CEI Joins Coalition Letter in Opposition to Any Proposal to Impose “Buy American” Mandates on Medicines


View Full Document as PDF

Dear Secretary Mnuchin, Director Kudlow, Leader McConnell & Leader McCarthy:

We write in opposition to any proposal to impose “Buy American” mandates on medicines.

A Buy American mandate would place unnecessary sourcing requirements on medicines and medical inputs purchased with federal dollars.

If implemented this proposal will disrupt existing supply chains, invite retaliatory actions from trading partners, and threaten timely access to medicines. During this unprecedented health crisis, a Buy American policy could even threaten our ability to adequately respond to the pandemic.

To be clear – increasing diversity in the supply chain should be encouraged. However, mandating production in America is the wrong way to do this.

The proposal risks upending the complex medical supply chain. This supply chain incorporates numerous inputs from across the world including raw materials, active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), and high precision analytical tools.

These supply chains frequently contend with a number of challenges including transportation and logistical obstacles, ensuring supply and demand are met, and alleviate stress caused to the chain due to region-specific disruptions in manufacturing or shortages. The ability of private industry to utilize a diverse global supplier base is essential to creating a healthy competitive advantage and mitigating risk.

Forcibly localizing this supply chain would be a substantial undertaking which would require finding new sourcing in the U.S. If there is no existing alternative, it would be a long process to set up an alternative.

Rather than restoring U.S. jobs, the proposal would likely lead to higher prices and reduced access. While proponents of a Buy American mandate have claimed the proposal is a way to bring back jobs to the U.S., it would almost certainly do more harm than good.

Under a Buy American mandate, some estimates show that the costs of manufacturing could be up to five times higher.

This is not unique to medicines. Buy American policies have increased prices for Americans whenever they have been tried. History shows that they restrict choices for consumers and manufacturers requiring inputs leading to higher prices or lack of access.

It is also important to note that the American pharmaceutical industry already contributes over $100 billion to the U.S. economy every year, directly supporting over 800,000 jobs. When indirect jobs are included, this innovation supports 4 million jobs and $1.1 trillion in total economic impact.

Pharmaceutical jobs are also high paying – the average compensation is over $126,000 – more than double the $60,000 average compensation in the U.S. Instead of destabilizing our innovation ecosystem with price controls, burdensome regulations, and heavy- handed government directives, we need to encourage advanced manufacturing capabilities with less government interference, lower taxes, and other incentives to maintain America’s global leadership in biomedical innovation.

A Buy American mandate could lead to retaliatory actions. Rather than mandating local sourcing requirements in the U.S. that could harm friendly countries and invite retaliatory actions, a better policy would be to seek the abolition of rules and requirements overseas that compel local sourcing to the disadvantage of U.S. manufacturers. Triggering a global reaction would stifle the pharmaceutical supply chain at the very moment where demand for medical innovation is most needed. Instead of warping the supply chain further, this would do more to level the playing field between regions.

We urge you to reject any Buy American policy on medicines. This protectionist proposal has no place in our healthcare system and will upend complex and efficient supply chains, leading to higher prices, threatening access to medicines, and opening the U.S. to retaliatory measures from other countries.



Grover Norquist

President, Americans for Tax Reform


Jim Martin

Founder/Chairman 60 Plus Association


Saulius “Saul” Anuzis

President, 60 Plus Association


Dee Stewart

President, Americans for a Balanced Budget


Phil Kerpen

President, American Commitment


Steve Pociask

President / CEO, The American Consumer Institute


Ryan Ellis

President, Center for a Free Economy


Andrew F. Quinlan

President, Center for Freedom and Prosperity


Jeff Mazzella

President, Center for Individual Freedom


Ginevra  Joyce-Myers

Executive Director, Center for Innovation and Free Enterprise


Peter Pitts

President, Center for Medicine in the Public Interest


Gregory Conko

Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute


Matthew Kandrach

President, Consumer Action for a Strong Economy


Fred Roeder

Health Economist/Managing Director, Consumer Choice Center


Yaël Ossowski

Deputy Director, Consumer Choice Center


Thomas Schatz

President, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste


Hance Haney

Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute


Katie McAuliffe

Executive Director, Digital Liberty


Adam Brandon

President, FreedomWorks


George Landrith

President, Frontiers of Freedom


Mario H. Lopez

President, Hispanic Leadership Fund


Tom Giovanetti

President, Institute for Policy Innovation


Charles Sauer

President, Market Institute


Pete Sepp

President, National Taxpayers Union


Sally Pipes

President and CEO/Thomas W. Smith Fellow in Health Care Policy

Pacific Research Institute


Wayne Winegarden, Ph.D.

Sr. Fellow Business and Economics/Director, Center for Medical Economics and Innovation Pacific Research Institute


Lorenzo Montanari

Executive Director, Property Rights Alliance


Paul Gessing

President, Rio Grande Foundation


Karen Kerrigan

President & CEO, Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council


David Williams

President, Taxpayers Protection Alliance


Sara Croom

Executive Director, Trade Alliance to Promote Prosperity


Amy Noone

Chairman and CEO, United Seniors for America