[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 119 (Wednesday, September 3, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H7813]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LOWERING THE HIGH COST OF DRUGS FOR AMERICANS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carter). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today in USA Today, they released a poll
that showed that 71 percent of the American people believe they should
be allowed to buy prescription drugs from Canada and other European
countries. People from around the world come to the United States for
their medical care, yet Americans are forced to go around the world for
their medications. The American people know what is going on here, and
they know the situation is wrong and it is unsustainable.
A recent Families USA study found that the prices of 50 drugs most
commonly used by seniors have increased in price by an average of 3.5
times the rate of inflation over the past year. Between 2000 and 2003,
seniors' expenditures on prescription drugs increased by 44 percent.
For too long, seniors have been paying premium prices for the same
prescription drugs that are available in other countries. Take
tamoxifen. It costs $60 in Germany, and $360 in the United States.
We cannot sit back and allow this situation to continue. Right before
we left for recess in August, the United States House of
Representatives passed legislation to allow Americans, elderly, folks
of any age, to buy their medications in Canada and Europe. It is
competition, the free market, and allowing choice to exist.
Today we exist in a closed market and Americans pay the highest
price. If we had a free market system, allowing Americans to buy their
prescription drugs if they want in Canada or Europe, their name-brand
drugs, prices would drop dramatically in this country. Today we are
paying 40 to 50 percent more than the poor starving French and Germans.
That price would be reduced here in the United States.
A lot of folks in the pharmaceutical industry say it is a safety
risk. Right after our vote here in the House, Pfizer, the largest
pharmaceutical company in the country, said they were going to pull out
of the Canadian market or limit their sales in Canada. It had nothing
to do with safety. When people tell you it ain't about money, folks, it
is about money.
The second argument the pharmaceutical industry raises is they say
this will endanger research and development. Today the American
taxpayers fund the National Institutes of Health for $27 billion. They
also fund research at the pharmaceutical industry with a tax credit for
R&D.
There is not a single cancer drug or major AIDS drug or drug dealing
with diabetes that has not been developed without taxpayer-funded
research. The American people pay for the research on the front end,
and they pay the most expensive prices on the back end. That is a
system we have created. It is working for the pharmaceutical industry,
and it is time we changed the law so it works on behalf of the American
people.
Today our legislation is in conference on the prescription drug bill.
We are thinking about a $400 billion expansion of an entitlement, the
largest expansion of an entitlement program in over 40 years, and I
think we owe the taxpayers of this country, if we are about to go spend
$400 billion of their money, we owe them the decency to get them the
best price, not the most expensive price.
Today, all we can guarantee is 20-year-old legislation on generics
that guarantees that generics are held off the market, which would save
our seniors money. We guarantee the pharmaceutical companies tax credit
R&D as well as the National Institutes of Health funding, so the
taxpayers pay for all the research, and we guarantee that the Americans
pay the highest price for the prescription drugs.
There is a reason the pharmaceutical industry has paid $28 million to
try to defeat the legislation, because they have got a good thing going
here and they do not want to change it; because they have got taxpayers
funding the research on the front end, and they have got Americans
paying the most expensive prices on the back end.
So we have a chance to change that system. We have a chance to bring
competition and choice to bear on the market, and the pharmaceutical
industry will try to live under the free market, like every other
industry. Right now, they have a closed market, and the end result of
it is the American people are paying the highest prices.
We can make a difference here. We did it in the House. We now need
our colleagues in the other Chamber to do better and join us in giving
a voice to the 71 percent of Americans who said they too want the
choice of the free market. No more continuation of this closed market,
forcing Americans to pay the highest prices.
Over the summer, the reputable group called the AARP, that speaks for
34 million seniors, endorsed this legislation. Today their seniors, who
are members of the AARP, who buy their pharmaceutical products in
Canada, get reimbursed from United Health Insurance that represents the
AARP members.
Now, do you really believe the AARP would be endangering the health
of their members? There is a reason they did this: because the market
is speaking. They pay 25 to 30 percent less in Canada than we here in
the United States for the same drugs.
____________________