In a letter sent to members of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the Center for Individual Freedom urged opposition to S. 150, the so-called Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act of 2023.

"As the Covid pandemic illustrated, it’s critical to upgrade existing drugs to address potentially mutating microbes that cause disease," the letter reads. "Weakening patent protections in the manner contemplated by S. 150 would dangerously undermine the incentive to pursue such improvements. We simply cannot risk that legacy, or American consumers’ access to the world’s most innovative pharmaceutical market."    

Read the entire letter below.

February 6, 2023

Dear United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Members:  

On behalf of over 300,000 supporters and activists across the nation, the Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF) writes in strongest opposition to S. 150, the misnamed “Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act of 2023.”  

The proposed legislation would merely serve to weaken the patent protections that have made America the world’s leading producer of new life-saving and life-improving drugs.  Today, the U.S. accounts for approximately two-thirds of all new drugs introduced to the world, far ahead of any other competitor.  That reflects America’s historical legacy of maintaining the world’s strongest intellectual property protections, including patent rights, which our Founding Fathers explicitly protected in Article I of the Constitution, even before adding the Bill of Rights.  As a direct result, no nation in history rivals our legacy of innovation, including pharmaceutical innovation.  

In that vein, current law rightfully grants patent rights for new and useful improvements to existing drugs, which logically incentivizes research and development, and rewards the multiple years of risk-taking and experimentation necessary to invest in that research and development.  New medicines and improvements often require ten or more years to perfect, and of all innovations that reach the clinical trial stage, only 10% or fewer ultimately secure Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval.  Obviously, that sort of risk and investment can only be sustained by greater certainty and reliability upon regulatory incentives, which S. 150 would undermine.  

While some dangerously dismiss improvements to existing pharmaceuticals as “patent-hopping,” those advancements actually open the door to make existing products even better through such things as reduced side effects, lower dosage requirements, improved potency, extended effectiveness duration and alternative uses.  Improvements of that sort are particularly important as it relates to mutating viruses, changing world conditions and other evolving circumstances.  Indeed, as the Covid pandemic illustrated, it’s critical to upgrade existing drugs to address potentially mutating microbes that cause disease.  

Weakening patent protections in the manner contemplated by S. 150 would dangerously undermine the incentive to pursue such improvements.  We simply cannot risk that legacy, or American consumers’ access to the world’s most innovative pharmaceutical market.  

We therefore urge you in the strongest possible terms to oppose S. 150, which would discourage innovation and weaken pharmaceutical patent protections on which American consumers and innovators depend.  Thank you very much for your attention to this critical issue, and please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments.  

Sincerely,
/s/
Timothy Lee
Senior Vice President of Legal and Public Affairs