Debbie Stabenow

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I appreciate very much his leadership and that of my colleagues that are working so hard on this issue. I rise today to express my deep, deep disappointment that this rule does not allow for a vote on a real solution to the high cost of prescription drugs for older Americans. I want to share just a few words from Connie Lisuzzo from Dearborn, Michigan, who wrote me, as thousands of seniors and disabled have written me from Michigan, pleading for some help so they do not have to choose between getting their food and getting their medications. She writes, ``I am a widow of 18 years. I am now 72 years of age. I find prescriptions going up every day. I have no insurance to cover any of these costs. I call around for the best price I can get. Seems that every visit to the doctor adds one more prescription. Please help us so we won't have to make choices between food and prescriptions.'' Unfortunately, today, Mr. Speaker, this bill does not directly help Connie Lisuzzo and the millions of other seniors who earn above $12,525 a year, barely enough to live on, which, by the way, are the majority of seniors in Michigan. I urge us to pass a bill that makes sense and modernize Medicare.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment that the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) and myself have introduced. This is a very, very important amendment; and as my colleagues will speak tonight, this speaks to something we should all agree on. Regardless of which side Members of the House are on as it relates to other issues relating to gun safety, we all agree that strong enforcement of gun laws is absolutely critical to protect our children and our families. In this vein, I have introduced H.R. 4456, which would similarly to this amendment authorize $150 million for local prosecutors to focus on gun violence. In my district in Michigan I have frequently sat down with my sheriffs and prosecutors and police chiefs and others and asked them what we can do to support their efforts. And just as they strongly support community policing and what has been done by adding more officers in our neighborhoods and communities across the United States, they have been saying loudly that they need additional resources to focus on local prosecution and State prosecution of our gun laws. We understand that there is a serious issue here. Those that are violating our gun laws need to be prosecuted quickly, and our communities are telling us they need more resources to do that. Let us join together this evening, let us show this evening that regardless of the side that an individual is on on other measures relating to gun safety, we all can come together around this amendment and understand that with additional resources to our States and our local communities that we can reduce gun violence, we can prosecute those who are committing crimes with guns, and we can make our streets safer for our children.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I would ask to speak on the point of order and ask that this very, very important program be allowed to proceed. I would ask the chairman to withdraw. I appreciate the comments that he has made, but he is speaking on a baseline that basically cut the program in half last year, so to say we are funding it at the same level does not give us what our communities need. In Michigan we have seen over 3,400 police officers added to our communities. It has dramatically reduced crime. It is critical for the communities and the families in Michigan that we fully fund community policing with all of the technology, all of the other efforts to make sure that this moves forward at its complete and fully funded level. I would ask the chairman to withdraw that in keeping with the strong support for fully funding of what is the most important crime-fighting effort we have seen in this country in many, many years, which is the community policing program.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, on April 12, I led an hour of debate on the topic of prescription drug coverage for senior citizens. I read three letters from around the state from seniors who shared their personal stories. On the 12th, I made a commitment to continue to read a different letter every week until the House enacts reform. This week I will read a letter from Crystal Pearl Beaudry of Marquette, Michigan. Text of the letter: ``Mrs. Stabenow, We are an elderly couple--78 and 76 years ``young,'' and we sure do complain about the costs of [prescription] drugs. Our pension is only $1,200 [per month] and [by] the time we pay [for] our rent and food, eye glasses and dental work, ect., then try to pay for our drugs--which rise every time we need a refill--there is not much left! It seem that every time we have a doctor appointment, they either add a new prescription or change it . . . Also, at [my husband's] place of employment, if you retired before the age of 62, you lost $200 a month. He was ``laid off'' at 61 and a half. So again, we lost more income. It doesn't seem fair for the elderly! We have worked all of our lives and end up this way and this is our beloved U.S.A.? Below is a list of drugs: [price is per month] Novasac..........................................................$37.99 Prilosec.........................................................106.00 Allegra...........................................................33.29 Nitro..............................................................7.00 Premarin..........................................................22.97 Toprol............................................................33.29 Indur.............................................................43.94 Mysoloq...........................................................18.99 Premarin Cream....................................................40.99 Lipitor...........................................................49.99 Synlar.............................................................9.14 Aclovate..........................................................15.89

