<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><i class="">PDF attached…</i><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">August 30, 2018</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The Honorable Robert E. Lighthizer</div><div class="">United States Trade Representative</div><div class="">600 17th Street, N.W.</div><div class="">Washington, D.C. 20508</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Dear Ambassador Lighthizer:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">As you work toward a conclusion in the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with both Mexico and Canada, I write to reiterate my strong support for the protection and preservation of access to affordable medicines in any final agreement(s).</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Any new or revised U.S. trade agreement should not repeat mistakes of the past, including deal where the United States failed to advance an adequate balance between the protection of intellectual property and access to affordable medicines.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The most direct way to address these concerns is to strike all patent-related pharmaceutical provisions from the original NAFTA Agreement’s intellectual property chapter. However, if the negotiations do not follow that approach, any final agreement(s) should provide for flexibility, and autonomy for public health systems and those seeking to provide safe, quality, affordable medicines.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There were alarming recent press reports on the NAFTA renegotiation that suggest the United States is advancing language that would harm families, workers, and public health systems. These and other rumored proposals would negatively affect consumer medicine prices and access to medical treatment in the United States, Mexico, and Canada.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">For example, the announcements earlier this week — that the United States and Mexico have preliminarily agreed to 10 years of data protection for biologic drugs and an expanded scope of products eligible for protection — reaffirmed my concern of potential limits to regulatory and legislative authority. Additional problematic possible changes include:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* Extending the length of time or expanding the scope of eligibility for pharmaceutical patents to allow for longer monopolies on medicines;</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* Creating new rights for pharmaceutical companies to play a role in public health care programs’ drug coverage and reimbursement decisions, which could prevent cost-saving reforms from being enacted; and</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* Failing to respect the Doha Declaration on the Trade-Related Aspects for Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement and Public Health.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It is important to underscore that the United States must retain the authority to adjust drug pricing by considering obligations related to transparency and considerations made during the government’s pharmaceutical price and reimbursement determination process. Any final agreement(s) must preserve the flexibility, authority, and duty of the U.S. government to improve access to affordable medicines as needed.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Every day, families struggle with treating and managing diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s, sever allergies, diabetes, and HIV / AIDS. High costs can deter patients from purchasing and using doctor-prescribed treatment. Simple said, free trade agreements should not prioritize corporations making a profit above the public’s health and safety.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">As always, I appreciate your consideration of my concerns on this important matter, and I look forward to your response.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Sincerely,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">John Lewis</div><div class="">Member of Congress</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; " class=""><div class="">Arthur Stamoulis</div><div class="">Citizens Trade Campaign</div><div class="">(202) 494-8826</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
</div></body></html>