[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 27637-27639]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                MEDICARE COVERAGE FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, this is the ninth time I have come to the 
floor of the Senate to talk about the issue of Medicare coverage for 
prescription drugs. As the Senate can see, I am urging seniors to send 
in copies of their prescription drug bills, as this poster instructs, 
to your Senator, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.
  I am doing this because it is critically important that Congress move 
on this issue and address it in a bipartisan way. With the counsel and 
input of Senator Snowe of Maine, there is one bipartisan bill now 
before the Senate to cover the issue of prescription drugs for the 
Nation's elderly.
  I am sure other Members of the Senate are getting the kind of mail I 
am. What I will do this morning, as I have done on eight previous 
occasions, is talk specifically about some of the bills I am getting 
from senior citizens in Oregon in an effort to pull together a 
bipartisan coalition for action in this session.
  We have heard, again and again, experts on the health care issue say 
the prescription drug question is too complicated for the Senate to act 
on at this time. That is a view I do not share. It is not shared by 
Senator Snowe. In fact, 54 Members of the Senate have already voted for 
the funding plan the two of us have developed. We have already laid the 
foundation for the Senate to move on this issue in a bipartisan way.
  I will talk for a few minutes this afternoon about our legislation 
and about some copies of bills I have received from senior citizens. I 
have a whole sheaf of them to go through.
  What our bill is all about is trying to give senior citizens who are 
on Medicare the same kind of bargaining power in the marketplace that a 
health maintenance organization has. The sad part about this issue is 
that the senior citizens get shellacked on their prescription bills 
twice. Medicare doesn't cover prescription drugs. When the program 
began in 1965, it didn't cover prescriptions. Maybe back then there was 
a feeling they weren't that important. If anybody thought that then, 
they certainly would not believe that now, because we have more than 20 
percent of the Nation's senior citizens spending over $1,000 a year out 
of pocket for their prescription medicine. They can't afford these 
prescriptions. The doctors tell them to take three prescriptions. They 
start off taking two, and then they take one, and eventually they can't 
afford their medicine, and they get sicker and they need perhaps 
institutional care, which is far more expensive. What is so sad is that 
the seniors, of course, with Medicare not covering prescriptions, have 
to pay out of pocket. On top of that, they have to subsidize the big 
buyers, the health maintenance organizations, the health plans, and 
other big buyers that are in a position to get a discount on their 
prescription medicine.
  So Senator Snowe and I, in support of the bipartisan Snowe-Wyden 
bill, are urging seniors to send copies of their prescription drug 
bills to the Senate, to your Senators, in Washington, DC, in the hopes 
that we can deal with this in this session of the Senate.
  I have been concerned about this issue since back in the days when I 
was codirector of the Oregon Gray Panthers. I ran the legal aid office 
for senior citizens then, and prescriptions were awfully important even 
then. But the fact is they are much more important to the Nation's 
older people today than they were then because, today, so many of these 
prescriptions can, in effect, help to keep seniors well and healthy and 
physically fit. So many of the drugs today can help to lower blood 
pressure, or deal with cholesterol problems, or a wide variety of 
conditions, and can keep our seniors healthy. The savings associated 
with these kinds of drugs are absolutely staggering.
  I reported last week, when we talked about the question of 
prescriptions for

[[Page 27638]]

