[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13927-13928]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            CORPORATE GREED

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration has very 
close ties to the prescription drug industry. In and of itself, that 
might not be a problem. Part of any administration's job is to support 
American industry, so long as it coincides with the best interests of 
the American people.
  That is, unfortunately, where the Bush administration runs into 
problems. The best interests of the American people should outweigh the 
interests of industry, but too often with this administration, the drug 
industry prevails at the expense of American consumers.
  Last year, for instance, prescription drug costs increased 17 
percent, while the inflation rate was only 1.6 percent. Rising drug 
costs have fueled double-digit increases in health insurance premiums. 
Rises in drug costs are putting State budgets in the red. Rising drug 
costs are bankrupting seniors on fixed incomes.
  The Bush administration's response to this situation? They recently 
released a ``study'' arguing that American consumers must continue to 
pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. If we do 
not, the study said, medical research and development will dry up. This 
study is available online at www.hhs.gov.
  It could just as easily, however, appear at www.phrma.org, the drug 
industry association's Web site. If Members had any questions about how 
closely aligned the administration is with the drug industry, this 
study makes it clear they are in lockstep.
  I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if it is any coincidence that this study comes 
out of the Department of Health and Human Services' Planning Office, 
which is managed by a former employee of, you guessed it, the drug 
industry.
  This study says the best bet for American consumers is the status 
quo. If we do anything about price, this study, the administration, or 
the drug industry, and it all, unfortunately, seems like the same thing 
too often, if we do anything about price, the administration says, we 
will be responsible in this country for killing research and 
development in the drug industry.
  It is a pretty difficult sell to claim this when we consider that the 
drug industry has topped, or in terms of profitability, it has been the 
most profitable industry in America for 20 years running, return on 
price, return on sales, return on equity. While the overall profits of 
Fortune 500 companies declined 53 percent last year, the top 10 
drugmakers increased profits by 33 percent last year.
  Drug companies spend twice as much on marketing and administration as 
they do on research and development. U.S. tax dollars fund almost half 
of the research that the drug industry does, but American consumers are 
supposed to be so grateful that they are supposed to gratefully pay 
twice for that R&D. We are supposed to thank the drug industry for 
charging us prices two and three and four times what prices are in 
every other country in the world.
  To explain this, look what happened last month. Last month, the drug 
industry wrote a prescription drug coverage bill for the Republican 
leadership that was introduced in the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
to give a prescription drug plan for Americans. The drug industry wrote 
the bill.
  The Republicans started a hearing. The Republicans, as we were 
marking up this drug industry bill sponsored by Republicans, our 
committee recessed at 5 o'clock so Members of the committee, Republican 
Members of the committee, could go off to a fundraiser underwritten by 
the drug companies, chaired by the CEO of GlaxoSmithKline, a British 
drug company, who gave $250,000. The next morning, the Republicans and 
all of us met again to work on this drug bill. Every pro-consumer 
amendment was defeated by the drug industry and by the Republicans.
  After this bill then passed the committee and passed the House of 
Representatives, the drug industry spent, through a group called United 
Seniors Association, but paid by the drug industry, spent $3 million on 
an ad campaign thanking those Republican Members for passing it and 
thanking them for their concern for America's seniors. So the drug 
industry wrote the bill, the Republicans passed the bill, the drug 
industry gave money to the Republicans while the bill was being passed, 
and then the drug industry ran TV ads thanking the Republican Members 
and congratulating them on a job well done.
  The Bush administration then, no surprise here, followed suit by 
claiming that seniors' best hope for drug coverage is the Republican 
bill.
  Now, why is this? Why should the drug industry have this kind of 
influence here? Well, over the last 12 years, the drug industry's 
lobbying expenditures have increased 800 percent. In the 2000 election 
cycle, the drug industry contributed $26 million to candidates running 
for office, the overwhelming majority of which to Republicans. The 
industry contributed $625,000 to the

[[Page 13928]]

Bush-Cheney inaugural. So far in this election cycle, the drug industry 
has contributed $14.6 million in political donations, the vast majority 
of which to Republicans.
  This may explain, Mr. Speaker, why the administration is working so 
hard for the drug industry, but it begs the question: Is what is good 
for the drug industry in the best interests of the American people?

                          ____________________