[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 7 (Thursday, January 11, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S146-S148]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Opioid Epidemic
Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, I am here today with my colleague Senator
Capito to talk about something that is getting a lot of attention but
needs even more attention from this Congress, which is the opioid
epidemic--the epidemic the President has rightly called a crisis, and
he then turned to Congress and said: Find the money to solve the
problem. We have been doing a substantial amount of that, but I think
we see a clear desire here and in all of our States to find a better
solution.
This is an issue that has hit every town in America, small and large,
I believe. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
over 40,000 people died from an opioid overdose. This is a fraction of
the people who had an opioid overdose. These are the people who died
from an opioid overdose in 2016, 40,000 people; over 90 Americans every
single day. It was a 28-percent increase over 2015 and a dramatic
increase over where we were just 10 years before.
Opioid overdoses now surpass car accidents as the No. 1 accidental
cause of death in the country. Both of our States and our surrounding
States, I think almost every one of them, have had more overdose deaths
in 2016--and an increased number, I think, in 2017--than car accident
deaths. The Centers for Disease Control estimates the economic burden
of this epidemic is almost $80 billion a year.
We have just gone through a tax discussion, an economic growth
discussion. When we were talking about billions of dollars, seldom were
we talking about $80 billion to do something with or to stop doing
something with, but the economic cost of all of this--lost
productivity, addiction, the crime related to that addiction--the CDC
says $78.5 billion a year is now the cost.
We are both appropriators. The members of the Appropriations
Committee have looked at this carefully. Our colleagues have had a
chance to confront this issue in our committee head-on. We brought
bills to the floor that have passed and made a big difference in a
[[Page S147]]
short period of time. Over the past 2 years, not counting what we hope
to do this year, the committee has increased opioid funding by over
$900 million, nearly a 200-percent increase for the Department of
Health and Human Services--more money for justice, more money for the
Department of Veterans Affairs.
This funding is focused on developing alternatives for pain
management, giving our State, Federal, and local law enforcement
partners the tools they need to combat opioid trafficking, ensuring
first responders we are working to see that there are better ways to
respond with opioid reversal.
One of the things we have seen recently is that opioids of all kinds
are now laced with new drugs like fentanyl, and you don't even know
what you are taking. Narcan, the former way to deal with this and still
the most effective way to deal with this--you think you have dealt with
a problem, and the dose is so strong, the same person in just a few
minutes lapses back into another seizure, attack, that has often been
fatal. Even though people are there and the traditional way to respond
is there, it isn't enough for what is going on now.
One thing you would have to tell anybody doing this is, it is
unlikely you have any real idea what you are putting into your system.
What you think was a narcotic high the day before could easily kill you
the next day. We have been looking for better ways to monitor programs
so prescriptions in West Virginia and Missouri--they are both States
where, in some counties, the number of prescriptions people have been
walking into the pharmacist with are just ridiculous.
The committee that funds the Department of Health and Human
Services--that is the committee we are both on--in the last 2 years, we
have increased funding by 1,300 percent, $745 million--13 times more
than we were spending just 2 years ago. We have given grants to States,
in ways we haven't before, to look at specific State needs and ideas
they have to deal with this and then share. We have looked at
increasing Federal surveillance on how prescriptions are being written,
how drug stores are becoming the conduit, and how many substances are
coming through the mail to find new ways to determine whether this is
reasonable in the area these drugs are going into. We have looked at
ways to increase the tools necessary to communities and first
responders. We are talking right now to the National Institutes of
Health about what they can do on a number of fronts. One is to work
with the pharmaceutical companies themselves to develop alternatives to
the kind of pain management we have had.
Also, let me say on that front, we have gone through a period where
doctors and hospitals were too often graded on whether people had any
pain or not as opposed to whether they had pain they didn't understand,
pain that was unacceptable. More and more people ought to be saying, as
opposed to taking this potentially addictive drug, give me a dose that
is not as addictive, and maybe I am still more achy than I would be
otherwise, more pain than I would have otherwise, but I understand it
and am aware of it, and I am not in some cloud of no pain but not much
of anything else in terms of real quality of life.
We are looking at how we can work with these companies for pain
management. I have talked to the pharmaceutical companies. I think it
is time for them to step up, maybe in partnership with NIH, so there is
some Federal money to encourage more private sector money to find
alternatives that are less addictive and better understood, to find
more effective and affordable ways to respond. Just the amount of money
in the first responders' kits around the country, and local governments
paying for the Narcan, the more expensive injectable treatment--we need
to look for ways where that can be more available and in a way that
local governments have a better way to deal with this.
