Q: Why are you working to increase imports of pharmaceuticals from Canada into the United States?
A: Americans ought to have the ability to benefit from free markets, including when they fill their prescription medicines. It makes no sense that a woman in Ottumwa, Iowa, would pay double or triple the amount for the same medication that her sister might pay in Ottawa, Ontario, as an example. I don't blame Americans who are fed up with subsidizing for the rest of the world the research and development costs that it takes to bring life-saving miracle medicine to market. This is a free trade issue. Imports create competition and keep the domestic industry more responsive to consumers. A healthy dose of competition results in better services, better prices and better choices for consumers. From airlines to restaurants and gas stations, consumers will spend their travel, entertainment and fuel dollars where they can stretch them for the best value. The same goes for insurance premiums and prescription medicines. At the same time, policymakers must protect the ingenuity of the free market system that rewards innovation and the discovery of breakthrough medicine. It's a tricky balance to enact patent and trade laws that foster innovation and keep medicines affordable and accessible to Americans. One thing is for certain. Americans are paying more than their fair share for the high cost of pharmaceutical research and development.
Q: Are Americans allowed to import drugs from Canada?
A: Congress passed a law in 2003 that allows the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to permit pharmacists and wholesalers to import prescription medicines from Canada. The FDA also may issue a waiver to individuals. But first, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must certify that importation would not pose risks to public health and safety. Moreover, HHS must certify that importation also would lower prices for the same prescription medicine sold in the United States. Let's remember that American consumers have grown accustomed to the idea that "you get what you pay for." That couldn't be more important in a policy debate about importing prescription medicine. When cancer or diabetic patients pay for their life-saving treatments and medicines, they deserve to know they are getting the safest, highest quality product. That's why importation of prescription drugs needs to come from a trading partner with a regulatory regime comparable to the U.S. regime, for example. Taxpayers and consumers are coughing up more and more out-of-pocket to pay for prescription medicine. Policymakers have an obligation to figure out the best way to keep prescription prices affordable without crippling innovation. That's why I've urged HHS to use its full authority under the law to allow for pharmaceutical drug imports if certain circumstances are met, including significant and inexplicable price hikes and that the imported drug is produced by the name brand manufacturer that originally developed the drug or by a reputable generic manufacturer that commonly does business in the United States.
Q: What other measures are you working on to address instability, affordability and accessibility for prescription medicine?
A: In November, I released the results of an 18-month, bipartisan investigation that took a deep dive into the pricing and marketing strategy of a name brand drug prescribed to treat Hepatitis C. The price tag for a 12-week treatment cost $84,000 or $1,000 per pill. Taxpayers have a tremendous stake in this debate as federal programs pay for a significant share of prescription drug coverage for the elderly, individuals with disabilities and veterans. That's why I'm also working to crack down on anti-competitive arrangements, known as "pay for delay" deals that abuse litigation to keep affordable generics off the pharmacy store shelves. My bipartisan Preserve Access to Affordable Generics Act would help make sure consumers have access to the cost-saving generic drugs.
