[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 27850-27852]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



      PRESCRIPTION DRUG COVERAGE FOR OUR NATION'S ELDERLY CITIZENS

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am on the floor tonight for what is 
really the 10th time in recent days to talk about the need for decent 
prescription drug coverage for the Nation's elderly citizens. There is 
one bipartisan bill now before the Senate. It is the Snowe-Wyden bill. 
I believe so strongly in this issue because of what I am hearing from 
senior citizens in my home State and now, frankly, from across the 
United States.
  What I have decided to do, as part of the effort to advance the 
prospect of dealing with this issue and dealing with it on a bipartisan 
basis, is to come to the floor as frequently as I can in the hectic 
Senate schedule to read from some of these bills I am getting from the 
Nation's senior citizens.
  As you can see in the poster next to us, on behalf of the Snowe-Wyden 
legislation, I am urging seniors to send in copies of their 
prescription drug bills directly to us at the United States Senate, 
Washington, DC 20510, because I would like to see the Senate deal with 
this issue and not just put it off because some are saying it is too 
difficult and too hard to deal with in this contentious climate. I 
believe Members of the Senate are sent here to deal with tough issues. 
This is one that would meet an enormous need.
  For a number of years before I was elected to the Congress, I served 
as director of the Oregon Gray Panthers. The need for coverage of 
prescription drugs was extremely important back then. It was always a 
big priority for senior citizens.
  Frankly, it is much more important today because so many of the drugs 
that are available now are preventive in nature. They help keep seniors 
well.

[[Page 27851]]

They help us to hold down the cost of medical care in America. A lot of 
these drugs today, the blood pressure medicine, the cholesterol 
medicine, keep seniors well and keep us from needing much greater sums 
of money to pick up the cost of tragic illnesses.
  Last week, I cited as one example an important anticoagulant drug. 
This is a drug that can be available to the Nation's seniors for 
somewhere in the vicinity of $1,000 a year. But if a senior gets sick, 
if a senior suffers a debilitating stroke, the expenses associated with 
that treatment can be more than $100,000. Just think about that--a 
modest investment in decent prescription drug coverage for the Nation's 
elderly people, an anticoagulant drug that costs $1,000 a year can help 
save $100,000 in much more significant medical expenses.
  As the President knows, we have a real challenge in terms of ensuring 
the stability of the Medicare program. The Part A program, the 
institutional program, is the one that is going to escalate in cost if 
we can't do more to make prescription drug coverage a significant part 
of outpatient benefits for the Nation's seniors.
  I am very hopeful this Senate will act on this issue. I believe this 
is the kind of issue that could be a legacy for this session of 
Congress.
  All over the Nation, seniors are telling us now they cannot afford 
their prescription medicine. I am going to read from three more letters 
I have recently received from folks at home. The first is from an 
elderly woman in Toledo, OR. She writes:

       Dear Senator Wyden, I am an 81-year-old widow. My only 
     income, Social Security, allows me to pay for glaucoma, 
     angina, high blood pressure, all of which I have problems. I 
     am taking eight prescription medications daily. My Medicare 
     supplement insurance doesn't cover medication.

  For just 1 month for those medicines, she has to spend $166. On top 
of that, she reports that every other month she has to spend a little 
over $62 for a small bottle of eye drops. As she says:

       That adds up to a lot. If I don't use the eye drops, I go 
     blind. And if I don't use the other medications, I will have 
     a stroke, a heart attack or both. Myself, and I am sure many 
     others, are in exactly the same boat.

  She, as part of her letter, encloses a copy of her bills.
  Now, this isn't the kind of thing we might hear from some Washington, 
DC, think tank that is putting out reports about whether or not this is 
a serious problem and whether or not seniors really need this 
prescription drug coverage. This is a real live case. This isn't an 
abstract kind of matter. This is an 81-year-old widow in the State of 
Oregon who is taking eight prescriptions a day, spending from a modest 
fixed income $166 a month for those eight prescriptions. Every other 
month, on top of that, she has to pay for her eye drops. It is very 
clear that if she doesn't get those medicines, she is going to have the 
much more serious problems--heart attacks and strokes--that are so 
debilitating to older people.
  Another letter that I got in the last couple of days comes from 
Medford, OR, from seniors there who discussed the question of 
prescription drug coverage there at the senior citizens center. They 
said:

       We are glad you are launching a movement to gain support 
     for prescription drug coverage for seniors. They hope it goes 
     through. Enclosed you will find a computer printout of the 
     amounts I spend on prescriptions and drugs. More than 10 
     percent of our annual budget is used to defray prescription 
     costs. That does not include the miscellaneous items related 
     to drug purchases.

