The Administration strongly supports reducing drug costs for seniors and other
persons with disabilities quickly. For this reason, the Administration urges
rapid action by the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate to pass bipartisan
legislation to provide overdue prescription drug coverage and other essential
improvements in Medicare benefits.
The Administration is disappointed, however, that the Senate has chosen to use
S. 812 as a vehicle for bypassing the usual Senate process for deliberation on
an issue as momentous as affordable drug coverage for seniors. The
Administration supports steps to encourage fair competition and appropriate use
of generic drugs and recognizes that some adjustments to current law would
improve the fair entry of generic substitutes into the market and prevent future
abuses of the patent laws, which can and do occur today. However, the
Administration opposes S. 812 in its current form because it will not provide
lower drug prices. S. 812 would unnecessarily encourage litigation around the
initial approval of new drugs and would complicate the process of filing and
protecting patents on new drugs. The resulting higher costs and delays in
making new drugs available will reduce access to new breakthrough drugs.
Moreover, this new cause of action is not necessary to address patent process
abuses. Clearly, the bill would benefit from consideration by the Senate's
experts on Hatch-Waxman law on the Judiciary Committee, the proper committee of
jurisdiction for this bill.
Prescription Drug and Medicare Related Amendments
Legislation to provide prescription drug coverage, lower drug costs, and improve
the Medicare program deserves immediate markup in the Finance Committee followed
by referral to the full Senate for action. S. 2, the Twenty-First Century
Medicare Act, is an example of a Medicare drug benefit proposal that would
provide far more substantial relief for seniors than generic drug legislation.
The Administration commends Senators Grassley, Snowe, Breaux, Jeffords, Landrieu
and Hatch for working across party lines to provide effective drug coverage for
seniors. The Administration supports a Medicare drug benefit that protects
seniors against high expenses, allows them to choose a plan that provides the
drug coverage they and their doctors prefer, and provides them with access to
lower prices. Employers, unions, private plans, and other sources provide some
prescription drug coverage to almost three-fourths of Medicare beneficiaries
today and the Administration believes that a Medicare drug benefit should
strengthen and complement these private sources of coverage, not replace them
with an expensive government program. Most importantly, the Medicare drug
benefit should continue to encourage the life-saving and life-improving
innovation in prescription drugs that holds so much promise for improving the
health of seniors in the twenty-first century. S. 2 reflects these principles.
The Administration supports other features of S. 2. The bill takes a step
toward fair and effective competition in the Medicare program. The bill also
gives seniors the option of a more rational and up-to-date Medicare benefit
package, which provides free preventive care, better protection against high
expenses, and more affordable coverage. In addition, in contrast to other
Medicare bills, S. 2 appropriately targets all new spending to improving
Medicare's benefits for seniors.
The Administration urges further improvements in Medicare legislation to make
the program more efficient and secure for the Baby Boom generation while
increasing value for seniors today. These improvements include providing seniors
with: a wide range of choice options and further steps toward effective
competition that saves money for beneficiaries in the Medicare program in the
years ahead; a more efficient improved benefit option in the traditional
medicare plan; and, competitive bidding for more products and services in the
traditional Medicare plan. The Administration also supports allowing current
beneficiaries to have the option of continuing their existing Medicare benefits
exactly as they are now.
If additional, sensible steps like these to improve Medicare cannot be enacted,
then it is important to consider alternative, less costly drug benefit proposals
that put a comprehensive drug benefit in place for beneficiaries with limited
means and protect all beneficiaries against high expenses. The Administration
commends Senators Hagel, Ensign, Gramm, Lugar and Inhofe for developing a more
sustainable drug benefit proposal. S. 2736, the Medicare Rx Drug Discount
and Security Act, represents an important first step toward bringing the
Medicare program up to date.
The Administration opposes S. 2625, the Graham-Daschle-Kennedy-Miller
bill. This bill would require seniors to purchase government-controlled
drug coverage with few or no choices, with the government having unprecedented
control over which drugs seniors do not have access to. Not only is the
flat-rate drug benefit an untested benefit design which will prevent seniors
from sharing in the savings of choosing less costly drugs, but it will also
eliminate virtually all incentives for the drug benefit plans to keep their
costs down. As the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has noted, this kind of
drug benefit will actually increase drug prices, especially on the drugs
that seniors use most. This benefit design will also make it difficult for
existing employer plans and other private plans to qualify for subsidies,
resulting in millions of seniors having no choice but to join the new government
plan in order to get subsidized coverage. Because of higher drug prices and a
widespread replacement of private drug financing, hundreds of billions of
dollars in new spending under the bill would simply go toward purchasing the
drugs that are currently financed through existing private coverage.
As a recent Health and Human Services report concluded, all countries that have
adopted government-controlled drug coverage use delays, restrictions, and
denials of new drug coverage to control costs. This bill would impose similar
burdens on seniors in the United States. For example, seniors may have no
choice other than joining their State Medicaid drug plan, or joining a single
plan controlled by the Federal government. Now is not the time to restrict
access to life-saving breakthrough treatments through a one-size-fits-all,
government-controlled drug benefit.
