[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 25, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H5912-H5913]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2145
                   MEDICARE MODERNIZATION LEGISLATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Garrett). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, here it is in Washington, nearly 10 o'clock 
at night and the Republican leadership of this institution does not 
even have a prescription drug bill ready for us to read as homework 
tonight. They tell us that we are going to debate this tomorrow, maybe 
2 hours at the most, one of the most important changes in our country's 
history in terms of health care for our seniors. They tell us maybe 
after midnight tonight we might be able to go up to the Rules Committee 
to offer our amendments and to have them considered. They will deny 
most of those amendments, but the interesting thing about going to the 
Rules Committee after midnight, no press is there. Nobody will know, in 
one of the most significant pieces of legislation that will be 
considered in this 21st century. So the American people will not know. 
The press will not know.
  I am here tonight to say I intend to offer an amendment before the 
Rules Committee that is likely to be rejected, but it is a very 
important amendment. This amendment says that whatever prescription 
drug plan is considered here tomorrow, under their very restrictive 
rules, should do exactly what we do in the Department of Veterans 
Affairs and exactly what we do at the Department of Defense and that is 
have negotiated pricing for the drugs that our seniors will buy. Why? 
You get the best price. Everybody knows when you buy in quantity, you 
get a cheaper price. It is a very simple concept. But what has the 
Republican majority in this House, the radical right, done? They have 
actually put a provision in the bill and here it is. This is the bill 
that was before the committee and we know this provision will be 
retained in whatever the Rules Committee considers tonight, but it 
basically says that it prohibits our government, our Secretary of 
Health and Human Services from negotiating with the biggest drug 
companies in the world to get the best price for prescription drugs for 
our seniors. So what they are going to do, imagine they have got a 
provision that prohibits what we do at the Department of Veterans 
Affairs already and it prohibits what we do at the Department of 
Defense already in our financial purchasing system which gets our 
people the best prices. That is in the base bill. My amendment would 
get rid of that and it would say, hey, if you are going to do it and we 
have success across our government, just like Canada has success in 
their country by negotiating with the most powerful pharmaceutical 
companies in the world, why should we treat seniors any differently? 
Why should we make them pay higher prices? Indeed, in the Republican 
bill they make seniors pay any cost of drugs over $2,000 a year up to a 
level of perhaps $3,500 and it might be more because they are drafting 
the bill somewhere here in the Capitol. I do not know where they are. I 
went up to the Rules Committee to find the bill and the doors were all 
locked to the chairman's office.
  But in any case here is what is currently being paid, for example, in 
the United States. Let us just take one of these drugs here, Norvasc, 
which is for high blood pressure. Normally it sells in one of our 
pharmacies for about $182.99, the Canadian price is $152.82, and the 
price at the Department of Veterans Affairs is $102. It is a definite 
savings. That is true with a whole series of pharmaceutical products 
that could be available to our seniors. So what the Republicans are 
basically saying in their bill to our seniors is, you have to pay the 
higher price because we won't permit you to negotiate price, we won't 
negotiate it for you, because our bill fundamentally denies it. This 
provision was written by the pharmaceutical companies themselves. Gee, 
does that surprise anybody?
  I am only one Member of Congress representing 660,000 beautiful 
people in the northern part of Ohio. I am only one. Do you know there 
are six lobbyists for the pharmaceutical companies in this town for 
every one of me that there is? So basically many times I go home at 
night and I say to myself, folks back home, I am all you got and I am 
sticking with you. And I say to the pharmaceutical companies, I don't 
take your money, I don't want your money, but I'll show the public 
where your money goes. Is it any wonder why they put the provision in 
the base bill that went through the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
like lightning the other day?
  Let us take a look at PhRMA. This group is so powerful that just in 
the last election cycle, just in one year, 2002, they contributed over 
$3 million. Ninety-five percent of it went to, guess, which party? The 
Republican Party. I happen to be a Democrat. Too bad for the Democrats. 
They only get 5 percent of the $3,100,000 that was donated just in the 
fiscal year 2002. Why do you think they gave all that money to the 
leadership of this institution? Take a look at Pfizer. They gave 80 
percent of the $1.8 million they just contributed in 2002 to one party, 
the Republican Party. You can go down the list. Almost all the money 
goes to one party. So is it any surprise to us why the bill that we 
cannot find here in the Capitol and we will not even be allowed to talk 
about until after midnight and we are all staying up late to do that 
for our constituents, do you really wonder whether this government is 
on the level?
  I urge my colleagues tomorrow to vote ``no'' on this bill and to vote 
``no'' on these pharmaceutical companies until we can get negotiated 
pricing in this bill.

                   TITLE VIII--SECTION 1809(c)(1)(D)

       Noninterference--In carrying out its duties with respect to 
     the provision of qualified prescription drug coverage to 
     beneficiaries under this title. The Administrator may not:
       (i) require a particular formulary or institute a price 
     structure for the reimbursement of covered outpatient drugs;
       (ii) interfere in any way with negotiations between PDP 
     sponsors and Medicare Advantage organizations and drug 
     manufacturers, wholesalers, or other suppliers of covered 
     outpatients drugs; and
       (iii) other wise interfere with the competitive nature of 
     providing such coverage through such sponsors and 
     organizations.
                                  ____


       U.S., CANADIAN, NEGOTIATED VA/DOD PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  FSS
                                           U.S.     Canadian  negotiated
       Drug name/prescribed for           retail     retail    price (VA
                                          price      price      & DoD)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glucophage/Diabetes Millitus..........     $69.99     $30.16      $60.95
K-Dur 20/Low potassium levels.........      55.99      29.01       25.58
Norvasc/High blood pressure...........     182.99     152.82      102.11
Prilosec/Heartburn....................     134.99      67.71       63.32
Prozac/Depression.....................     302.97     140.69      186.98
Synthroid/Hypothyroidism..............      39.09      17.82       29.73
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison is drawn between drugs of equal dosage and quantity.
Sources: Data Compiled from Veterans' Affairs Commission and Alliance
  for Retired Americans.


               2002 PHARMACEUTICAL CONTRIBUTIONS, BY PARTY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Democrats  Republicans
 Rank           Organization            Amount    (percent)   (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     1  Pharmaceutical Research &     $3,180,552          5          95
         Manufacturers of America..
     2  Pfizer Inc.................    1,804,522         20          80
     3  Bristol-Myers Squibb.......    1,590,813         16          83
     4  Eli Lilly & Co.............    1,581,531         25          75

[[Page H5913]]

 
     5  Pharmacia Corp.............    1,480,241         22          78
     6  GlaxoSmithKline............    1,301,438         22          78
     7  Wyeth......................    1,188,919         17          83
     8  Johnson & Johnson..........    1,075,371         39          61
     9  Schering-Plough Corp.......    1,057,978         21          79
    10  Aventis....................      954,349         22          78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Center for Responsive Politics.



                          ____________________