[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 18422-18423]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2130
               FREE-MARKET ACCESS FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gingrey). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan used to say that, ``If you 
say something that's not true, and you don't know it's not true, well, 
that's a mistake. But when you say something that's not true and you 
know it's not true, well, that's a lie.''
  We have had an awful lot of things that have been said in the last 
couple of weeks about a bill that I am very involved with in terms of 
opening up markets so that Americans can have access to world-class 
drugs at world market prices, and some of the groups have gone over the 
edge, especially as it relates to tying the issue of abortion to the 
issue of allowing Americans to have access to cheaper drugs around the 
world.
  I want to read from a letter from one of my heroes, and he is a 
fellow who served in this House admirably for 6 years. I was privileged 
to serve with him, Mr. Speaker. Dr. Tom Coburn is an OB-GYN, and he 
served in Congress for 6 years. He sent a letter to Members of Congress 
when he heard that the pharmaceutical industry is somehow tying RU-486 
to the debate about reimportation of drugs.
  Now, Dr. Coburn was one of the most militant advocates and defenders 
of the sanctity of human life that the Congress has ever seen. He was 
also a supporter and an author of the bill to open up markets so that 
Americans could have access to those drugs at fairer prices. He says in 
his letter, and I will submit the entire letter for the Record, but he 
says in his letter, and I quote: ``As a pro-life practicing physician 
who earned a 100 percent pro-life voting record while serving in 
Congress, I find it ludicrous that those who oppose your legislation 
would resort to ad hominem attacks with no basis in reality.''
  He goes on, and it is a very strong letter. I also want to submit for 
the Record a letter from our colleagues, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), 
who are very active and co-chairmen of the House Pro-Life Caucus, and 
they say in their letter, and I will submit it for the Record: ``While 
we both wish RU-486 were not legal, this debate is not about 
abortion.''
  I want to come back to my original point, that when you say something 
that is not true and you know it is not true, well, that is a lie. If 
anyone should know the rules about RU-486, one would think that the 
people who make the drug would know the rules here in the United 
States. RU-486 cannot be purchased in the United States of America with 
a prescription. It cannot be purchased without a prescription. It can 
only be administered in a doctor's office by a doctor.
  In other words, no one can go to a doctor's office and have the 
doctor write out a prescription to take to the pharmacy and buy the 
drug. Therefore, nothing that we are talking about in terms of 
importation of legal FDA-approved drugs from FDA-approved facilities 
around the world, nothing in that legislation could be impacted by RU-
486 because it cannot be obtained without a prescription. It cannot be 
obtained with a prescription. More importantly, RU-486 is completely 
illegal in Canada and Mexico.
  So when you say something that is not true and you know it is not 
true, well, that is a lie. And that is the kind of thing that we have 
had to deal with in the last several weeks. Now, we in politics are 
used to puffery. We are used to distortions. We are used to people 
sometimes saying things that are not completely truthful. We have half-
truths. But this is a bald-face lie.
  So I come to the floor today to say that people can disagree about 
whether or not Americans should have to pay the highest prices in the 
world for prescription drugs, but these groups that oppose this do so 
for what I believe is clearly a profit motive. In other words, it is 
the pharmaceutical companies who understand that if we pass this bill, 
prescription drug prices in the United States are going to drop 
dramatically.
  I have used examples and I have my charts, and people can argue with 
my charts, although no one does. The pharmaceutical industry can come 
in and say, well, it is not true that Americans really have to pay $360 
for Tamoxifen while they can buy it for $60 in Germany. Maybe that is 
true, maybe it is not true; but that is what we found out in the 
research we did. We bought the drug in Munich, Germany, for $59.05. We 
called pharmacies here in Washington, D.C. and asked them how much does 
this particular drug in this particular milligrams, this number of 
tablets, what does it sell for, and they said it is $360.
  Now, maybe we are wrong, but that is an honest mistake. But we 
believe we are telling the truth, and in everything we have done we 
have cited our sources. Now, some people have questioned our sources, 
but they are making up facts that they know are not true. This is not 
about abortion. It is not about RU-486. The question that we are going 
to be asked, hopefully next week, is will we stand with American 
consumers, or will we stand with the giant pharmaceutical industry. I 
hope we will get the right answer.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record the letters I referred to above:

                                                    July 10, 2003.
     Hon. Gil Gutknecht,
     Cannon House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Gil. I was shocked to learn that some opponents of 
     free-market access for prescription drugs have begun arguing 
     that your legislation, H.R. 2427, the ``Pharmaceutical Market 
     Access Act of 2003'' somehow promotes abortion and, more 
     specifically, the availability of abortion drugs such as RU-
     486.
       As you may recall, while in the House I was the author of 
     not only provisions to permit the reimportation of FDA-
     approved drugs, but also the author of the House-approved 
     proposal to block FDA-approval of RU-486. As a pro-life 
     practicing physician who earned a 100 percent pro-life voting 
     record while serving in Congress, I find it ludicrous that 
     those who oppose your legislation would resort to ad hominem 
     attacks with no basis in reality.
       I can state unequivocally that your legislation in no way, 
     shape, or form promotes abortion. Many pro-life members are 
     original cosponsors of your legislation and, quite obviously, 
     do not believe your bill violates their deeply held 
     convictions about the sanctity of life. Those who argue that 
     your legislation makes abortion drugs more accessible by 
     lowering overall drug prices necessitate the conclusion that 
     in order to be pro-life one must be in favor of increasing 
     all drug costs. I suppose the argument would be the higher 
     the drug costs the more fervent your pro-life beliefs.
       In Washington, it was always sad to see organizations drift 
     from their core principles and take positions that defined 
     common sense and logic. Any organization that links your 
     legislation with the abortion debate will, in the long-term 
     undermine their credibility and relevancy in Washington. 
     While the pharmaceutical industry has provided many wonderful 
     saving drugs, it would be unwise for anyone to believe that 
     the industry that developed and fought for FDA approval of 
     RU-486 is now motivated by a passion for the pro-life cause.
       The fact that opponents of your legislation have resorted 
     to these attacks is shameful, yet the obtuseness of their 
     logic ultimately serves to highlight the soundness of your 
     argument.
           Sincerely yours,
                                               Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
     Former Member of Congress.
                                  ____

                                                    July 16, 2003.
       Dear Colleague. While we do not agree on the reimportation 
     of prescription drugs, we both have devoted our careers to 
     defending the sanctity of human life. We are disheartened by 
     recent ads and targeted mailings that attack Members' pro-
     life credential even in cases where Members have 10 percent 
     pro-life voting records.
       While we both wish the RU-486 were not legal, this debate 
     is not about abortion. Many pro-life Members are original 
     cosponsors of legislation that would allow the reimportation 
     of prescription drugs, and many pro-life Members staunchly 
     oppose this proposal.
       Any effort to tangle this issue with abortion is 
     misleading. We must not confuse the fight to defend the 
     innocent life with a dispute over whether or not to import 
     drugs from foreign countries.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Joseph R. Pitts,
                               Chairman, House Values Action Team.
                                                      Chris Smith,
                               Co-Chairman, House Pro-Life Caucus.

[[Page 18423]]



                          ____________________