Further, the supporters of the Graham-Daschle-Kennedy-Miller proposal have not
proposed any way to pay for the bill's unsustainable costs. In fact, the drug
benefit is a temporary proposal that ends in 2010, only seven years or less
after it is implemented. (Even though the bill is scheduled to go into effect in
2003, independent experts have noted that such a major government run drug
benefit program could not possibly be implemented until at least 2005.) The
cost of making this drug benefit permanent would require cutting all other
government programs by more than 10 percent, draining the Medicare Trust Fund by
2019 or earlier (if only half of the costs of the benefit are paid for by using
Part A surpluses), or increasing taxes on all working Americans by an amount
equal to a 1 to 2 percentage point, or greater, increase in the payroll tax.
These tax increases would be equivalent to a tax of around $1,500 in today's
dollars on every working American in 2025. The President believes that a
Medicare drug benefit should be a permanent and secure part of Medicare; this
proposal is neither.
Further, the bill does nothing to improve existing Medicare benefits, which are
out of date and inadequate for seniors. For example, the bill provides no
stop-loss protection for non-pharmaceutical medical expenses so that even with
this costly benefit, seniors still would not have financial security in the
event of a major illness. In addition, the bill does nothing to correct the
years of unfair and inadequate payment updates to the private Medicare+Choice
depended on by over 5 million seniors, especially those with limited means or
from minority groups.
Finally, the Administration understands that the Graham-Daschle-Kennedy-Miller
bill may have provisions providing billions of dollars in additional payments to
providers. These provisions would add to an already unsustainable financing
burden, as well as take away funds that are badly needed to provide better drug
coverage and other benefit improvements. The Administration supports
improvements in provider payment rules to address unexpected reductions, such as
those facing physicians. Under current law, provider payments are scheduled to
increase by over 5 percent per year, and this amount is sufficient to provide
adequate reimbursement for all Medicare providers. Higher priorities for new
health care spending should be addressed before spending more money on
providers, including improving Medicare coverage, reducing the uninsured, and
making health care more affordable for all Americans.
While passage of a bipartisan bill to provide permanent prescription drug
coverage is clearly the most important action needed by the Senate now, the
Administration urges the Senate to act on effective proposals to lower drug
costs for seniors immediately. These proposals are needed because a full drug
benefit will take several years to implement. The President has proposed a
Medicare-endorsed prescription drug card to give seniors the ability to use bulk
purchasing to negotiate lower prices from drug manufacturers. The President
supports additional payments for Medicare+Choice plans that keep up with
Medicare cost increases, so that seniors can have wider access to modern
benefits like drug coverage, and to services to help them avoid disease
complications and costly medical care. The President also supports additional
Medigap options to provide more affordable drug coverage. Moreover, the
President has proposed immediate Federal funding to provide prescription drug
assistance for seniors who can least afford drugs and do not have coverage now,
through the Medicare drug card or existing State programs. Combined with the
"Pharmacy Plus" wavier program that the President implemented this year, these
proposals would allow up to 5 million seniors who do not have drug coverage now
to get help before the full drug benefit is available. All of these measures
have passed the House, and the Administration urges Senate passage quickly.
Drug Reimportation Amendment
Amendments related to drug reimportation have also been offered to S. 812.
While the Administration supports measures to reduce drug costs for seniors, the
Administration is concerned that these amendments will compromise drug safety.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services believes that the drug reimportation
proposals introduced this year and in previous years would create unacceptable
risks of adulterated, outdated, mislabeled, or otherwise unsafe medications.
This same view was also shared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in
the previous Administration. The Dorgan reimportation scheme related to
Canadian imports only runs the risk of transshipment and adulteration, because
the FDA cannot guarantee the safety of such imported drugs. In addition, this
reimportation proposal does not provide for the substantial costs of
administering the extensive new tracking, inspection, and testing processes for
reimported drugs. The Customs Service and FDA officials are already facing
substantial new responsibilities for maintaining the safety and security of
legal imports; this is not the time to add immensely to that burden, especially
when the public health is at risk.
Pay-As-You-Go Scoring
Any law that would reduce receipts or increase direct spending is subject to the
PAYGO requirements of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act and
could cause a sequester of mandatory programs in any fiscal year through 2006.
The requirement to score PAYGO costs expires on September 30, 2002, and there
are no discretionary caps beyond 2002. Although S. 812 is not subject to PAYGO
scoring, many of the amendments that may be considered by the Senate related to
Medicare reform and a prescription drug plan would increase direct spending over
the next ten years. The Administration will work with Congress to ensure fiscal
discipline consistent with the President's Budget and a quick return to a
balanced budget. The Administration also will work with Congress to ensure that
any unintended sequester of spending does not occur.
|