seniors on the floor of the Senate, about one anticoagulant drug 
seniors often take today. It costs a little over $1,000 a year for a 
senior citizen to take that anticoagulant drug. By taking that drug, 
very often it is possible to prevent a debilitating stroke that can 
cost a senior more than $100,000, in terms of expenses. Just think of 
that. An anticoagulant drug helps our seniors stay healthy for about 
$1,000 a year. As a result of spending $1,000 a year on this particular 
medicine, we can keep that person from having a debilitating stroke, 
which could cost more than $100,000 a year.
  So, very often, I am asked by colleagues and others in the Congress 
whether our Nation can afford to cover prescription drugs for the 
elderly. My answer is that our Nation cannot afford not to cover 
prescription drugs, when you look at the kind of savings that would be 
associated with this coverage.
  Now, in the Snowe-Wyden bill, we seek to do a number of things beyond 
giving senior citizens the same kind of bargaining power that a health 
maintenance organization does. We focus on the principles of the 
private marketplace, trying to create choices and options and a wide 
variety of alternatives for the Nation's seniors, and we do it through 
a concept the President of the Senate and all of us understand very 
well, and that is, we use the model of the Federal Employees Health 
Benefits Plan. We don't go out and set up a whole new bureaucracy. We 
don't set up a lot of price controls and get the Government intervening 
in the marketplace.
  I have great reservations about that kind of approach because, if you 
go with price controls, say, on Medicare, the only thing that will 
happen is you will shift all the costs onto the backs of other 
vulnerable people. I don't think there is a Member of the Senate who 
would like to see us take action with respect to prescription drugs for 
the Nation's senior citizens, and then have a lot of costs shifted 
onto, say, a 27-year-old woman who is divorced and has two kids and is 
working hard and playing by the rules and suddenly is seeing the 
prescription drug costs for her children go up very dramatically. So we 
ought to unleash the forces of the marketplace. That is what is in the 
bipartisan Snowe-Wyden prescription drug bill.
  What I am going to do for a few moments is talk about some of the 
bills and documents that I have been sent by seniors since we came to 
the floor and began to urge them, as this poster says, to send in 
copies of their prescription drug bills to us in the Senate.
  The first case I want to talk about this morning involves a senior 
citizen who is 73 years old and lives in my home State, in Hillsboro. 
She has a monthly income of $1,000, and she is spending 25 percent of 
it on her prescription drugs. She doesn't have any of these bills 
covered by her health insurance--not any of them. She has to take a 
wide variety of drugs, such as Relafen and Prilosec--a whole host of 
prescription drugs--primarily due to hypertension and a variety of 
problems. Her Prilosec alone is one she has to take on a regular basis; 
yet, as a result of the expenses associated with her prescription 
medicine, this senior citizen at home in Hillsboro, OR, is not able to 
take all of the medication she needs. She reports that when she does 
take her Prilosec as her doctor tells her, she has had to give up other 
kinds of necessities. She is eating cheaper foods and is particularly 
concerned that if something isn't done about prescription drugs in the 
Senate, she is going to have a whole host of other problems. She is not 
able to afford other essentials, such as being able to take care of 
expenses for her house.
  This is a real case, not some government report from some think tank 
in Washington, DC, hypothesizing about what the senior citizens need. 
This is a real, live case from my home State, in Hillsboro, OR. She 
heard I am urging senior citizens, as this poster says, to send in 
copies of their prescription drug bills to their Senators.
  She sent me her case. Very clearly, these are heartrending cases--to 
think people with a $1,000-a-month income trying to get by on that 
alone is hard enough. Having to spend 25 percent of her income on 
prescription drugs, having to be part of a drug regime where she can't 
even take all that her doctor is telling her to take--this is what is 
going on in the United States of America. A country as rich and 
powerful and as good as ours has not yet figured out a way to help 
people such as this. It is a tragedy that we cannot come together on a 
bipartisan basis, the way the Snowe-Wyden bill envisages. There are 
other approaches that certainly would be appealing as well. But we need 
to get this done. What everybody says is that this Congress is so 
polarized, they can't deal with big issues.
  Well, I believe the bipartisan Snowe-Wyden bill, which has gotten 54 
votes in terms of a funding plan and is based on models that every 
Member of the Senate knows about, is a very appealing kind of concept. 
But if our colleagues have different approaches--and certainly in this 
body we have strong views, and there are a variety of different ideas 
on this--have them come forward.
  But let's not duck this issue. Let us not duck it and say, oh, this 
is a matter for the 2000 campaign, and we don't need to deal with it 
today. We need to deal with it now.
  I am going to go through a couple of other cases.
  Here is another one from a couple in Cornelius, OR, a home in my 
State. They have a monthly income of about $1,000. They are spending 
between $200 and $400 every month on their prescription drugs. They 
have to take drugs for arthritis, for cholesterol problems, and 
antibiotics on a fixed income.
  Clearly, this kind of case where month after month they are seeing 
between 20 percent and 40 percent of their monthly income going for 
prescription drugs ought to make it clear to Members of this body that 
we have to move and move on a bipartisan basis.
  There isn't anything that is important in Washington, DC, that isn't 
bipartisan. I don't know of a single issue that can be addressed in a 
significant way without Democrats and Republicans coming together. The 
Snowe-Wyden bipartisan approach is one way. There may be others. But 
the important thing is we ought to move and we ought to move in this 
session of Congress.
  A third case I would like to go through involves an elderly woman in 
Forest Grove, OR. Recently, in effect, in the last few weeks, she spent 
$294 on her prescription medicine. She has had to take a variety of 
different medicines. That is one example of what we are getting now 
from the seniors across this country. This particular senior is in 
Forest Grove, OR, taking a whole host of medications.
  A lot of our seniors average 15 prescriptions a year. The third case 
I have gone through this morning with seniors spending $294 in just a 
few weeks on her prescription medicines in Forest Grove is pretty 
representative of what we are hearing.
  I hope that as a result of my coming to the floor over these last 
days before we wrap up for the year that we can see Democrats and 
Republicans in the Senate coming together to try to deal with this 
question.
  I want to bring up one last case. It is a particularly poignant one. 
It is from an older person who is now taking 15 prescription drugs. She 
is on a fixed income with nothing but her Social Security. She is 
spending $600 a month--$600 a month--on her prescription medicine. None 
of it is covered by her health insurance. She writes to tell me that 
she is spending almost her entire monthly income on prescription drugs.
  Think of that. A senior citizen, again, at home in Oregon spending 
almost her entire monthly income on prescription drugs. We asked: What 
happens when you can't afford the prescription drugs you need? She said 
borrow. That is what she tries to do. A senior citizen with only Social 
Security spending virtually all of her monthly income on prescription 
drugs is now having to borrow from friends and family.
  I have a list of these prescriptions. Again, the list goes on and on.
  This is an example of the kind of bills that senior citizens are now 
sending in as a result of our efforts to try to get bipartisan action 
on this issue.

