[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1365-1366]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                    PRESCRIPTION DRUG AFFORDABILITY

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, similar to many of our colleagues, I have 
been back home in my State at townhall meetings. One of the very 
consistent themes I heard is that folks want to see us address some of 
the key issues of our time, particularly the economic issues.
  I have heard again and again--and it is clear--that millions of 
senior citizens cannot afford their prescription medicine. I heard 
again and again that millions of married couples are being shackled by 
this marriage tax penalty. It seems to me Congress can fashion a 
prudent, well-crafted bill that addresses this marriage tax penalty and 
also responds to the concerns of seniors--without blowing up the 
budget, without violating the principles of fiscal responsibility, and 
by prudent use of the surplus.
  Democrats want to see--and Democrats are anxious to work with 
Republicans on this--an effort to help the many seniors and families 
who are walking on an economic tightrope trying to afford their 
prescription drug bills. We want to see meaningful tax relief for 
married couples. What we have to do is work together, in a bipartisan 
way, to fashion that.
  I will spend just a minute talking about how serious this 
prescription drug problem is for the Nation's older people.
  When I was home recently, I heard from an elderly woman in Yoncalla, 
OR. She lives by herself. She lives in southern Oregon. She has an 
income of about $500 a month. When she is done paying her prescription 
drug bill, she has just a little bit over $200 to live on for the rest 
of the month. She lives a long way from pharmacies, so she cannot very 
well comparison shop.
  She wants to know, why isn't it possible for this Congress to enact a 
prescription drug benefit for her and for others similarly situated? My 
view is, if we do not enact a prescription drug benefit for this 
person, she is going to end up a lot sicker and with a lot more health 
problems than she has today. That will be much more expensive to the 
taxpayers.
  In addition, I recently heard from an elderly couple from Baker, OR, 
who have to take a great many prescription drugs. After their monthly 
medication, together they have less than $200 on which to get by. They 
said in their letter: ``That is not living. That is existing.''
  Colleagues, it is very clear that in a country as rich and as strong 
as ours, we clearly are capable of doing justice to the vulnerable 
older people, such as the elderly folks I described from rural Oregon 
who are struggling to make ends meet and cannot afford their 
prescription drugs.
  People ask us all the time: Can we afford prescription drug coverage? 
My message is: We cannot afford not to cover prescription drugs.
  One of these anticoagulant medicines that helps prevent strokes in 
older people might cost $1,000 or $1,500 a year--certainly pricey--but 
you prevent that stroke with the medication and you save upwards of 
$100,000 that an older person might incur in expenses for problems 
associated with the stroke.
  What we need to do--and the President has one approach; Senator 
Kennedy has another approach; Senator Snowe and I have worked together 
on a bipartisan basis--is bring these bills together and make sure we 
use marketplace forces to hold down the costs of prescription drugs for 
older people. Each one of these bills--the kind of approach the 
President is talking about, as well as the approaches Senator Kennedy 
and Senator Snowe and I are talking about--each one of these approaches 
makes sure the dollars we earmark for this program are used to pay the 
prescription drug portion of an older person's private health insurance 
bill.
  You hear a whole lot of talk these days about how the insurance 
companies would not possibly be interested in this. Of course they are 
going to be interested in this. I have talked to them from my area. 
They are anxious to see the Government in a responsible, prudent 
program, for which I believe there

[[Page 1366]]

is now bipartisan support. They are anxious to see Medicare pick up the 
prescription drug portion of a senior's private health insurance bill.
  With a lot of my colleagues on the Democratic side--and I know 
Senator Snowe and others on the Republican side want to address this as 
well--I intend to keep coming to the floor of the Senate and keep 
reading these letters and describing the circumstances of older people 
who want to see this Congress enact meaningful relief for prescription 
drug costs before we adjourn.
  Medicare did not cover prescription drugs when it began. Right now, 
the senior citizen who does not have prescription drug coverage is 
basically subsidizing other people in this country who do have coverage 
whose plans are able to negotiate discounts. That is not right. It is 
not fair.
  We can enact meaningful prescription drug coverage under the Medicare 
program in this session of Congress. Until we do, I and other Democrats 
are going to keep coming to this floor, reading the accounts of seniors 
who are facing these staggering prescription drug costs they cannot 
afford.
  I intend to keep working with Senator Snowe and Senator Kennedy, and 
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, so the legacy of this session 
of the Congress can be that we stood up for a fair shake for the 
millions of vulnerable older Americans and their families.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________