This needs to be dealt with locally. The first responder is going to
be a local person. If you are a fire department that also has first
responders, your department is three times more likely to go on an
overdose call than they are to go to a fire. That is where we are in
this situation today.
In trying to figure out what the impact really is at home--as we all
are trying to do--I had a meeting not too long ago with medical
professionals, with State officials, with emergency responders, in
Springfield, MO, to talk about how we deal with prevention, treatment,
and recovery. We talked about the critical partnership between local,
State, and Federal law enforcement and the dangers the first responders
themselves face. Sometimes what people are putting into their system is
so powerful and so addictive that walking into the room or touching the
clothing becomes a potentially great danger for the person who is there
to help you. I talked to doctors and hospitals about the challenges
they face in prescribing less habit-forming pain medications and how
patients are still not fully aware of the danger of dealing with pain
if you overdo it as you are dealing with pain.
I talked to one person who talked about his daughter who had just
gone to the dentist and got pain medicine and had no sense that the
pain medicine could be addictive and she should stop taking it when it
had done its job, whether or not it was when the last pill was gone.
Then, of course, there is a new issue of underprescribing. Nobody
likes to go back to the pharmacy twice to get the same prescription
they just got a few days ago, but giving people more pills than they
need to take themselves or have them sit in the medicine cabinet
doesn't make any sense.
In our State, there are large urban areas, but it also has a lot of
small and remote communities and, frankly, rural communities have been
hit particularly hard by this crisis. Certainly, West Virginia is a
State that understands this. There has been no more vigorous advocate
for funding and new ways to solve this problem than Senator Capito. I
am glad to be here with her today as we talk about this issue.
I can assure the people we work for that this is a top priority. It
has been a top priority for over 3 years now. The first 2 years showed
dramatic increases in the willingness we had to deal with this and the
breadth of how we deal with it, and that is one reason we need to move
on and get this funding bill, which should have been done by October 1,
done right now. As we get a new number to deal with, one of our
priorities will be the opioid epidemic, and one of the leaders in that
discussion will be the Senator from West Virginia, Mrs. Capito.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. President, I wish to thank Senator Blunt from the
great State of Missouri for his leadership on this issue. He chairs the
subcommittee that is very pivotal--the Appropriations Subcommittee on
Labor, Health and Human Services--and has moved forward so aggressively
to up the funding in this area. We have the pedal to the metal now.
As he said, when we are moving and coming to a final spending bill,
this has to be a top priority for us. It is absolutely critical. I am
really pleased to be on the subcommittee, but I want to thank him for--
I know he works diligently with NIH, which holds big promise. We are
always looking for solutions. Can we treat ourselves out of this? Can
we law enforce ourselves out of this? Can we prevent ourselves out of
this? I think we can do all of those. We have to have a component of
research that looks at the alternatives to pain medications and pain
management.
The current bill we have looked at is $816 million for programs to
combat opioid abuse issues, and that is a 440-percent increase from the
previous year.
I am going to go through this. It might sound a little mundane and
detail-oriented, but people say: That is great to ``up'' the amount of
money that you are spending, but where are you really spending this
money?
The Senator from Missouri, Mr. Blunt, mentioned that it has to be
done locally, and there is a lot of emphasis on where these dollars are
going.
Some of them are going, of course, to the CDC, the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, for prevention issues, which is
critical, while $50 million is going to our community health centers.
In States such as Alaska, West Virginia, and Missouri, community health
centers are seeing hundreds of
[[Page S148]]
thousands--millions--of people every day and many more who are dealing
with mental health and substance abuse. SAMHSA oversees the mental
health grants that go to our States, and there is $15 million for a new
SAMHSA program for opioid prevention. We have our drug-free communities
program, which works well in my State. It is a total grassroots-up,
bottom-up, when you get everybody from your local county or public
health and others in the room to try to solve this issue. Then again,
there are some block grant programs to our community health centers
along with the funding to NIH. This is a broad-based look at where the
funding is going.
We have an opportunity here in the next several weeks to ``up'' that
funding, to make sure that the national priority that we feel, as
Senators from States that are highly affected, is reflected in our
funding. I believe that with Senator Blunt's leadership on the
subcommittee and with other members on the subcommittee, that is
something we are going to be doing.
I happen to chair the Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations Subcommittee, which appropriates the money for the high-
intensity drug task forces. Our State has over 22 counties that are in
that. Is that a branding that you really want--that you are a high-
intensity drug trafficking area? Not really. What that does is
coordinate Federal, State, and local resources to help meet the
challenge and face what a difficult problem you have. I work with
funding on that, with the drug-free communities, and also with the
President's Office of National Drug Control Policy. We have done a lot,
and we have pushed for resources.
