Scholarlink

<p>The US healthcare system is characterized by a persistent deadlock, where high costs, low efficiency, and inequity resist fundamental reform. This stalemate is rooted in deep ideological divides, political polarization, a fragmented fiscal structure, and the power of entrenched interest groups. This article analyzes how recent trade protectionist policies, specifically tariffs on pharmaceuticals and their inputs, intersect with this domestic gridlock. It posits a central paradox: a political system incapable of enacting major domestic health reform can simultaneously deploy assertive trade interventions in the same sector. The article argues that these tariffs should not be misconstrued as flawed instruments of healthcare reform. Instead, they represent the application of a distinct sovereigntist and protectionist logic, driven by national security concerns. The consequence is not a failed attempt at a solution, but a collision of policy agendas that actively exacerbates the healthcare system’s core dysfunctions. By increasing costs, destabilizing supply chains, and creating new arenas for interest group conflict, tariffs intensify partisan strife and further entrench the reform deadlock. This process, marked by the “securitization” of the pharmaceutical industry, signals a critical shift in global health governance, where geopolitical strategy now overrides and complicates the pursuit of domestic public health goals.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Tariff Conflicts and Entrenched Interests: The Deepening Deadlock of US Healthcare Reform

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月10日

查看全文
  • Miao Wang

摘要

The US healthcare system is characterized by a persistent deadlock, where high costs, low efficiency, and inequity resist fundamental reform. This stalemate is rooted in deep ideological divides, political polarization, a fragmented fiscal structure, and the power of entrenched interest groups. This article analyzes how recent trade protectionist policies, specifically tariffs on pharmaceuticals and their inputs, intersect with this domestic gridlock. It posits a central paradox: a political system incapable of enacting major domestic health reform can simultaneously deploy assertive trade interventions in the same sector. The article argues that these tariffs should not be misconstrued as flawed instruments of healthcare reform. Instead, they represent the application of a distinct sovereigntist and protectionist logic, driven by national security concerns. The consequence is not a failed attempt at a solution, but a collision of policy agendas that actively exacerbates the healthcare system’s core dysfunctions. By increasing costs, destabilizing supply chains, and creating new arenas for interest group conflict, tariffs intensify partisan strife and further entrench the reform deadlock. This process, marked by the “securitization” of the pharmaceutical industry, signals a critical shift in global health governance, where geopolitical strategy now overrides and complicates the pursuit of domestic public health goals.