[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 22054-22055]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      PRESCRIPTION DRUG AMENDMENT

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I also want to speak on a 
matter that Senator Vitter and I will introduce shortly, for there will 
be in front of the Senate an appropriations bill that will fund the 
Food and Drug Administration. Senator Vitter will offer, on behalf of 
himself and myself, an amendment that we had offered to the Senate on a 
different appropriations bill several months ago--and passed--that 
would allow Americans to purchase low-cost prescription drugs from 
Canada.
  Every year, millions of Americans, who cannot otherwise afford their 
prescriptions at pharmacies, seek those same FDA-approved prescriptions 
from Canada at significantly lower prices.
  Back in July, Senator Vitter and I introduced a separate amendment on 
this issue to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. 
Our amendment prohibited Customs from stopping the importation of FDA-
approved prescription drugs by American citizens.
  The amendment was in response to a new policy implemented by U.S. 
Customs which resulted in over 38,000 prescription drug shipments being 
detained by Federal officials. Our amendment received overwhelming 
bipartisan support when it was added to the Senate bill.
  This Senator started receiving complaints as far back as 2\1/2\ years 
ago. They had been ordering prescriptions from Canada for years, and 
suddenly Customs was confiscating their prescriptions. Customs has 
admitted that it was to the tune of almost 40,000 prescriptions.
  To a senior citizen who is so desperate to make financial ends meet--
and, in fact, sadly, in America in the year 2006, some senior citizens 
are having to make a choice because of their financial condition 
between buying their groceries or buying their prescription medicines. 
They are forced to do things such as cutting their medicine tablets in 
half to try to stretch it out when, in fact, their doctor tells them 
that is not what they should be doing. Yet it is happening.
  Over and over again, seniors have been able to order from Canadian 
pharmacists at half the cost of their prescription medicine. It is not 
a question of safety because it is made by the same manufacturer and 
even with the same packaging.
  Back in the summer, Senator Vitter and I saw an opportunity on an 
appropriations bill to prohibit Customs from using the appropriated 
moneys for the seizure of those kinds of individual purchases for a 
small duration of time--no more than a 90-day supply of their 
prescriptions and only from Canada.
  We passed it in the Senate overwhelmingly. It goes down to a House-
Senate conference committee, and they watered down that provision to 
say that it can be done to bring those small, limited, individual 
supplies of prescription drugs from Canada but only if you bring it 
personally back from Canada.
  That may help my two colleagues who are from the State of North 
Dakota because they are right next to the Canadian border. But clearly 
for the States of Senator Vitter and myself and the States in the 
Southeastern United States, that doesn't help at all, particularly 
since some of our seniors have been accustomed to ordering these much 
less expensive drugs by mail or by e-mail or by telephone calls.
  When it got to the conference committee, they watered down the 
provision. That is what we are going to address today. I am waiting on 
Senator Vitter to come to the floor so we can offer this amendment.
  We have a new opportunity on an appropriations bill that includes the 
Food and Drug Administration appropriations. This does not assure 
Americans access to lower cost medications from Canada, since the FDA 
can still hold up the imports if they choose to do so under current 
law. That is why we are going to add this amendment to prevent the FDA 
from interfering with the importation of prescription drugs from 
Canada.
  A little bit of good news came out the last time we tried to do this 
with regard to the Customs Department. In October, Customs threw up its 
hands and said: We have more important things to do on the huge import 
of drugs that are counterfeit. That is what we are going after. We are 
not going to confiscate these individual purchases of a 90-day supply 
or less which are prescriptions from Canadian pharmacists.
  With that as a precedent, it would seem to me that the Senate would 
certainly go along with us and put this in the law right now with 
regard to the FDA to make sure that this policy is very clear.
  When Congress returns in January, we should look at, additionally, 
what is introduced by my colleague who is on the floor now, Senator 
Dorgan, and Senator Snowe, the Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug 
Safety Act.
  This bipartisan bill, which I support, is going to set up a 
comprehensive system for importation of prescription drugs which will 
further help our senior citizens on lower prescription drug costs.
  Ultimately, we will have to debate the very essence of the problem in 
Medicare prescription drug benefits, Part D benefits. That is going to 
be a whole new debate that we will have out here on how to fill the 
doughnut hole which some people say would cost something like $26 
billion. But there is a way to do that--by allowing Medicare to do what 
other parts of the Federal Government have done for years, including 
the Veterans' Administration and the Department of Defense; that is, 
use the bulk purchasing power to negotiate lower prices for drugs.
  As most people know, that was prohibited in the Medicare prescription 
drug benefit. But I think we are going to be addressing that because 
that is a huge stake in the heart of the purchasing power of Medicare 
for 43 million senior citizens to be able to negotiate those prices 
down by bulk purchases.
  It is clearly time for the Congress to stand up for our constituents 
and to help lower these prescription drug prices.
  I am looking forward to working with Senators in a bipartisan way to 
embrace this Vitter-Nelson amendment.
  Thank you.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, my colleague from Florida was describing 
the issue of prescription drug pricing in our country--an amendment 
that would be offered to a subsequent appropriations bill dealing with 
the FDA and its enforcement of the reimportation of prescription drugs.
  Let me point out, as he properly said, that Senator Snowe and myself 
and

[[Page 22055]]

others, a large bipartisan group, Senators McCain and Kennedy, 
introduced legislation--and have been blocked from having it considered 
for some many months in the Senate--dealing with the comprehensive 
approach to reimportation of FDA-approved drugs.
  The American consumer is now charged the highest prices for 
prescription drugs in the entire world. Let me say that again. The 
American consumer is charged the highest prices for prescription drugs 
anywhere in the world. It is not fair. That pricing policy has to 
change. One of the ways to change it will be to put downward pressure 
on pricing in this country by allowing American consumers to access 
those identical FDA-approved drugs, some of which are actually made in 
this country; to reimport them from other countries, FDA-approved, made 
and manufactured in manufacturing plants approved by the FDA.
  My colleague talked about Canada and the United States. That is an 
obvious issue. My State borders Canada, and we see people coming back 
and forth going to Canada to purchase prescription drugs, in some cases 
for one-tenth the price they are charged in this country.
  We need to find a way to pass the comprehensive legislation. My 
colleague from Florida cosponsored that bill and worked with us on it--
myself, Senator Snowe from Maine, Senator McCain, Senator Grassley, 
Senator Kennedy, a pretty significant bipartisan group in the Senate. 
We have not had a vote on that only because it has been blocked. We 
will have a vote on that in the next session of Congress if we are not 
able to offer it in the coming weeks. In the next session of Congress, 
we will have a vote on it.
  We will have very substantial numbers in the Senate supporting that 
legislation. When we do, it will be good news for American consumers 
who now pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. 
That is unfair. I certainly support the amendment that deals with a 
funding limitation that would be offered as described by my colleague 
from Florida. That in itself does not solve the larger problem. He has 
indicated that. I believe Senator Vitter would indicate that as well. 
It is a step in the right direction.
  I am supportive of it with the understanding that we will have a more 
comprehensive piece of legislation on this issue which will be 
introduced, will be offered, and will be voted on with a very large 
majority in the Senate. The House of Representatives has already 
demonstrated its support for such a plan. If we can't get it done in 
the lameduck session, as soon as we turn the calendar and begin a new 
year, I am convinced we will get this done.
  I appreciated the words of my colleague from Florida.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The senior Senator from North Dakota is recognized.

                          ____________________