The NIH Must Abandon This Harmful Remnant from the Biden Administration
- Jeffrey Depp
- Oct 19
- 2 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Op-Ed Published in *Truth on the Market by CFJ Senior Counsel, Law & Policy, Jeffrey Depp
When the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced in July that it would proceed with a Biden-era proposal, many in the innovation community were stunned. This proposal mandates “access plans” for companies seeking to license NIH-owned patents. Industry groups have warned that this new bureaucratic hurdle could effectively “kill NIH licensing.”
They are correct, and not just in a practical sense. The very design of this policy embodies a dangerous assumption: that government planners can predict and orchestrate the myriad market interactions that drive innovation.
Understanding the NIH Policy
At its core, the NIH policy requires any company seeking a commercial license for NIH-developed technology to submit an “access plan.” This detailed blueprint must outline how the company will ensure that resulting drugs or devices are broadly available and affordable for patients. This includes provisions for “underserved communities” and even low-income countries.
NIH officials will review and approve these plans before granting licenses. Moreover, they retain the authority to revoke licenses if companies fail to adhere to their commitments.
The Flaws in Central Planning
The problem with this approach, as Austrian economists like Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises would assert, is that such a system is fundamentally flawed. Central planning cannot account for the complexities of market dynamics.
Innovation thrives in environments where flexibility and responsiveness are paramount. By imposing rigid access plans, the NIH risks stifling the very creativity that drives advancements in healthcare.
The Impact on Innovation
The implications of this policy extend far beyond the immediate licensing process. It creates a chilling effect on research and development. Companies may hesitate to invest in NIH technologies, fearing bureaucratic entanglements that could hamper their ability to innovate.
Moreover, the focus on access plans diverts attention from the critical need for scientific exploration. Researchers and companies should be encouraged to push boundaries, not constrained by government mandates that seek to dictate outcomes.
A Call for Change
It is essential for the NIH to reconsider this approach. The focus should be on fostering an environment that encourages innovation rather than imposing bureaucratic hurdles. Policymakers must recognize that the best way to ensure access to life-saving treatments is to promote a vibrant and competitive marketplace.
In conclusion, the NIH must abandon this harmful remnant from the Biden Administration. The future of innovation in healthcare depends on it.
For those interested in a deeper exploration of this topic, I encourage you to read more in the full article linked above.
