Democrats’ drug price controls in the $3.5 trillion blowout would lead to 167 to 324 fewer new drugs, according to an issue brief by Tomas J. Philipson and Troy Durie at the University of Chicago. 

Within their $3.5 trillion reconciliation package, Democrats have included H.R. 3, legislation that government price controls on American medical innovation. Specifically, it creates a 95 percent excise tax on manufacturers and imposes an international reference pricing scheme that directly imports foreign price controls into the United States.  

According to Philipson and Durie’s brief, this provision would lead to a 29.2 to 60 percent reduction in R&D spending, which translates to 167 to 324 fewer new drug approvals: 

“We calibrate that the price controls implemented in the United States would lead to a 29.2 to 60.0 percent reduction in R&D from 2021 to 2039. This equates to $952.2 billion to $2.0 trillion in lost R&D spending and 167 to 342 fewer new drug approvals during this period. This means annual new drug approvals will be 11.7 to 24.0 percent lower per year from 2021 to 2029 and 45.0 to 92.4 percent lower from 2030 to 2039.” 

Though these estimates are significantly higher than the CBO’s, the authors explain that their estimate is conservative:  

“We discuss how these findings, as well as findings from other studies, differ from CBO (2019), which finds only 37 fewer new drug approvals over this time period, which is 550.2 to 1,024 percent lower than our estimates. Our estimates are conservative as the entire evidence base is considered and not only the evidence base for the more R&D sensitive US market.” 

These results are severe, but not surprising. H.R. 3 arbitrarily sets the prices of medicines based off the prices in six countries which utilize socialist price controls in their healthcare systems: Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan. 

These countries’ access to care is, inevitably, lower. For instance, Canadian patients wait an average of 19.8 weeks from referral to treatment. In the UK, at any one time, 4.5 million patients were waiting to see a doctor or receive care. By comparison, 77 percent of Americans are treated within four weeks of referral, while just 6 percent wait more than two months. 

Further, Americans have access to far more medicines than other countries. According to research by the Galen Institute, 290 new medical substances were launched worldwide between 2011 and 2018. The U.S. had access to 90 percent of these cures. By comparison, the United Kingdom had access to 60 percent of medicines, Japan had 50 percent, and Canada had just 44 percent. 

In trying to be more like foreign countries with socialist policies, Democrats will restrict Americans’ access to life-improving and life-saving medicines. Hundreds of new cures will not be developed in the future which will harm American patients and the healthcare system.

ATR President Grover Norquist was guest on Fox Business Network's Kudlow show today for a discussion of the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill being pushed by congressional Democrats.

Norquist noted that the burden of the proposed corporate tax rate increase will fall on workers:

"The American people get that when you have higher corporate taxes, that is largely paid for by lower wages and lower wage increases in the future. It is also paid for in higher prices and in less competitive production in the United States compared to China or Europe."

Kudlow also played a portion of ATR's upcoming television ad, pointing out the problems with the enormous tax and spending proposal.

Click here or below to view the ad and interview:

A top aide to Federal Trade Commissioner Lina Khan has confirmed the obvious – no industry is safe from the left’s antitrust crusade. 

In a May interview with The Marker, FTC attorney adviser Shaoul Sussman says that Congress has made its mind up when it comes to breaking up America’s largest companies. “All of these companies are going to be on the butcher’s table,” Sussman says, adding that “I’m not sure if they will be broken up in the next few years, but from the perspective of legislation, their judgment has been written.” 

Of course, the antitrust debate on Capitol Hill is far from over. The most recent antitrust legislation, spearheaded by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), limped out of a 29-hour markup with robust conservative and moderate Democrat opposition. A group of Democrats called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to slow down the Cicilline package, and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said that the sloppily drafted legislation was far from ready for a vote on the House floor. 

In a subsequent interview published on Sunday, Sussman said that he hopes Congress makes sweeping changes to antitrust law that go beyond technology companies, specifically highlighting “monopolies in agriculture, health, and telecommunications” and calling for more “systemic legislation.” Sussman is currently one of Khan’s only antitrust advisers, and was conveniently exempted from the FTC’s agency-wide gag order because he gave the interview before he started advising Khan.

This is a stark confirmation that the left’s antitrust plot goes far beyond Big Tech. The left’s true goal is to give the Biden Administration sweeping new power to reshape entire industries. Instead of keeping antitrust law focused on harm to consumers, the left wants to weaponize it as a vehicle for their woke social agenda. 

As we head into the fall, Republican lawmakers should hold firm and reject any proposals that politicize antitrust law or give unelected bureaucrats even more power to control the economy. 

While Democrats’ $3.5 trillion reconciliation package contains major tax hikes and spending increases, it also contains numerous provisions of dubious origin. These provisions reveal Democrats’ priorities: carving out giveaways to the Left’s base by spending on “woke,” wasteful initiatives.  

Below are just 10 of these perplexing items. 

1. Fake News Tax Handout for Reporters at “Local” Newspapers with up to 750 Employees

The proposal creates a tax credit for “local newspapers” with up to 750 employees – a largely left-of-center group of workers.  

It gives an employment tax credit of up to $12,500 per person for reporters at “eligible” newspapers. As a section-by-section analysis from the Ways and Means Committee details: 

“The credit amount is equal to 50% of wages for each of the first 4 calendar quarters, and 30% of wages for each calendar quarter thereafter. Eligible local newspaper publisher is any employer that is in the trade or business of publishing a local newspaper that serves the needs of a regional or local community and who employs no more than 750 employees.”  

