Newspapers, Drug Industry Groups and Advocacy Organizations Weigh in on Prescription Drug Issue

A number of newspapers, pharmaceutical industry groups and others have commented on the congressional debate over rival Medicare prescription drug bills and other prescription drug-related legislation. The House last month passed a 10-year, $350 billion Republican-sponsored bill that would allow Medicare beneficiaries to purchase prescription drug coverage directly from private insurance companies. Senate Democrats have proposed an eight-year, $500 billion bill that would provide a prescription drug benefit as part of Medicare coverage. In addition, a tripartisan group of senators has proposed a $330 billion, 10-year bill similar to the legislation passed in the House. A summary of some of the reaction to the debate over the legislation appears below.

Editorials

• Daily Oklahoman: Neither the bill passed in the House nor the legislation proposed in the Senate "try to reform Medicare's base structure, which grows more wobbly each year as more Americans reach eligibility ages," according to an Oklahoman editorial. The editorial adds that Medicare has "serious structural difficulties," and adding a new benefit would "create a number of new problems" for the program. According to the editorial, lawmakers must make "serious structural changes" to Medicare before they add a prescription drug benefit to the program. The editorial concludes, "Unfortunately, that kind of overhaul is nearly impossible in an election year, when politicians trying to curry favor with voters are long on rhetoric and short on the kind of visionary work needed to modernize" Medicare (Daily Oklahoman, 7/16).
• Newark Star-Ledger: Although a generic drug bill set for debate on the Senate floor this week would offer "needed relief to private pocketbooks, employee health plans and state budgets," the legislation "is not enough" for seniors, who "deserve" a prescription drug benefit, according to a Star-Ledger editorial. The editorial adds that the nation "will win if Congress produces a good benefit, which means one that is part of Medicare and does not use coverage gaps to camouflage an otherwise workable allocation." The editorial concludes, "The country will lose if the politicians find it more convenient to use failure as a political cudgel against their opponents" (Newark Star-Ledger, 7/17).
• Wall Street Journal: Although "it makes sense" for Medicare to cover prescription drugs, lawmakers should pass a benefit that "won't tempt the government to impose price controls in response to rising costs and squash this innovation," according to a Wall Street Journal editorial. The editorial endorses legislation that would "give means-tested catastrophic coverage to seniors." However, lawmakers also could "simply help seniors buy drug-inclusive health insurance on the private market, and get out of the business of micro-managing a single-payer system," the editorial concludes (Wall Street Journal, 7/17).

Opinions

• Russel Bantham, executive vice president at the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America: Bills to promote generic treatments and allow reimportation of prescription drugs from abroad do not focus on the "real meat" of Medicare prescription drug coverage and offer the "legislative equivalent of lettuce and a bun," Bantham writes in a Washington Times opinion piece. The reimportation bill would eliminate "important consumer protections that have ensured the safety of our medicine supply," he writes. Bantham adds that in the future the nation's aging population will require new treatments for diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's -- "not just cheaper copies of drugs discovered years ago," which he says the generic drug bill would provide. Bantham concludes, "If lawmakers buy into legislation that's all condiments but no meat, there won't be prescription drug coverage for seniors passed this year. If that happens, seniors -- and all Americans -- will have a real beef" with lawmakers (Bantham, Washington Times, 7/17).
• Anthony Daniels, CEO of Manual, Daniels Burke International: In a Washington Times opinion piece, Daniels writes that reimportation of prescription drugs would "open the floodgates to adulterated and often dangerous counterfeit drugs from unscrupulous profiteers, deranged individuals and even terrorists" (Daniels, Washington Times, 7/16).

Ad
A group of advocacy organizations on July 16 ran an advertisement in the Washington Times opposing the proposed re-importation measure. The ad states, "Reimporting foreign drugs is just plain dangerous," citing federal officials who have cautioned against the possibility of counterfeit medicines. The ad concludes, "If foreign drugs are allowed into the United States, the personal health of American consumers will be at risk. ... Help keep foreign counterfeit drugs out of America's medicine cabinets" (Washington Times, 7/16).