  She sent me this, and I will hold up a copy of it. It is an example 
of the kind of information we are getting. She actually sent us an 
enumerated copy of the prescription bills that she is paying at home in 
Medford, OR. These are not isolated cases. I have been on the floor 
now, this is the tenth occasion, taking three or four of these cases 
every single time. I hope seniors and families who are listening 
tonight will look at this poster and see we are urging that they send 
in copies of their prescription drug bills to their Senators here in 
the U.S. Senate in Washington, DC, because I am hopeful that this can 
prick the conscience of the Senate and bring about constructive action 
before this session is over.
  The Snowe-Wyden legislation is bipartisan. Fifty-four Members of this 
body have already voted for this bill. We have a majority in the Senate 
on record on behalf of the funding mechanism that we envisage in our 
legislation. We use marketplace forces. I am not talking about a price 
control regime or about a one-size-fits-all approach to Federal health 
care; it is one that is very familiar to the Presiding Officer and to 
all our colleagues. It is really a model based on the Federal Employees 
Health Benefits Plan. The Snowe-Wyden legislation is called SPICE. It 
stands for the Senior Prescription Insurance Coverage Equity Act. It is 
bipartisan. We do think it would help create choices, options, and 
alternatives for the Nation's older people.
  I am very hopeful this Senate will say we cannot afford to duck this 
issue. I am often asked whether we can afford to cover prescription 
medicine for the Nation's older people. I am of the view that we cannot 
afford not to cover prescriptions, because what we are going to save as 
a result of these medicines of the future, and the breakthroughs that 
we are achieving in terms of preventive care and wellness, is going to 
far exceed the costs that might be incurred as a result of debilitating 
illnesses that seniors will suffer if they can't get the medicine. As 
part of this effort to get bipartisan support for the Snowe-Wyden 
legislation, I intend to keep coming to the floor of the Senate and 
reading from these letters.
  Before I wrap up tonight, I wish to bring up one other case that I 
thought was particularly poignant. This also was a letter from an 
elderly person in Medford. Her Social Security monthly income was $582. 
Over the last few months, she spent over $700 on her prescription 
medicine, and every 3 months, in addition, she has to pay for her 
health insurance plan, which doesn't seem to cover many of the health 
care needs that she has.
  Just think about that. With a monthly Social Security income of $582, 
over recent months she spent more than $700 on prescription drugs. Her 
private policy doesn't cover many of her health care needs. She also is 
sending me copies of her bills in an effort to get the Senate to see 
how important this issue is.
  Members of the Senate, I know, care about older people; a number of 
them have come up to me while I have been on the floor these last 
couple of weeks talking about this issue and said: You are right; we 
need to act on it. It is hard to see what is actually holding up the 
effort to go forward in the Senate.
  This is the last period before the year is out. Certainly we can come 
together as a body and get ready to address this issue early next year. 
We have a majority in the Senate on record and voting for a specific 
plan to fund this benefit. It is based on a model that uses marketplace 
forces that ought to be appealing to both sides of the aisle. It is a 
model with which Members of Congress are familiar because of the 
Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan. It is the basis of the Snowe-
Wyden legislation. It is hard to see what is really holding up the 
effort to win passage of this important legislation.
  I guess part of the problem is that some of the political 
prognosticators say it is a difficult issue, that both sides are just 
going to fight it out on the campaign trail, and we can just wait until 
2001 to actually take action on it.
  When I hear from seniors at home, such as the letter I raised first 
from the elderly widow in Toledo who has eight prescriptions and pays 
more than $165 a month for her prescriptions, and folks in Medford who 
are on a small monthly income and spending a significant portion of it 
on prescription drugs, I don't think those people can afford to wait 
until after the 2001 election. Frankly, I think they expect us to deal 
with the concerns they have, and to deal with them now.
  It is essentially one full year before there is another election. 
There is plenty of time to go out and campaign and have the vigorous 
discussion of the issues in the fall of 2000. But what we ought to do 
now is to act in a bipartisan way. The Snowe-Wyden legislation is that 
kind of effort. Senator

