Congress concluded its summer session by passing legislation
that would allow Americans to buy prescription drugs from Canada
and several other nations. This practice is known as reimportation,
because the drugs originally were manufactured in the U.S. and
exported. Federal law currently prohibits Americans from buying
pharmaceuticals from other countries, even though identical drugs
often cost one-third to one-half less in foreign pharmacies. So
while Americans ostensibly enjoy a freer economy than the rest
of the world, they perversely pay more for their prescriptions
than residents of any other nation.
The pharmaceutical industry obviously likes this, and it worked
overtime lobbying against the reimportation measure paying off
some strange bedfellows in the process. Several supposedly free-market
groups came out against reimportation, making tortured attempts
to argue that the free-market principles they normally promote
somehow just dont apply to imported prescription drugs.
Some even made the outrageous argument that reimportation will
threaten the pharmaceutical industrys profits, as though
it is the job of government to ensure the profitability of any
industry!
The truth is that many of the organizations opposing reimportation
either directly represent the pharmaceutical industry, or receive
funding from it. They are transparently willing to abandon their
free-market principles when necessary to protect their
bottom line.
The arguments against reimportation amount to simple protectionism.
Opponents of reimportation want to preserve artificially high
drug prices in America at the expense of drug consumers. They
rely on two tired and demonstrably false claims: namely, that
the free market does not work when it comes to health care, and
that there is no level playing field because other
countries impose price controls on drugs. These protectionist
arguments are used as justification for imposing higher costs
on Americans by limiting their consumer choices.
It does not matter if the Canadians or Germans employ price controls.
Their drug prices may be artificially low, while ours may be artificially
high. This simply shows that both the U.S. and other countries
interfere in the market. It is not a justification for further
intervention in the market by prohibiting reimportation. American
consumers should not be punished simply because other governments
have foolish economic policies.
Pharmaceutical companies certainly own the drugs they produce,
and they have every right to sell them at any price they choose.
They also have the right not to sell their products to foreign
pharmacies, or to condition sales on an agreement that such pharmacies
will not reimport into the U.S. They do not have a right, however,
to use government to prevent Americans from buying drugs from
any willing seller they choose, regardless of where that seller
may be located. To quote Sheldon Richman, a scholar at the Future
of Freedom Foundation, The U.S. government has no business
telling the American people what they may and may not buy from
people living outside the country. Thats called freedom,
something earlier Americans actually understood and valued.
Reimportation
is hardly a solution to our health care woes, of course, and the
bill faces a highly uncertain future in the Senate. Reimportation
would, however, inject a tiny measure of freedom into our increasingly
regulated health care system. No American should ever enjoy less
freedom by virtue of living in the U.S., and no American should
be forced to pay higher prices for drugs that are available more
cheaply overseas. The ban on reimportation is unconscionable,
and most Americans know it despite the best efforts of the pharmaceutical
companies and their mouthpieces.
August
5, 2003