[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 198 (Wednesday, December 11, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6958-S6959]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                        Prescription Drug Costs

  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, over in the House this week, Democrats 
are taking up the latest installment in their campaign to have the 
government take over Americans' healthcare: the Pelosi prescription 
drug bill.
  There is no question that high prescription drug costs are a problem. 
One in four seniors reports difficulty affording medications, and there 
are too many stories of patients being forced to ration pills or to 
abandon their prescription at the pharmacy counter. But the Pelosi drug 
bill is the wrong prescription for the problem of high drug prices. 
Why? Because it would reduce Americans' access to lifesaving treatments 
and discourage investment in prescription drug research.
  Between 2011 and 2018, more than 250 new medications were introduced 
worldwide. American patients have access to nearly all of them, but 
that is not the situation for patients in a lot of other countries. The 
chamber of commerce reports that patients in France have access to just 
50 percent of those new drugs. French patients, in other words, are 
missing out on fully half of the new drugs that have been introduced in 
the past 8 years.
  Why do Americans have such tremendous access to new drugs while other 
countries trail behind? Because the U.S. Government doesn't dictate 
drug prices or drug coverage. As statistic after statistic 
demonstrates, when governments start imposing price controls, patients' 
access to new drugs and treatments diminishes.
  Government price controls also discourage the medical research and 
innovation that produce the prescription drug breakthroughs of the 
future. The United States leads the world in prescription drug 
innovation, and a big reason for that is because the U.S. Government 
doesn't dictate drug prices.
  It wasn't always this way. European investment in drug research used 
to exceed U.S. investment, but that changed when European governments 
stepped in and started imposing price controls. Today, European 
investment in drug research and development is almost 40 percent lower 
than U.S. investment, in large part because of European governments' 
price controls.
  No other country comes close to achieving the number of prescription 
drug breakthroughs that companies in the United States achieve. That 
situation, however, is not going to last if the Democratic Party has 
its way.
  The Pelosi drug bill would impose a system of government price 
controls on up to 250 medications, and reduced access to drugs and 
fewer medical breakthroughs would soon follow.
  The California Life Sciences Association released a statement noting 
that the Pelosi drug bill could result in ``an 88-percent reduction in 
the number of drugs that are brought to market by small/emerging 
companies in California.'' It goes on to say that ``such a dramatic 
decline would be felt most in the higher risk/smaller population 
therapeutic areas of R&D, including new drugs for endocrine, metabolic, 
genetic and rare diseases, and pediatric cancers.'' Again, that is from 
the California Life Sciences Association. In other words, there would 
be fewer medical breakthroughs for those who need them the most.
  As I said earlier, the high cost of some prescription drugs can be a 
real problem for many families, but the answer--the answer--is not to 
introduce a government-run pricing system that would mean that 
important prescription drugs would not be there when you or your child 
needs them.
  There are a lot of things we can do to lower the cost of prescription 
drugs

[[Page S6959]]

without resorting to government price controls. Multiple Senate 
committees have been actively engaged on this topic. There are options 
for how to improve transparency in a complicated and often opaque drug-
pricing process. There are ideas to examine competition and 
consolidation in the pharmaceutical supply chain; to ensure that 
generic companies can access the samples they need to develop a new 
generic or biosimilar; to prevent companies from engaging in patent 
thicketing to block competition; to promote real-time benefit tools to 
help inform consumers of cheaper drug options; to advance value-based 
insurance design to support coverage of high-value items and services, 
like medicines, that people with chronic conditions need to manage 
their health; and to modernize the Medicare Part D plan design and cap 
seniors' out-of-pocket costs.
  Republicans in the House recently introduced legislation on 
prescription drug costs that both promotes innovation and contains 
bipartisan ideas for reform, including increased transparency in drug 
pricing and provisions to prevent drug companies from gaming the 
system. This bill provides several ideas passed by the Senate Finance 
Committee, while focusing on policies that can be passed through both 
Chambers of Congress. Importantly, it eliminates those policies that 
have divided us.
  There are bipartisan solutions on the table. It is unfortunate that 
House Democrats have abandoned bipartisan efforts on drug pricing and 
have decided to pursue their government-run alternative.
  It boils down, really, simply to this: Government price controls mean 
access to fewer drugs, and access to fewer drugs means that when you or 
your child or your mom or your dad needs a lifesaving medication, that 
drug may be out there, but it may not be out there for you, and that is 
not acceptable.
  The Pelosi drug bill is a bad prescription for the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.