As Congress revives debate over foreign reference pricing—better known as the “Most Favored Nation” (MFN) policy—conservatives need to ask a hard question: who benefits most when we outsource America’s drug prices to foreign bureaucrats?
The answer is clear—and it’s not the American people. It’s China.
At its core, MFN is a price control scheme that pegs U.S. drug prices to artificially low rates set by government-run health systems in Europe. But beyond the economic fallout—slashed innovation, lost jobs, and shuttered rural hospitals—MFN is also a geopolitical gift to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
China isn’t just competing with us in semiconductors and rare earth minerals. It’s waging an all-out race to dominate the future of biomedicine. In oncology alone, China has surged ahead, launching nearly as many new cancer treatments as the U.S. in the past five years. They’ve increased R&D investment nearly three times faster than the U.S.—and that gap will only grow if America kneecaps its own pharmaceutical engine with MFN.
The data tells a chilling story. One credible estimate finds that MFN could result in up to 342 fewer new drug approvals, nearly 1.3 million lost American jobs, and over $1 trillion in lost tax revenue. Meanwhile, China is sitting on the sidelines, cheering us on as we undermine one of the last great industries still led by the United States.
This isn’t just a healthcare debate. It’s a national security issue.
In a world where biomedical innovation determines who cures the next pandemic, who wins the cancer war, and who commands global influence, surrendering our pharmaceutical sector to the whims of foreign price-setters isn’t just misguided—it’s dangerous.
Make no mistake: MFN isn’t “market-based reform.” It’s socialized medicine disguised in populist rhetoric. It invites the failed policies of Europe—rationing, restricted access, and aging infrastructure—into a system that has delivered 90% of the world’s medical breakthroughs over the past decade.
Worse still, it puts American patients behind a global paywall. Today, U.S. patients have access to nearly 90% of newly launched medicines. In countries like Canada and Australia, that figure drops to 19% and 24%. With MFN, we risk importing not just low prices—but low access, fewer cures, and slower innovation.
For conservatives, the path forward is clear: reject MFN and fight for American solutions. That means cutting out middlemen like pharmacy benefit managers who pocket 50 cents of every dollar spent on medicine. It means reforming the 340B hospital racket, where tax-exempt systems buy drugs for pennies and sell them for thousands. And it means holding foreign freeloaders accountable—not rewarding them by adopting their failed models.
The choice is simple: Do we lead the world in medical innovation, or do we hand the keys to Beijing?
Alton Phillips
