Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Surf
Side, Texas (Mr. PAUL).
(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission
to revise and extend his remarks.)
2003 Ron Paul 91:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the
rule, but I also strongly support the
bill itself, H.R. 2427. And I would like
to advise other Members here that I approach
all legislation the same way. I
look at it through two prisms. One, I
look to see if it promotes freedom, and
the other I look to see if it conforms to
the Constitution.
2003 Ron Paul 91:2
Every piece of legislation I look at it in this manner. Now, the sad part is I
do not get to vote for many bills. They
come up short on quite a few occasions.
So I want to thank the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. GUTKNECHT) and the
gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs.
EMERSON) for giving us a bill tonight
that I can vote for enthusiastically. I
finally found one, and I thank them
very much.
2003 Ron Paul 91:3
But in looking at the particular bill, one of the specific reasons why I oppose
it, is I came to Congress opposing all
welfare. Some people oppose welfare
for the poor, but they support welfare
for the rich. Others support welfare for
the rich, but not for the poor; and some
people support both kinds of welfare. I
do not support any kind of welfare.
This bill is needed to stop the indirect
welfare through regulation for the rich
and the pharmaceutical corporations.
This is corporate welfare. That is one
of the strong reasons why I am opposed
to that.
2003 Ron Paul 91:4
I also believe in freedom of choice. People have the right to make their
own choices. We do not need to promote
the nanny state. People are wise
enough and cautious enough to make
their own choices. Today we had two
votes on free trade legislation. They
were promoting international trade
agreements, but done in the name of
free trade. Why do we have free trade
legislation, so-called? To lower tariffs,
to lower prices to the consumer. But
those very same people who worked so
hard on free trade legislation are saying
now we cannot allow the American
people the option of buying drugs from
other countries and saving money.
2003 Ron Paul 91:6
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 2427, the Pharmaceutical
Market Access Act, because I believe it is an
important bill that will benefit all Americans. As
my colleagues are aware, many Americans
are concerned about the high cost of prescription
drugs. These high prices particularly affect
senior citizens who have a greater than average
need for prescription drugs and a lower
than average income. Of course, some of
these seniors may soon have at least part of
their prescription drug costs covered by Medicare.
2003 Ron Paul 91:7
However, the fact that Medicare, that is already on shaky financial ground, will soon be
subsidizing prescription drug costs makes it
more important than ever that Congress address
the issue of prescription drug costs. Of
course, Congresss actions should respect our
constitutional limits and not further expand the
role of government in the health care market.
2003 Ron Paul 91:8
Fortunately, there are a number of marketoriented policies Congress can adopt to lower
the prices of prescription drugs. This is because
the main reason prescription drug
prices are high is government policies, that
give a few powerful companies monopoly
power. For example, policies restricting the importation
of quality pharmaceuticals enable
pharmaceutical companies to charge abovemarket
prices for their products. Therefore, all
members of Congress who are serious about
lowering prescription drug prices should support
H.R. 2427.
2003 Ron Paul 91:9
Opponents of this bill have waged a hysterical campaign to convince members that
this amendment will result in consumers purchasing
unsafe products. Acceptance of this
argument not only requires ignoring H.R.
2427s numerous provisions ensuring the safety
of imported drugs, it also requires assuming
that consumers will buy cheap pharmaceuticals
without taking any efforts to ensure
that they are buying quality products. The experience
of my constituents who are currently
traveling to foreign countries to purchase prescription
drugs shows that consumers are
quite capable of purchasing safe products
without interference from Big Mother.
2003 Ron Paul 91:10
Furthermore, if the supporters of the status quo were truly concerned about promoting
health, instead of protecting the special privileges
of powerful companies, they would be
more concerned with reforming the current
policies that endanger health by artificially
raising the cost of prescription drugs. Oftentimes,
lower income Americans will take less
of a prescription medicine than necessary to
save money. Some even forgo other necessities,
including food, in order to afford their
medications. By reducing the prices of pharmaceuticals,
H.R. 2427 will help ensure that
no child has to take less than the recommended
dosage of a prescription medicine
and that no American has to choose between
medication and food.
2003 Ron Paul 91:11
Other opponents of this bill have charged that creating a free market in pharmaceuticals
will impose Canadian style price controls on
prescription drugs. This is nonsense. Nothing
in H.R. 2427 gives the government any additional
power to determine pharmaceutical
prices. H.R. 2427 simply lowers trade barriers,
thus taking a step toward ensuring that Americans
pay a true market price for prescription
drugs. This market price will likely be lower
than the current price because current government
policies raise the price of prescription
drugs above what it would be in the market.
2003 Ron Paul 91:12
Today, Americans enjoy access to many imported goods which are subject to price controls,
and even receive government subsidies,
in their countries of origin. Interestingly, some
people support liberalized trade with Communist
China, which is hardly a free economy,
while opposing H.R. 2427! American policy
has always been based on the principle that
our economy is strengthened by free trade
even when our trading partners engage in
such market distorting policies as price controls
and industrial subsidies. There is no good
reason why pharmaceuticals should be an exception
to the rule.
2003 Ron Paul 91:13
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my disappointment with the numerous D.C.-based
free-market organizations that are opposing
this bill. Anyone following this debate could be
excused for thinking they have entered into a
Twilight Zone episode where libertarian policy
wonks argue that the Federal Government
must protect citizens from purchasing the
pharmaceuticals of their choice, endorse protectionism,
and argue that the Federal Government
has a moral duty to fashion policies
designed to protect the pharmaceutical companies
profit margins. I do not wish to speculate
on the motivation behind this deviation
from free-market principles among groups that
normally uphold the principles of liberty. However,
I do hope the vehemence with which
these organizations are attacking this bill is
motivated by sincere, if misguided, principle,
and not by the large donations these organizations
have received from the pharmaceutical
industry. If the latter is the case, then these
groups have discredited themselves by suggesting
that their free-market principles can be
compromised when it serves the interests of
their corporate donors.
2003 Ron Paul 91:14
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to show that they are serious
about lowering the prices of prescription
drugs and that they trust the people to do
what is in their best interests by supporting
H.R. 2427, the Pharmaceutical Market Access
Act.