This payroll credit would cost $1.3 billion. The vast majority of newspapers in the country have fewer than 750 employees. Likely beneficiaries include The Malibu Times, Aspen Times and the Vineyard Gazette serving the progressive playground of Martha’s Vineyard.

2. Big Labor Tax Break 

Sec. 138514 provides for an above-the-line deduction for up to $250 in “dues” to a labor organization. This deduction would be distortionary tax policy that does little or nothing to help the majority of middle-class families. It is a more harmful and favorable version of the union dues deduction that existed before the GOP tax cuts repealed it.  

The tax deduction the TCJA repealed allowed employees to deduct any unreimbursed expenses (including union dues) that exceeded 2 percent of their adjusted gross income. However, this distortionary deduction was repealed as part of a trade-off that resulted in lower taxes for the middle class across the board. Now, the Left is artificially trying to buttress union membership and fill their political war chests, as union political giving almost entirely flows to Democrats. 

This deduction would cost $4.25 billion in revenues.  

3. Solar Subsidies to “Promote Environmental Justice”

In yet another edition of, “Why is the government paying for this?”—This provision in the bill expands the energy credit for solar facilities in low-income communities, in which “the Secretary makes an allocation of environmental justice solar capacity limitation.” 

In determining which solar facilities to choose, the Secretary is directed to consider the greatest health and economic benefits, wage and employment benefits, and “community engagement” the facility conducts. Projects would receive an additional 10 percent credit if the solar facilities are in low-income communities, or an additional 20 percent credit if a project is “a qualifying low-income residential building project or a low-income economic benefit project.” 

The extension, modification, and increase in this energy credit would cost $63.9 billion. 

4. $15 Billion for “Energy-Efficient” Doors and Windows 

The reconciliation package would replace a $500 lifetime cap on nonbusiness energy property credits with an annual $1,200 credit. This credit allows up to $600 in credits for energy efficient windows and skylights and up to $500 for energy efficient doors.  

This provision also increases the percentage of the credit for installing qualified energy efficiency improvements from 10 percent of the cost to 30 percent. There is no reason the government should be subsidizing individuals’ door and window replacements.  

5. Tax Credit for Electric Bikes  

Sec. 136407 establishes a 15 percent refundable tax credit for electric bicycles. Under this law, taxpayers could claim a credit of up to $1,500 for electric bicycles costing as much as $8,000 per bike. As a reminder, a tax credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction in your tax liability.   

The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that this provision alone could cost $7.43 billion. 

In 2020, the e-bike market was valued at $23.89 billion. This single provision in the Democrats’ plan spends one-third of the entire value of the e-bike market. 

6. Tax Breaks for Elite, Well-Funded Private Universities

Sec. 137702 of this bill would reduce, potentially down to zero, excise tax on investment income of private colleges and universities depending on the amount of financial aid they offer their students. Notably, universities who can provide a lot of grants and scholarships are typically universities with the largest endowments: for example, universities like Harvard and Yale.  

The amount of tax imposed would be reduced based on the aggregate amount of qualified aid awards provided by the institution in relation to the aggregate undergraduate tuition and fees received by the institution. This phaseout would reduce tax revenues by $2.34 billion.  

7.  Investments in the “Green Workforce” 

In Title 5 of this bill, “Investment in the Green Workforce,” Democrats spend $10 billion funding perplexing, niche credits: 

• Sec. 136501 allows the Secretary to allocate an additional $2.5 billion in credits for the advanced energy project credit. About $400 million in credits each year would be reserved for projects in “automotive communities.” Automotive communities, in this bill, are defined as communities that have “experienced major job losses in the automotive manufacturing sector.” This is an apparent handout for unionized autoworkers. 

• Sec. 136502 provides a credit for up to 10 percent of the labor costs incurred by a taxpayer in installing “mechanical insulation property into a mechanical system which was originally placed in service not less than 1 year before the date on which such mechanical insulation property is installed.” Huh? 

8. Refundable Credit for “Environmental Justice” Programs  

Democrats provide a substantial refundable credit for “environmental justice programs” under Sec. 136601 of the bill. 

This provision creates a capped refundable competitive credit of $1 billion for each year from 2022 through and including 2031 to institutions of higher education for environmental justice (EJ) programs. The base credit is 20 percent of costs spent within five years by the higher education institution; however, for HBCUs and minority-serving institutions (MSIs), this credit could cover 30 percent of costs.   

9. Repealing Social Security Number Requirement to Qualify for Child Tax Credit (CTC) 

Sec. 137102 would eliminate the Social Security Number requirement for qualifying children, which was added by the GOP tax cuts, opening the credit up to more abuse.  

10. Credit for Contributions to a Public Universities’ Research Infrastructure Projects 

Middle-class Americans aren’t the usual donors to colleges and universities. Especially not when it comes to project-specific donations. Nonetheless, Democrats are creating a credit for contributions to public universities’ research infrastructure projects. 

The “public university research infrastructure credit” is an amount equal to 40 percent of the qualified cash contributions made by a taxpayer during such taxable year for a qualifying project. The credit amounts allocated to a certified educational institution for all projects cannot exceed $50,000,000 per year, and the total amount of qualifying project credit amounts that may be allocated can be up to $500,000,000 for each 2022 through 2026 – or $2.5 billion in total.