[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 23 (Wednesday, February 6, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S920-S922]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Cardin):
S. 349. A bill to require the Secretary of Transportation to request
nominations for, and make determinations regarding, roads to be
designated under the national scenic byways program, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the Reviving
America's Scenic Byways Act, a bill I have introduced with my colleague
from Maryland, Senator Cardin. Our bill seeks to revive the long-
dormant process within the U.S. Department of Transportation through
which some of our Nation's most remarkable roadways can earn the
prestigious designation of ``National Scenic Byway.''
The National Scenic Byways Program began as a grassroots effort to
help recognize, preserve, and enhance selected roads throughout the
United States based on one or more cultural, historic, natural,
recreational, and scenic qualities. Today, there are more than 150
distinct roads nationwide that have been recognized as National Scenic
Byways--including several which have gained the honor of being named an
``All-American Road.''
I am proud that my home State of Maine boasts not only three National
Scenic Byways, but also the Acadia All-American Road. These roadways
provide Mainers and tourists alike with spectacular views and memorable
experiences, while at the same time spurring much-needed economic
activity in the surrounding areas. The National Scenic Byways program
represents a true win-win scenario by protecting precious corridors and
providing tangible benefits for local communities.
Despite this program's proven value, its nomination process has been
inactive since the passage of the 2012 surface transportation funding
bill (also known as MAP-21). As a result, numerous roadways across the
country have been prevented from pursuing National Scenic Byway
designation.
In fact, a recent survey found that at least 44 State scenic byways
across the country are prepared to seek national designation as soon as
the program is reopened to nominations. It is critical that we provide
these local byways the opportunity to seek the Federal designation and
reap its demonstrated benefits.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, which in
turn supports the preservation of America's
[[Page S921]]
most unique roadways and the facilitation of increased economic
activity in the regions that they serve.
______
By Mr. CARDIN (for himself and Mr. Wicker):
S. 359. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude
from gross income certain Federally-subsidized loan repayments for
dental school faculty; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague Senator
Wicker to bring your attention to our proposed Dental Loan Repayment
Assistance Act. This legislation will provide incentives for dental and
dental hygiene graduates to remain as dental school faculty by
eliminating certain loan assistance benefits from being counted as
taxable income. We rely on dental faculty to train the next generation
of oral health providers, but too often, these educators find
themselves pushed to work in private practice in order to pay off their
student loans. The Dental Loan Repayment Assistance Act will ease some
of this financial burden and allow faculty to stay where they are most
needed.
There are currently over 5,000 dental health professional shortage
areas nationwide--areas where it is hard to find a dental provider even
with insurance coverage. By 2025, the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) projects that the United States will have a national
shortage of 15,000 dentists. We can only hope to solve this problem if
we can recruit and retain enough faculty to train the next generation
of dentists and dental hygienists. Crippling educational debt should
not prevent our Nation from having the oral health care providers it
needs, and this bill will help address that.
I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge that
February is National Children's Dental Health Month. Since 1981, this
month has afforded us the opportunity to acknowledge the importance of
children's dental health. We recognize the significant strides we have
made, but we also acknowledge the work that remains to be done. I
invite my colleagues to join me to use this month to renew our
commitment to ensuring that all children in our country have access to
affordable and comprehensive dental services. To echo Former U.S.
Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, ``there is no health without oral
health.''
Despite being largely preventable, tooth decay is the single most
common chronic health condition among children and adolescents in the
United States. It is four times more common than early-childhood
obesity, five times more common than asthma, and 20 times more common
than diabetes. Among children in families living below the federal
poverty line, 52 percent have cavities. Children with cavities in their
primary or ``baby'' teeth are three times more likely to develop
cavities in their permanent, adult teeth, and the early loss of baby
teeth can make it harder for permanent teeth to grow in properly. If
tooth decay is left untreated, it not only can destroy a child's teeth;
it can have a debilitating impact on his or her health and quality of
life.
Many have heard me speak before about the tragic loss of Deamonte
Driver, a 12-year-old Prince George's County resident, in 2007.
Deamonte's death was particularly heartbreaking because it was entirely
preventable. What started out as a toothache turned into a severe brain
infection that could have been prevented by an $80 extraction. After
multiple surgeries and a lengthy hospital stay, sadly, Deamonte passed
away--twelve years ago this month.
Even in less tragic cases, tooth and gum pain can impede a child's
healthy development, including the ability to learn, play, and eat
nutritious foods. Recent studies have shown that children with poor
oral health are nearly three times more likely to miss school due to
dental pain, and children reporting recent toothaches are four times
more likely to have a lower grade point average than their peers
without dental pain.
