[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 18 (Thursday, February 24, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S787-S788]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS AFFORDABILITY
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, for many months now, I and other Members of
this body have been coming to the floor to talk about the need for
prescription drug coverage for our older people under Medicare. I have
brought to the floor on more than 20 occasions specific cases of older
people who, in so many instances, are walking an economic tightrope,
trying to balance their food costs against their prescription drug
bill, their prescription drug bill against some other necessity. More
and more of these older people and their families simply cannot make
ends meet.
I wish to address the question of whether this country can afford to
cover prescription drugs for older people under Medicare. I submit this
Nation cannot afford not to cover these essential health care services.
We talked on the floor about the important drugs such as Lipitor, a
cholesterol-lowering drug used by many older people. These drugs are
absolutely key to keeping older people well. There is no question that
right now if the Government were to pick up the costs of these
medicines there would be additional costs, but the savings generated as
a result of extending prescription drug coverage to older people, in my
view, would be staggering.
I continually cite the exciting contributions made by these new
medicines that prevent strokes. They are known as anticoagulant drugs.
For an older person, it might cost perhaps $1,000 a year to pay for the
drugs, anticoagulant drugs that prevent these strokes, but if you
prevent a stroke you could save upwards of $100,000 through an
investment that is just a small fraction of those costs.
I am very hopeful it will now be possible to reconcile the various
bills that cover prescription drugs for older people. Senator Daschle
has talked to me on a number of occasions, even a few hours ago,
indicating he is very interested in seeing the Congress come together
on a bipartisan basis and enact this legislation to meet the needs of
older people and better utilize the dollars that are available for
health care in this country.
The stories we have accumulated from home are tragic. I heard
yesterday from an older woman in Tillamook, OR. She recently took
another senior, an 80-year-old woman, to the emergency room. This 80-
year-old woman said she could not afford the one medication she needed
to control her high blood pressure. As a result, she almost died.
From what we are seeing across this country, we either now go forward
and make a well-targeted investment to make sure vulnerable seniors get
help with prescription drugs or we end up with vastly more people
suffering and much increased costs.
I have received scores of letters from across rural Oregon. These are
from people who have to drive 40 miles, 50 miles to a pharmacy. They
don't have big health plans that negotiate discounts for them.
In Baker City, OR, I have been told by an older couple they are
getting by on $200, the two of them, for their entire month after they
are done paying their prescription drug bills. There is not a one of us
in the Senate who could live in that kind of arrangement where they
essentially had only a couple of hundred dollars a month to pay for
their food and shelter and other essentials. A country as good and rich
and strong as ours is capable of addressing this need. I think it can
be done using an approach that relies on marketplace forces.
I particularly wish to praise my colleague from Maine, Senator Snowe.
I have been able to team up with her on this prescription drug issue
for 14 months. When we started in the Budget Committee, I think a lot
of folks looked at us and said, Senator Snowe, Senator Wyden, they are
well meaning but there is no chance this prescription drug issue is
going to be addressed.
We have seen over the last few months tremendous progress. There is
not a Member of Congress, Democrat or Republican, who goes home and
doesn't get asked about this issue. We have a chance to bring the
various bills together. Senator Daschle wishes to do so, and I know a
number of Republicans want to do so as well. Our colleagues in the
Senate recognize this ought to be a voluntary program. A lot of lessons
have been learned since the catastrophic care issue came before the
Congress. This is not going to be a mandatory program. This is not
going to be a one-size-fits-all program from Washington. This is going
to be based on voluntary choice. We are going to use the dollars that
are raised for this program to pick up the prescription drug portion of
a senior citizen's private health insurance.
I am not talking about a federalized health care system. We are
talking about using private health insurance, making sure older people
have a variety of choices and offerings. As a result of those choices
and offerings, they can have some big bargaining power.
What happens right now is the health plans, the HMOs, big buyers, go
out and negotiate a discount. If you are an older person in rural
Nebraska or rural Oregon and you don't have prescription drug coverage,
you walk into the Rite Aid or a Fred Meyer or one of your drugstores
and you, in effect, have to subsidize the big buyers who are in a
position to negotiate discounts. We can use private marketplace forces,
the way the Snowe-Wyden legislation does, and the way several of the
other bills do, to make sure older people have the kind of bargaining
power that makes these prescription drugs more affordable.
I am very pleased that this issue has become a bigger priority in the
Congress in the last few weeks. I think now is going to be a test of
whether we can,
[[Page S788]]
as Senator Daschle and others have suggested, reconcile the various
bills that have been introduced on this issue. I do not expect to have
the last word on this matter.
Senator Snowe and I are very proud the financing of our legislation
received 54 votes in the Senate when it came up last year. On the
Snowe-Wyden amendment, we saw Senator Wellstone vote for it, Senator
Santorum vote for it, Senator Kennedy vote for it, and Senator Abraham
vote for it. That is a pretty good coalition. That is the kind of
coalition we can build if we pick up on the counsel of Senator Daschle,
and I know a number of Republican leaders, to come together and
reconcile these various bills.
I intend to keep coming to the floor and reading these cases. Our
friend, Senator Kerrey, is here. I know he is going to be speaking on
an important issue, and I do not want to detain him. I think in this
country we are now seeing older people break their pills in half
because they cannot afford to pick up the cost of medicine when we
have, as we saw in Tillamook, OR, 80-year-old women being taken to
emergency rooms and not able to afford their medicine. It is wrong. It
is just wrong for this Congress to not address this issue in a
bipartisan way this year.
This is not one we ought to put off until after the election and see
it used as a political football. It should not be used as fodder for
the campaign trail because if it is, too many older people who cannot
afford their medicine are going to suffer.
We have a chance to move on a bipartisan basis to reconcile these
various bills. I intend to keep coming to the floor of this body again
and again to describe these cases, to show how urgent the need is. The
President at the State of the Union Address made it clear he was
extending the olive branch to both political parties to work with him
on this issue. We ought to seize, on a bipartisan basis, the
opportunity to use private health insurance, not some federalized
Government program, to make sure we meet the needs of older people for
prescription medicine.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Senator from Nebraska is
recognized.
____________________