Donors. © 2025; · Log in