[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 160 (Thursday, November 6, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H10539-H10540]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REIMPORTATION IS THE RIGHT PRESCRIPTION
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this week's issue of Congressional
Quarterly Weekly reports that on the subject of drug reimportation, FDA
Commissioner Mark McClellan said the following in an October 20 speech
to the National Press Club, ``These Members are out of touch with the
realities of keeping our drug supply safe, and the clear and present
dangers to America's supply of drugs that their bills would create.''
Evidently, it is Mr. McClellan who is out of touch with reality.
Millions of Americans are finding prescription drug reimportation from
Canada and other countries to be a viable and necessary alternative to
high-priced drugs in the United States. The number of those Americans
is growing every day. It would be wrong for Members of Congress to
ignore this reality and to ignore the excessive cost of prescription
drugs in America.
If Mr. McClellan thinks Americans are content to allow price gouging
on prescriptions to continue, he is mistaken. American consumers are
understandably fed up.
Large pharmaceutical manufacturers have long been gouging American
consumers by charging substantially more, in some cases up to 90
percent more, for prescription drugs sold in the United States than in
Canada and other industrialized countries. Americans refuse to be
exploited by the pharmaceutical industry any longer. The exploitation
of American consumers must end. The excuse that most of the world's
pharmaceutical research and development takes place in America does not
justify the continued degree of cost shifting onto the backs of
American consumers. Profit levels of American, foreign, and multi-
national pharmaceutical firms are huge, as is the
[[Page H10540]]
level of their advertising budgets and their level of inducements
offered to prescribing physicians.
This Member firmly believes that many of the safety issues which
opponents have brought to the forefront in this debate are really red
herrings. The real issue is the prices Americans pay for the medicines
they need.
According to a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, there is strong
support for opening drug markets, despite warnings by FDA that it
cannot guarantee the safety of these life-saving medicines. Even with
the possibility of a drug safety issue being mentioned in the question,
more than two-thirds, or 69 percent of respondents, said it should be
legal for Americans to buy prescription drugs from Canada or other
industrialized countries. In fact, 12 percent of those surveyed said
that they or a family member had purchased prescription drugs from
Canada or other country in order to obtain a better price.
The reimportation debate is not a battle of right versus left, it is
a battle of right versus wrong. It is simply wrong to require Americans
to pay the world's highest prices for prescription drugs, so they
thereby can subsidize consumers everywhere else on earth to generate
the research, advertising and profit revenues for pharmaceutical
companies.
As a Member of Congress serving in the people's House, this Member
has a responsibility to do what is right for Nebraskans and all
Americans. This Member supports prescription drug reimportation because
Americans deserve access to quality drugs at world market prices and
reimportation seems to be the only solution immediately available to
reduce the gross overcharge of American consumers for prescription
drugs.
A typically cynical comment was made by an unnamed health care
lobbyist found in the November 1, 2003, Congressional Quarterly Weekly
regarding the Medicare bill and the likelihood that the final bill will
include importation provisions that will never be implemented. The
unnamed source is quoted as saying, ``You tell them that this will only
kick in after FDA has appropriated $100 million for border safety, or
FDA has a counterfeit, tamper-resistant device packaging system in
place.'' The lobbyist concluded, ``Whatever the trigger is, just say it
will never be met.''
Mr. Speaker, there have been rumors that the Medicare conference
report will come out of committee with a drug reimportation provision
which will contain language under which the FDA can say they cannot
responsibly or legally implement, as they did on two previous
congressional efforts to provide for prescription drug reimportation.
This is unacceptable.
Governor Rod Blagojevich, our former colleague in the House, is
asking the FDA to allow Illinois to explore a plan to import approved
medications from Canada, and knows this issue well. He recently said,
``It is awfully hard to stop an idea whose time has come.'' He is
absolutely right in that assessment. Americans will find a way to buy
FDA-approved drugs from abroad, either legally or illegally. The FDA
needs to face the fact and get on with the method of discharging its
responsibilities given those realities.
Mr. Speaker, there is a serious call for action from the American
people. We must open the drug markets so Americans can obtain the
prescription drugs they need when they need them most and at affordable
prices.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record an article published in the Los
Angeles Times today entitled, ``Open Door to Drug Imports.''
[From the Los Angeles Times, Nov. 6, 2003]
Open Door to Drug Imports
In the 2002 election cycle, the U.S. drug industry gave
political candidates nearly $30 million. For the 2004 cycle
it has already spent more than $3 million, two-thirds of it
on GOP members of Congress. The industry is getting a good
return on its money. Bush administration officials and
sympathetic legislators are still trying to add a $400-
billion drug benefit to Medicare that prohibits, not just
omits, cost controls. House and Senate conferees have
proposed forbidding the federal government to negotiate
better prices, as such countries as Canada and agencies as
the Department of Veterans Affairs do.
The glimmer of good news is that at least one consumer-
friendly reform may survive. The conferees, pressured by
state and local leaders, last week began considering an
amendment to let consumers buy drugs directly and more
cheaply from Canada.
The Bush administration and most legislators on the
conference committee, including some Democrats, say it is
dangerous to legalize drug purchases from Canada. They echo
Food and Drug Administration head Mark B. McClellan's line
that the agency can't guarantee the safety of drugs that
aren't manufactured, stored and distributed under FDA
guidelines. McClellan says he fears tampering by shippers as
well. Canada, however, has one of the world's most stringent
pharmaceutical quality oversight systems. As for adulteration
in shipping, that can happen in any mail-order operation.
Californians are right to ask why importation from Mexico,
which also has lower prices than the U.S., was excluded.
Legislators argue that Mexico's prescription drug oversight
is too lax, but it's also because strong proponents of drug
importation--Reps. Bernard Sanders (I-VT.), Gil Gutknecht (R-
Minn.) and Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.)--are in states closer to
Canada.
A temporary solution, which the Canada measure would be,
is better than no solution. Plenty of individuals and even
municipalities are already importing from Canada, mostly over
the Internet. Legalizing the practice would allow for better
safety regulations.
On Tuesday, two top negotiators on the conference
committee, Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Bakersfield) and Sen. Edward
M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), said the Medicare drug benefit was ``on
life support,'' imperiled by partisan disagreements. That's
good news, because the bill would create a gigantic, cost-
ineffective benefits shaped behind closed conference doors.
Regional leaders whose budgets are being busted by drug
prices--including Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and New York
City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, both Republicans--are
pressuring the conferees to pass the Canada measure even if a
larger Medicare drug benefit dies. As Pawlenty recently
framed the issue: ``There's a rebellion brewing across
America. It is the prescription drug equivalent of the Boston
Tea Party.''
____________________