[[Page 27852]]

Snowe and I have said we are going to set aside some of the partisan 
bickering that has surrounded health care in this session of the Senate 
in years past; we are going to move forward and try to make sure 
seniors get some help.
  I hope families and seniors who are listening tonight will look at 
this poster. We are urging that seniors send copies of their 
prescription drug bills directly to each of us in the Senate here in 
Washington, DC, and help us in the Senate to come together and deal 
with the issue that is of such extraordinary importance to our 
families.
  There are a variety of ways this issue could be addressed. I think 
personally the Snowe-Wyden legislation, because it is bipartisan and 
because more than half of the Senate has voted for a plan to fund it, 
is the way to go. But I am sure there are other kinds of ideas.
  When seniors send in copies of their prescription drug bills as we 
try to get action on this issue, I hope they will also let us know 
their ideas about legislative approaches, be it support for Senator 
Snowe, the Snowe-Wyden legislation, or other kinds of approaches. But 
what to me is unacceptable is just ducking. I do not think there is any 
excuse for inertia on this issue. I think it is time for the Senate to 
say we cannot afford, as a nation, to see seniors suffer the way they 
do when they cannot get prescription drug coverage.
  Just as important as the questions of fairness for seniors, it seems 
to me, are the questions of economics. From an economic standpoint, the 
need to cover some of these prescription drugs for seniors looks to me 
like a pretty easy call. With a modest investment, we can save a whole 
lot of expense that comes about when they suffer strokes and heart 
attacks and the like when they cannot get their medicine.
  So I hope in the days ahead, Members of the Senate, in senior centers 
and medical facilities and other places where we all go to visit, will 
take the time to talk to some of the folks at home about the need for 
prescription drug coverage and discuss ways we can actually get this 
benefit added in this session of the Senate. Too many of our seniors 
now cannot afford their medicine. That is what these bills are all 
about. What these bills and these letters I am getting from seniors at 
home in Oregon are all about is that they cannot afford their medicine. 
These are the people who are told by their doctors to take three 
prescriptions; they cannot afford to do that and they end up taking two 
prescriptions. Then they cannot afford to do that; then it is one. 
Pretty soon, sure as the night follows day, they get sicker and they 
need institutional care. That is, obviously, bad for their health and 
it is also bad for the Nation's fiscal health. So I intend to keep 
coming back to the floor of the Senate.
  Since my days with the Gray Panthers at home in Oregon, I felt this 
was an important benefit for the Nation's older people. All these 
letters I am receiving as a result of folks sending in copies of their 
prescription drug bills, if anything, just reaffirms to me how 
important it is that the Senate act on this issue, and do it in a 
bipartisan way.
  Let's show seniors, let's show the skeptics we can come together 
around this important priority. This is not a trifling matter. This is, 
for many, many seniors, their big out-of-pocket expense. Many of them 
do not have private health insurance that covers it. Many of them are 
simply falling between the cracks in terms of meeting their health care 
expenses. For many elderly people, as a result of escalating health 
costs, they are paying more proportionally out of their own pocket 
today than they were back when Medicare began in 1965. That should not 
be acceptable to any Member of the Senate.
  I intend to come back to the floor again and again and again until 
this Senate, on a bipartisan basis, looks to addressing this 
prescription drug coverage. The Snowe-Wyden legislation is bipartisan. 
It uses marketplace forces. We reject the kind of price control regimes 
others may wish to pursue. I am hopeful we can get action on this issue 
because, for the millions of seniors who cannot afford their 
prescriptions, the Senate's willingness to tackle this issue, and do it 
on a bipartisan basis and get some relief for the seniors, will help 
instill a sense of confidence, a sense that the Senate is listening to 
them, hearing them, and is willing to respond to their most significant 
needs.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________