Writes Megan McArdle: "[T]he reason that people in Britain know about things like herceptin for early stage breast cancer is a robust private market in the US that experiments with this sort of thing. So in the absence of a robust private US market, my assumption is that the government will focus on the apparent at the expense of the hard-to-measure. Innovation benefits future constituents who aren't voting now. Producing it is very expensive. On the other hand, cutting costs pleases voters this instant." Will government healthcare hurt pharmaceutical innovation? Will this ultimately hurt future generations when they fall sick? What does the National Institute of Health say about the government's role in driving scientific discovery? Post your thoughts.
Previously: Should Healthcare Reform Pass This Year?
Take our poll: Will government healthcare hurt pharmaceutical innovation?