[[Page 27639]]

  I hope as a result of my remarks other seniors will, as this poster 
says, send in copies of their prescription drug bills. I hope they will 
be interested in the bipartisan Snowe-Wyden prescription drug bill. 
But, frankly, I would like to make sure they are in contact with all of 
us in the Senate because this is not an issue that should be allowed to 
be put off until after the 2000 election.
  We are given an election certificate. Mr. President, I know you feel 
very strongly about important issues such as campaign finance reform 
where it is important to come together. We are giving election 
certificates to deal with these issues. I have not been given an 
election certificate to put this off until after another election. We 
are all sent here to deal with these important issues such as campaign 
finance reform and prescription drugs because these are important to 
the American people.
  I am very proud to have been able to work with Senator Olympia Snowe 
on this issue.
  I think when you are dealing with important questions such as 
prescription drugs and campaign finance reform it has to be bipartisan. 
My plan is to keep coming to the floor of the Senate day, after day, 
after day, bringing up these examples of what I am hearing from the 
Nation's senior citizens and hope that we can come together. Senator 
Snowe and I got 54 votes on the floor of the Senate for the funding 
approach we are taking. More than $10 billion goes from the Medicare 
program each year to cover tobacco-related illnesses. We know we have 
to act. We have to act responsibly to address these concerns of 
seniors.
  There is a marketplace-oriented approach to this problem. We don't 
need a lot of price controls. We don't need a ``one-size-fits-all'' run 
from a Washington, DC, program. The Snowe-Wyden bill will give seniors 
the same kind of bargaining power that a health maintenance 
organization has to negotiate prices, not through a government regime 
but through the power of marketplace forces.
  I am going to keep coming back to the floor of the Senate until we 
get action on this issue. I will keep reading from these letters. I 
hope seniors will continue, as this poster says, to send in copies of 
their prescription drug bills. I know that seniors at home have made it 
clear they are going to keep sending them to me, and I am very hopeful 
that we can get action on this issue in this session.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for 15 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Baucus pertaining to the introduction of S. 1837 
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Roberts). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative assistant proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. THOMAS. What is the order of business, Mr. President?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The order of business is, under the previous 
order, the time until 2 p.m. shall be under the control of the 
distinguished Senator from Wyoming, Mr. Thomas, or his designee. The 
Senator is recognized.

                          ____________________