[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 22 (Tuesday, March 5, 2002)]
[House]
[Page H659]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Culberson). Pursuant to the order of the 
House of January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, recently the National Governors 
Association passed a resolution calling for action to prevent the 
brand-name drug industry from blocking access to lower-cost generic 
drugs. It turns out that the drug industry is cheating consumers out of 
literally billions of dollars in prescription drug savings by illegally 
and unethically keeping generic competitors off the market.
  Shocking, is it not, that the drug industry would exploit loopholes 
in the law to make sure that American consumers continue to pay higher 
prices than necessary for lifesaving products? We are talking about the 
same industry that charges Americans two and three and four times what 
it charges in other countries. We are talking about an industry that 
pummels American consumers with ads on TV and in magazines and on radio 
promoting a handful of drugs that just happen to be some of the most 
expensive drugs on the market.
  As a matter of fact, the drug industry's use of direct-to-consumer 
advertising to manipulate the public is just as insidious as the tricks 
the industry uses to keep generic competition off the market. The 
European Union does not permit direct-to-consumer advertising, neither 
does Japan nor Canada nor Israel. In fact, only one other country in 
the world, New Zealand, permits direct-to-consumer advertising of 
prescription drugs. That is because this advertising skews health care 
towards the newest, most expensive drugs, regardless of whether these 
drugs are the best alternative for patients and regardless of the 
impact on America's health care bill.
  The industry claims it is doing consumers a favor, that direct-to-
consumer advertising is a breakthrough in consumer education. In 2000, 
the drug industry advertised 1 percent of its 10,000 available 
prescription drugs. Ninety-five percent of all direct-to-consumer 
advertising was spent on just 50 of these 10,000 drugs. The drug 
industry claims its advertising is highly educational. Direct-to-
consumer advertising is highly profitable, hardly highly educational.
  Those 50 drugs I mentioned, the ones that were most heavily 
advertised in 2000, were responsible for half of the $21 billion 
increase in prescription drug spending. And about those 50 drugs, they 
are not for 50 different conditions. Most of those drugs are simply 
copycat drugs.
  We see ads for Vioxx and Celebrex, $239 million worth, which are 
alternative treatments for the same condition, arthritis. We see ads 
for Claritin and Zyrtec and Allegra to the tune of $227 million, all 
for the treatment of allergies. Billions of dollars are spent on ads 
for fewer than 30 health problems. American consumers pay for those ads 
when we shell out two and three and four times more than consumers in 
any other country in the world. We pay for those ads when the 50 most 
heavily advertised drugs account for half of the dramatic annual 
increase in spending.
  Prescription drug inflation is fueling double-digit increases in 
health care premiums, it is pushing State budgets into the red, and it 
is forcing seniors into poverty. And behind it all are romantic images 
of allergy-free people digging in their gardens and playing with their 
puppies.
  The drug industry has a chokehold on the United States. They charge 
Americans more than any other consumer; they manipulate American 
consumers with questionable TV and print ads; and they block access to 
affordable medicines, even though 70 million Americans, many of them 
seniors, do not have the benefit of insurance and are paying hundreds 
of dollars out of pocket.
  So where is the Bush administration? Why is George Bush not outraged 
about this? Where is his administration? The administration does not 
like to be perceived as catering to large corporations at the expense 
of American consumers. The administration bristles at the notion that 
it turned to Enron and big oil when it formulated its energy policy. 
They do not like it when you point out that they turned to the chemical 
companies when writing their environmental policy, that they turned to 
the insurance companies when they wrote the Patients' Bill of Rights. 
And I am sure the administration would vehemently deny that their 
silence on prescription drug prices stems from their close ties to the 
drug industry. Well, the proof is in the pudding. This is a litmus test 
in the next year what this body does about prescription drug prices, 
both for the President and for every Member of Congress. We report to 
the American public, not to the drug industry. If the President and the 
Congress do not break loose from the drug industry's chokehold and 
reign in that industry's unbridled greed, then American voters should 
send us all packing.
  It is as simple as that.

                          ____________________