[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 16]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 22812-22813]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 IN SUPPORT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PRESCRIPTION DRUG REIMPORTATION PROPOSAL

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. NANCY PELOSI

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 12, 2000

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, prescription medicines have become a vital 
part of our health care system, and it is our responsibility to pass a 
meaningful prescription drug benefits through Medicare so that seniors 
will have access to the treatments that their doctors prescribe. 
Unfortunately, the drug reimportation language that the Republican 
leadership

[[Page 22813]]

included in this bill falls far short of this important goal.
  Prices for the 50 most prescribed drugs for senior citizens have been 
going up, on average, at twice the rate of inflation over the past six 
years. As the price of prescription medicines has soared, our nation's 
elderly and disabled populations have found it harder and harder to 
afford the treatments that their doctors prescribe.
  Although it cannot replace a real prescription drug benefit through 
Medicare, drug reimportation holds great promise for reducing 
prescription drug costs. However, the Republican reimportation 
provision is filled with loopholes that will prevent seniors from 
seeing any real savings.
  The Republican proposal contains several provisions that 
unnecessarily restrict the supply of reimported prescription drugs and 
increase their cost. First, they limit the medicines eligible for 
reimportation and the number of countries from which they can be 
imported. Second, drug companies have the option of refusing to allow 
reimporters to use FDA-approved labeling for their products. This 
allows these companies to increase the price of reimported drugs by 
charging outrageously high prices for the use of the label. Third, this 
language does nothing to prevent pharmaceutical companies from 
discriminating against US consumers by forcing restrictive contract 
terms on foreign distributors.
  Finally, the Republican proposal is not permanent. By allowing this 
legislation to sunset after five years, the Republicans are giving 
pharmaceutical companies yet another opportunity to kill prescription 
drug legislation that they do not like.
  The Democratic proposal provides seniors with access to lower price 
drugs, subject to strict safety testing, without any of these harmful 
loopholes. Seniors deserve real prescription drug savings, not another 
empty promise from Republicans.

                          ____________________