[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 99 (Tuesday, July 17, 2001)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1345]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


             REIMPORTATION OF FDA-APPROVED PHARMACEUTICALS

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 17, 2001

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, due to a personal matter I was unable to be 
present for roll-call votes last week. I particularly regret not being 
in attendance for the votes on the amendments to the Agriculture 
Appropriations bills offered by the gentleman from Vermont (Roll Call 
no. 216) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Roll Call no. 217) dealing 
with the reimportation of FDA-approved pharmaceuticals. I would have 
enthusiastically supported both amendments had I been able to be here 
last week and I was quite disappointed to see the gentleman from 
Vermont's amendment rejected and pleased to see the gentleman from 
Minnesota's amendment accepted by this body.
  I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I supported these 
amendments. As my colleagues are aware, many Americans are concerned 
about the high cost of prescription drugs. These high prices 
particularly affect low-income senior citizens because many seniors 
have a greater than average need for prescription drugs and lower than 
average income. One of the reasons prescription drug prices are high is 
government policies which give a few powerful companies a monopoly 
position in the prescription drug market, such as those restricting the 
importation of quality pharmaceuticals. Therefore, all members of 
Congress who are serious about lowering prescription drug prices should 
have supported these amendments.
  As a representative of an area near the Texas-Mexican border I often 
hear from angry constituents who cannot purchase inexpensive quality 
imported pharmaceuticals in their local drug store. Some of these 
constituents regularly travel to Mexico on their own to purchase 
pharmaceuticals.
  Opponents of the amendments offered by the gentlemen from Vermont and 
Minnesota waged a hysterical campaign to convince members that this 
amendment will result in consumers purchasing unsafe products. 
Acceptance of this argument requires one to assume that consumers will 
buy cheap pharmaceuticals without taking any efforts to ensure that 
they are buying a quality product. However, the experience of my 
constituents who are currently traveling to Mexico to purchase 
prescription drugs shows that consumers are quite capable of ensuring 
they purchase safe products without interference from Big ``Mother.''
  Furthermore, if the supporters of the status quo were truly concerned 
about promoting health, instead of protecting the special privileges of 
powerful companies, they would be more concerned with reforming the 
current policies which endanger health by artificially raising the cost 
of prescription drugs. Oftentimes lower income Americans will take less 
of a prescription medicine than necessary to save money. Some senior 
citizens even forgo other necessities, including food, in order to 
afford their medications. By reducing the prices of pharmaceuticals 
this amendment will help ensure no child has to take less than the 
recommended dosage of a prescription medicine and no senior has to 
choose between medication and food.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I once again wish to express my regret 
for missing the votes on the amendments by the gentlemen from Vermont 
and Minnesota and urge my colleagues to show they are serious about 
lowering the prices of prescription drugs and that they trust the 
people to do what is in their best interest, by supporting future 
efforts to establish a true free market in pharmaceuticals.

                          ____________________