[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 118 (Monday, July 18, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3321-S3322]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Prescription Drug Costs
Madam President, now, on a related matter, one of the things
Washington Democrats appear most eager to do with their one-party
control of government is to resurrect their war on America's world-
leading medical innovation sector. In a statement just last week,
President Biden praised fellow Democrats for having ``beaten back'' the
industry behind most of the world's lifesaving treatments and cures.
And as things stand right now, it appears our colleagues intend to work
from a familiar leftwing playbook in the coming weeks.
Washington Democrats are working right now--right now--to find ways
to put more bureaucracy between American patients and the treatments
they rely on. They want to put socialist price controls between
American innovators and new cures for debilitating diseases. With one-
party Democratic control of government, they just might get away with
it. But our colleagues need to think again. Even just the medicine-
related parts of their partisan plans would have hugely, hugely
negative consequences for our country.
The American people know that government can't magically make things
cost less by passing laws saying things should cost less. There is no
Washington magic wand--trust me--or else we would have every American
driving $1 pickup trucks and eating $1 steaks just by passing a law
setting those prices at $1.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. The bill for made-up price
controls always comes due. In this case, the invoice will be delivered
to the American people who are living with actual health challenges.
The price of bigger government will be fewer lifesaving cures and less
innovation in the future.
Let's face it, prescription treatments are expensive to produce.
Long-term investments in cutting-edge research and development require
certainty. What Washington Democrats want to do right now would bleed
hundreds of billions of dollars in potential R&D out of American
industry, shrinking the pipeline for new therapeutics for patients with
chronic conditions, pouring cold water on the next breakthroughs in the
fight against Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.
Prescription drug socialism would have devastating and compounding
effects. By one analysis, price controls like the ones Washington
Democrats want to ram through could cost more than 330 million
cumulative years of life expectancy. That is enough to shorten every
American's life by a full year.
Two years ago, in 2020, America's medical innovators were busy
blowing away expectations and responding to a once-in-a-century
pandemic with lifesaving therapeutics and vaccines in record time--
record time. Two years later, in 2022, Democrats have decided that what
those same innovators need--the same innovators need--is heavyhanded
Washington micromanagement from the same politicians who couldn't
even--listen to this--couldn't even keep baby formula on store shelves.
Our country is contending with historic inflation. Our economy is on
the brink of recession. And Washington Democrats want to gamble with
the health of the American people? It doesn't get much more reckless
than that.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I wonder if Americans think the cost of
prescription drugs are too high. I wonder if Americans realize that the
cost of prescription drugs are so high in this country that they are
driving the cost of health insurance premiums up.
Don't take my word for it. BlueCross BlueShield of Illinois told me
that directly. Why are premiums going up? Prescription drug prices are
going up.
I wonder if the American people realize there are only two nations on
Earth that allow drug companies to advertise drugs on television. You
know one of them: United States of America. The other: New Zealand. No
other country allows them to take place.
I wonder if the American people realize that the same exact American
drugs that are sold here at the highest prices are sold at a deep
discount in other countries: Canada. In Canada, the reason American
drugs cost less than they do in America is because the Canadian people
won't tolerate the prices pharmaceutical companies charge people in
this country. So they established standards and cut the prices for the
exact same drugs made, manufactured, and sold in the United States.
They are not alone. Europe does the same thing, bringing down these
prices.
So we decided that at least in one area--one area--we were going to
make an exception to this overpricing of prescription drugs: the
Veterans' Administration. We said it costs a lot to keep our promise to
veterans who have served this country and need medical care afterward.
So we are going to allow the Veterans' Administration--we do under
law--to negotiate with the drug companies to bring prices down. It
works. They are brought down dramatically.
For the longest time, many of us have thought that isn't enough
because most of the drugs are being sold outside the Veterans'
Administration, and there is no negotiation; it is a take-it-or-leave-
it. Medicare--tens of millions of Americans who are covered by Medicare
face the cost of drugs which are sky-high.
So we decided, on the Democratic side, that we were going to listen
to the people we represent, who have told us over and over again that
when it comes to the cost of living and expenses families face, many of
these families were facing a choice of their money or their lives to
buy drugs that doctors told them were essential for their survival. So
we proposed that, finally, the pharmaceutical companies have to
negotiate with the government when it comes to Medicare drug pricing.
Now, you didn't hear that directly from the Senator from Kentucky who
just spoke. He talked about socialism in pricing drugs. Socialism? For
the government to suggest we want to bargain for prices? These
companies, incidentally, are not getting by hand to mouth. They are
doing quite well, and they are making a lot of money.
And they didn't do it on their own. I want to address that issue,
this notion that if they were paid less for their drugs, it would
stifle innovation. The pharmaceutical industry typically spends more
money on advertising than they do on research.
Why would they do that? So that some people watching the ad of a
person skipping through a field of flowers will finally get to the
point where they can spell ``Xarelto'' and go into a doctor's office
and say: I want to skip through flowers. I want Xarelto. And--you know
what--some doctors say ``fine'' and write the script. That is why the
cost of medicine and healthcare goes up.
The bottom line is this. These pharmaceutical companies, as good as
they are, as many things as they find, they don't do it alone. You know
what the No. 1 supplier of research information is to the private
sector pharmaceutical companies in America? The Federal Government. The
National Institutes
[[Page S3322]]
of Health. We spend tens of billions of dollars each year doing basic
research, which is then used by the pharmaceutical company to develop
their drugs.
Is it too much to ask them to bargain a fair price for drugs sold to
Medicare so that the taxpayers get a break, and the pharmaceutical
profits may go down just slightly? I don't think it is too much to ask.
We are going to have an interesting debate in the next few weeks
because the Democrats think it is time that pharma be held responsible
for dramatically overcharging Americans for pharmaceutical drugs that
cost a fraction of its price in Canada and Europe.
The Senator from Kentucky obviously sees it another way. He thinks it
is socialism. He calls it a free lunch--we want to give away a free
lunch. It isn't a free lunch when you can't afford to fill your
prescription the doctor gave you and you wonder if you are jeopardizing
your health or your life.
Take the drug insulin. We are working on that too. Insulin wasn't
discovered by Americans; it was discovered by Canadians back in the
early part of the 20th century. And they decided--and what a gesture it
was--that they were going to give away and surrender the patent on this
discovery.
Before then, it was not atypical that people died from diabetes.
After insulin, they could survive. It was a life and death drug. And
the researchers who discovered it said: This shouldn't be a
profitmaker; this should be something that is priced so that people can
continue to live.
Well, what has happened to insulin? Over the years, the
pharmaceutical companies started doing their magic, and the cost of
insulin for many people is dramatically higher than they can afford.
Some people actually cut the amount of insulin which they are told to
take because they can't afford it.
We want to bring down the cost of this lifesaving drug to a $35 a
month maximum premium for insulin, and I think that is a reasonable
amount of money.
So I believe that when it comes to the drug industry in America, it
is a great sector of our economy. They have found some wonderful
things, with the help of Federal research. They are making profits, as
I guess every private sector company is designed to do. But it is not
unreasonable for us to ask, it is not socialistic for us to ask, as
American citizens, that they negotiate fair prices for all Americans.
They do it for veterans. They can do it for Medicare and others.
And if Senator McConnell is signaling we are in for a fight over this
issue, all I have to say are three words: Bring it on. Bring it on. The
American people are sick and tired of the overpricing of these drugs,
and I think it is time that we have this debate. And if the Republicans
want to stay on the side of pharma and say the Democrats are wrong,
let's take that to the American people in November. I think it is a
viable issue.