[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 111 (Tuesday, September 19, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1527-E1528]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   GENERIC DRUGS SAVE CONSUMERS BILLIONS WHILE INCREASING CHOICE AND 
                              COMPETITION

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. MARION BERRY

                              of arkansas

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 19, 2000

  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, since the Drug Price Competition and Patent 
Restoration Act, better known as the Waxman-Hatch Act, was signed into 
law in 1984, generic drugs have been a major source of relief for many 
Americans who face extraordinarily high prescription drug prices.
  The law struck a balance between the generic pharmaceutical industry 
and brand-name

[[Page E1528]]

companies. It did this by speeding up the approval process for generic 
drugs, and also by guaranteeing brand-name companies a minimum amount 
of market exclusivity before generics are allowed to compete.
  After the passage of Waxman-Hatch, the generic pharmaceutical 
industry grew from a $2 billion industry in 1984 to $8 billion in 1997. 
Over the same period, brand-name companies' sales grew from $17 billion 
to $77 billion.
  According to the Congressional Budget Office, generic pharmaceuticals 
saved consumers $8 to $10 billion dollars in 1994 alone. As fast as 
drug prices have been rising in recent years, they would have increased 
much faster if consumers had not had access to generic alternatives.
  Despite the great benefit generic alternatives have provided to many 
patients, I am concerned about the activities some brand-name 
manufacturers have engaged in to obstruct generic competition. These 
efforts by brand-name companies include using payments to generic 
competitors, which are legally entitled to a period of being the 
exclusive competitor for 180 days, not to bring their product to 
market--in effect, this is buying a perpetual monopoly. Attempts to 
spread false information, lobby state legislators to restrict generic 
competition, and circumvent the ordinary process by having Congress 
pass special legislation granting patent extensions are other examples 
of anti-competitive behavior.
  I have a great appreciation for what the generic pharmaceutical 
industry has done to benefit American consumers, and I am hopeful that 
in the not-too-distant future Congress will consider additional pro-
consumer legislation to ensure consumers have increased access to more 
affordable generic prescription drugs.

                          ____________________