Tooth decay and oral health problems also disproportionately affect
children from low-income families and minority communities. According
to the National Institutes of Health, approximately 80 percent of
childhood dental disease is concentrated in 25 percent of the
population. These children and families often face inordinately high
barriers to receiving essential oral health care and, simply put, the
consequences can be devastating.
In 2009, Congress reauthorized the Children's Health Insurance
Program (CHIP) with an important addition: a guaranteed pediatric
dental benefit. Today, CHIP provides affordable comprehensive health
coverage--including dental coverage--to more than 8 million children.
Thanks to CHIP, we now have the highest number of children with medical
and dental coverage in history. In addition, in 2010, Congress included
pediatric dental services in the set of essential health benefits
established under the Affordable Care Act.
I am very proud that my State of Maryland has been recognized as a
national leader in pediatric dental health coverage. In a 2011 Pew
Center report, ``The State of Children's Dental Health,'' Maryland
earned an ``A'' and was the only State to meet seven of eight policy
benchmarks for addressing children's dental health needs. In addition,
in the Maryland Health Benefit Exchange, every qualified health plan
now includes pediatric dental coverage, so families do not have to pay
a separate premium for dental coverage for their children and do not
have a separate deductible or out-of-pocket limit for pediatric dental
services. I am pleased to say that our actions have been working, and
our numbers are improving. In 2004, nearly 23 percent of all children
had untreated tooth decay. In 2016, that number dropped down to 13
percent.
I urge my colleagues to join Senator Wicker and me in supporting the
Dental Loan Repayment Assistance Act to help address our critical
nationwide shortage of dental healthcare providers and especially
dental faculty. We will not continue to allow crippling graduate
student debt to deprive the American people of the teachers and mentors
we need to train the next generation of oral healthcare providers.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Ms. Harris, Ms. Smith, Ms. Klobuchar,
and Mr. Blumenthal):
S. 366. A bill to shorten monopoly periods for prescription drugs
that are the subjects of sudden price hikes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 366
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Forcing Limits on Abusive
and Tumultuous Prices'' or the ``FLAT Prices Act''.
SEC. 2. REDUCED MARKET EXCLUSIVITY.
(a) Penalty.--If the manufacturer of a prescription drug
approved under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355) or licensed under section 351 of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262) increases the
price of such drug as described in subsection (b), any
remaining period of market exclusivity with respect to such
drug shall be reduced as follows:
(1) With respect to any price increase described in
subsection (b), such market exclusivity shall be reduced by
180 days.
(2) For every 5 percent price increase over the 10 percent,
18 percent, or 25 percent, respectively, threshold price
increases described in subsection (b), such market
exclusivity shall be reduced for an additional 30-days.
(b) Price Increase.--A price increase described in this
subsection is an increase in the wholesale acquisition cost
(as defined in section 1847A(c)(6)(B) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-3a(c)(6)(B))) of a prescription drug of
more than 10 percent over a 1-year period, more than 18
percent over a 2-year period, or more than 25 percent over a
3-year period.
(c) Report on Price Increase.--
(1) In general.--A drug manufacturer that increases the
price of a prescription drug as described in subsection (b)
shall report such increase to the Secretary of Health and
Human Services (referred to in this section as the
``Secretary'') within 30 days of meeting the criteria for a
price increase under such subsection.
(2) Failure to submit report.--In the case of a drug
manufacturer that does not submit a report required under
paragraph (1) within the 30-day period described in such
paragraph, in addition to the penalty under subsection (a),
the period of market exclusivity with respect to such drug
shall be reduced by 30 days for each day after the due date
of the report until the report is submitted.
[[Page S922]]
(d) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive, or decrease, the
reduction in the period of market exclusivity that would
otherwise apply under subsection (a) with respect to a
prescription drug if--
(1) the manufacturer of such drug submits--
(A) a report under subsection (c)(1); and
(B) an application for such a waiver, at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require; and
(2) based upon the information in such application, the
Secretary determines that--
(A) the price increase is necessary to enable production of
the drug, does not unduly restrict patient access to the drug
, and does not negatively impact public health; and
(B) such waiver or decrease constitutes a deviation from
the reduction in market exclusivity that would otherwise
apply under subsection (a) only to the extent necessary to
achieve drug production objectives.
(e) Period of Market Exclusivity.--For purposes of this
section, the term ``period of market exclusivity'' means any
period of market exclusivity granted with respect to a
prescription drug under clause (ii), (iii), or (iv) of
section 505(c)(3)(E) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 355(c)(3)(E)), section 505(j)(5)(B)(iv) of
such Act, clause (ii), (iii), or (iv) of section 505(j)(5)(F)
of such Act, or paragraphs (6) or (7) of section 351(k) of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262(k)).
____________________