Trump’s price control proposal conflicts with ‘America First’ agenda

elp harden the country’s drug supply chain. Earlier this month, for example, President Trump signed an executive order to streamline the regulatory process for building new biomedical facilities here at home. And in April, the White House directed Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to address free market manipulation within the drug market to lower costs and expand patient choice. Following in Europe’s misguided footsteps would undermine these important steps being taken by the Trump Administration to “Make America Healthy Again.”

President Trump’s goal of cutting federal spending is refreshing. But deploying a government price control scheme through Medicaid would be an exercise in self-harm. Market-based reforms that preserve incentives for innovation and domestic manufacturing will help to deliver a healthier—and more fiscally responsible—future for American families.

In the quest to trim federal expenses, the Trump Administration is considering a new approach to cut costs associated with prescription drugs covered by Medicaid. While the idea of making taxpayer dollars go further is a positive step, implementing European-style socialism through government price controls is not the most prudent strategy. Rather than stifling the free market, healthcare policy advisors under President Trump should focus on promoting competition, empowering patients with choice, and ensuring transparent pricing.

The proposed plan by White House officials involves following the lead of European countries like France and the U.K., as well as Canada, by tying the cost of Medicaid-covered medications to a percentage of what these nations pay for the same drugs. While this may seem like a simple solution, the implications are complex. Countries with strict government price controls on medicines often force pharmaceutical companies to sell their products below market value. Initially, this may appear beneficial for patients in Europe and Canada. However, the repercussions of artificially low prices can be severe. In Europe, these policies have restricted patient access to medications, depleted the local biomedical industry, resulting in shortages of drugs and a fragile medicine supply chain vulnerable to external pressures. Furthermore, the delay in access to new treatments and vaccines highlights the consequences of impeding innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. The high cost of developing new drugs is a significant factor, and if companies cannot recuperate their expenses, they may divert resources from future breakthroughs. Despite the higher price Americans pay for drugs, they benefit from swift access to cutting-edge medications. By adopting price control policies from other countries, the U.S. risks losing its biomedical advantage and contradicting the ‘America First’ agenda that aims to eliminate regulatory inefficiencies and boost domestic manufacturing for a more resilient drug supply chain.

While President Trump’s emphasis on reducing federal spending is commendable, implementing a government price control system for Medicaid drugs could be detrimental. Instead, reforms should uphold incentives for innovation and local production to ensure a healthier and financially sustainable future for American families.