The Senator mentioned resources for our first responders. He
mentioned how dangerous it is. There have been local stories about our
first responders who have just touched fentanyl--just touched it--and
have gone into overdose situations. We were at the White House
yesterday and were talking, and the President mentioned drug-sniffing
dogs that have had reactions to fentanyl. So this is a very lethal
substance. Actually, I saw in the statistics for West Virginia that
more of the recent overdose deaths are attributable to fentanyl than to
heroin itself, and that is rising. We need the money for enforcement,
prevention, treatment and recovery, and more resources for research,
and I have mentioned how critical that research will be.
Nationwide, we had over 63,000 drug overdose deaths in 2016, and a
number of these were attributed to heroin and fentanyl. In my State of
West Virginia, we had the highest deaths per 100,000 for overdoses. I
would like to say it is happening somewhere in which maybe we would
have predicted that it would happen, but it is happening everywhere. It
is happening to the children of friends of mine.
Ryan Brown, a young man in West Virginia, lost his life. He had a
loving home, loving parents, and had been through treatment. He just
couldn't fight it. He went back and injected himself with a lethal
dose. He died in a very public place too. It was very tragic. To his
credit, his parents have taken up the mantle for Ryan to try to get
more treatment centers in the State of West Virginia. I thank them for
that.
We were just at the White House--Republicans and Democrats--for the
President to sign the INTERDICT Act. I sponsored that bill with Senator
Rubio, Senator Markey, and Senator Brown. What it does is help give our
Customs and Border Patrol folks the ability to detect fentanyl when it
is coming in. We know it is coming in from across our borders,
principally from China, maybe China through Mexico. We need to equip
our Border Patrol agents to be able to stop that--interdict the flow of
that lethal substance.
Just this week, The Hill newspaper published an op-ed about the
Martinsburg Initiative. Martinsburg is in West Virginia, in the Eastern
Panhandle. Everybody needs to visit Martinsburg. They have an
innovative police-school-community partnership that is spearheaded by
the Martinsburg Police Department, the Berkeley County Schools, and
Shepherd University, along with the Washington/Baltimore HIDTA. This is
a comprehensive strategy of intervention and treatment for families to
help prevent the beginning of the addiction to opioids.
In December, I attended the kickoff of the Bridge of Hope Fund, and I
want to highlight what some of the local communities are doing in my
State to try to get a comprehensive spectrum of solutions. This is a
new scholarship program that was developed by Fruth Pharmacy, which is
a locally-owned, family-owned pharmacy, that will allow people who have
completed addiction recovery programs to get a jump-start on their
college educations and career training.
The founders of the program started it because they wanted to
encourage people who have reclaimed their lives and been successful to
be able to get back into the mainstream. We know one of the roadblocks
to recovery is getting back into the work environment--to be able to
get a job. Many of these young folks who are in this position have
already burned through their education grants and their availability of
Pell grants. So this Bridge of Hope scholarship is an organic, from-
the-ground-up scholarship program for those who have been through
treatment.
We had a young man who talked about his road to recovery and how
important getting his education and getting back on his feet was. We
need more everywhere. I think that is essential to all of us. We have
to prioritize our Federal funding for States like mine that have been
the hardest hit by the opioid epidemic.
I see my colleague from New Hampshire here. Both of us have joined
together on the Targeted Opioid Formula Act so that those of us who
have high statistics and greater need are able to have those funds more
squarely targeted toward us for prevention and treatment.
There are a lot of good ideas out there. There are a lot of things
going on, but there is a lot of tragedy around all of us. I would say
to the folks in the gallery and certainly to everybody on the floor
that you probably know a family or you probably know a community or you
probably know somebody who has been hard hit by this. It is absolutely
crushingly sad, heartbreaking, because it is preventable. It is
something on which we can have an impact. If we don't, we are going to
lose another generation.
I have great fears that we are going to look back on this moment in
time and think we didn't do enough. So I think, with Senator Blunt's
help and the help of others, particularly with Senator Blunt's chairing
the Appropriations Committee, this is the direction in which we need to
go. We need to have more targeted funding so those local resources can
be creative in order to stop the scourge, to handle the scourge, and to
educate the next generation as to how devastating this could be if one
were to ever begin to go down this road.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up
to 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, let me applaud my colleague from West
Virginia, Senator Capito, for her work in addressing the opioid
epidemic. It is something that I know, in a bipartisan way, we care
about in this Chamber, and it is one place in which I think we could
come to some agreement about increasing resources as we come to an
agreement on the budget for the upcoming year. So I thank the Senator
for her comments.