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I am very proud today to stand as one of the sponsors of this amendment. I want to thank my colleagues, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen), and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), for their leadership on this issue. I stood on the floor a year ago asking that we fully fund veterans health care through the independent budget. We were not successful at that time, although there was a lot of discussion about the importance of veterans' health care. We have yet to fully fund at the level that has been put forward by the veterans' organizations to fully fund veterans' health care. This amendment is supported by the Veterans for Foreign Wars, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the Disabled American Veterans, and AMVETS. This amendment is about keeping our word. Very simple. It is very simple. As my colleagues have said, in 1998, in the transportation bill, we said that dollars would be removed for service-related tobacco illnesses. Rather than moving ahead at that time, in fact, we called on the VA, in the budget bill, to take all steps necessary to recover from the tobacco companies. So this was 2 years ago we passed a bill that says all steps necessary to recover from the tobacco companies. Two years later, we are here with a bill that says they cannot sue the tobacco companies. What happened in the last 2 years? What happened is a sleight of hand and an unwillingness to keep commitments that were made to our veterans just 2 years ago. And I am deeply concerned about that. We told them that they had to be part of the tobacco suit to recover costs so that they could treat tobacco-related illnesses. Now we are saying they cannot do that. It does not make any sense. We know that the VA spends $4 billion annually on treating tobacco- related illnesses, the Defense Department spends $1.6 billion. If we allow them to continue to be a part of the suit, under the Medical Care Recovery Act, any recovery of costs will be returned back to them so that our veterans can be cared for. And this is tens of billions of dollars. In addition to that, there are implications for the Medicare Trust Fund that are very important. Medicare spends $20.5 billion a year on tobacco-related illnesses for our older Americans, seniors, disabled. Under the suit, the Medicare Secondary Payor Provisions, any recovery of these costs would go right back to Medicare; and if the lawsuit is funded and successful, these dollars could add years to the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund, continue health care for older Americans and the disabled for years into the future, and, most importantly, allow us to fund a prescription drug benefit. I have been deeply involved in this issue. For the last year, I have had a hotline set up in the State of Michigan asking people to share their stories of situations where they are struggling to pay the costs of prescription drugs. I have been deluged with letters and phone calls, people sitting down every night at the table, do I get my food? do I pay my electric bill? or do I get my medications? If we allow this lawsuit to go forward, we can do something about that. If we allow these funds to be transferred to support this effort, we can hold an industry accountable that needs to be held accountable and we can make sure that our veterans have the commitment kept to them that we made 2 years ago to support their efforts to increase dollars available for veterans' health care as a part of this lawsuit. It is time to stop protecting the tobacco companies in this House of Representatives, and it is time to start keeping our word to our veterans.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, on April 12, I led an hour of debate on the topic of prescription drug coverage for senior citizens. I read three letters from around the state from seniors who shared their personal stories. On the 12th, I made a commitment to continue to read a different letter every week until the House enacts reform. This is the seventh week in a row that Congress has been in session in which I have returned to the House floor to read another letter from a Michigan senior citizen. This week, I will read a letter from Edith DeYoung of Spring Lake, Michigan. Before I read Ms. DeYoung's letter, I would like to share some troubling statistics released just yesterday in President Clinton's report entitled, ``Prescription Drug Coverage and the Rural Medicare Beneficiaries: A Critical Unmet Need.'' Although Ms. DeYoung is fortunate to live next to a larger city in Michigan, Muskegon, there are many rural communities in our state, particularly in the Upper Peninsula that have unique health care needs. As a member of the Rural Health Care Caucus in the House of Representatives, I have been working to ensure that those needs are understood and met. The President's report documents that seniors living in rural America face real challenges in accessing health services, especially prescription drugs. Senior citizens who live in rural communities represent almost 25 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries, tend to have a greater need for prescription drug coverage, but have fewer coverage options. Their incomes are lower, access to pharmacies more limited, and out-of-pocket spending higher. According to the President's report, rural beneficiaries are over 60 percent more likely to fail to get needed prescription drugs due to cost. A greater proportion of rural elderly spend a large percent of their income on prescription drugs. In fact, rural senior citizens pay over 25 percent more in out-of-pocket expenses for prescription drugs than urban senior citizens. Finally, rural senior citizens on Medicare are 50 percent less likely to have any prescription drug coverage. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight an important provision in the Democratic prescription drug proposal that does not get as much attention as some of the other important provisions that offer coverage for Medicare seniors. The Democratic plan includes assurance that resident in rural communities will have full access to all prescription drug benefits. Now, I will read the letter from Edith DeYoung. ``I'm writing this letter to you concerning medical prescriptions for people who have reached 65 years of age. I was getting Medicaid but now that I've reached the Golden Years, age 65, I can't get help from Medicaid and Medicare does not cover prescriptions. I get $915 a month on Social Security. I would like to know how you can pay rent, lights, and, oh yes, groceries, and still have to pay $437 on a spend-down for medicine that leaves me $478 a month to pay all the above and live on. I am sending you a copy of the prescriptions I get every year. I sure can't afford any other insurance. So please, help the bill pass and help us that are 65 and need it really bad. As a senior citizen, I would like to hear back from your office. Sincerely, Edith DeYoung.'' The time is now to enact real prescription drug legislation that includes a prescription drug benefit in Medicare. Proposals have been offered by the other party that would essentially offer a subsidy for a private insurance plan--that may or may not be available to all senior citizens. I am especially worried about seniors living in rural communities. And, as Edith DeYoung said, herself, she can't afford additional insurance. The Democratic plan, on the other hand, would provide her with the real help she needs. The Democratic plan would create a Medicare benefit that, because of Ms. DeYoung's income level, would cover all of her prescription drug costs.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, on April 12, I led an hour of debate on the topic of prescription drug coverage for senior citizens. I read three letters from around the state from seniors who shared their personal stories. On the 12th, I made a commitment to continue to read a different letter every week until the House enacts reform. This week I will read a letter from Julia Kanopsky of Livonia Michigan. In conjunction with Mother's Day, the Older Women's League (OWL) published a report entitled, ``Prescription for Change: Why women need a Medicare Drug Benefit.'' The report describes the special problems older women face in obtaining prescriptions. More than one in three women on Medicare lack prescription drug coverage. In 1997, 2.6 million women on Medicare spent more than $1200 a year on their medications and another 2.4 million women spent between $612 and $1200 a year on pharmaceuticals therapies. The high costs of prescription drugs are especially hard on older women, most of whom live on fixed incomes. More than half of women age 65 and over have personal annual incomes of less than $10,000 a year and three out of four have incomes under $15,000. On average, women's overall out-of-pocket spending for prescription drugs is higher than their male counterparts. In 1999, women on Medicare were projected to spend $430 a year on medications, compared to $380 for men. Women are expected to make up a greater share (58 percent) of beneficiaries with high ($500-$999) or very high ($1,000) annual out- of-pocket drug costs in 1999. Women make up more than six in ten (61.4 percent) Medicare beneficiaries with hypertension and women with hypertension have higher overall out-of-pocket spending for prescription drugs ($800) than men do ($694). OWL shares the disturbing fact that Medicare beneficiaries without drug coverage are less likely to receive drug therapies compared to those with coverage. In 1996, women without coverage used 24 percent fewer prescriptions than did women with coverage. I agree with the conclusions in the OWL report that these numbers cry out for the inclusion of a prescription drug benefit in Medicare. I will now read the letter from Julia Kanopsky: I was so thrilled to find your address I was allowed to express myself on [the] high price of prescriptions. I am one of the least fortunate ones who does not have any . . . health care . . . [I have a] pension [and] when I pay for my three prescriptions for heart and blood pressure, and 2 for pain, pay for my Blue Cross, half of my check is used up and every time you get a refill on prescription drugs, the price differs. Blue Cross [also] goes up. I [have] talked to so many seniors like myself and it has us worried to death. I just wish the government would take an interest in different problems like this, to curb like prices. I eat two meals a day . . . any more hike in health cost, I'll have to go to one meal. [I get] a little Social Security raise, and then . . . property tax and utilities go up. I just can't win. Voice your opinion, Debbie! Maybe someone will listen. Thank you, Julia Kanopsky. P.S. I'm too old to get a job if I were younger, maybe [I would]. I could pick up a job to at least pay for prescriptions for Healthcare. I'm trying to maintain my home and being independent, these prices are scaring me. The time is now to enact legislation that will reduce the price for prescription drugs for seniors and that will include a prescription drug benefit in the Medicare program.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my grave concern over the ongoing trial in Iran of 13 Iranian Jews on questionable charges of spying. The world should know that we are watching this case closely. If Iran truly wants to join the community of nations it should ensure an open and fair trial. The Jews facing trial in Iran have been held without due process for over one year. The Clinton administration has rightly put Iran on notice that we are watching these proceedings closely and we will hold the Iranian regime responsible for their actions. Mr Speaker, we are seeing reports in the press that describe the social isolation of many in Iran's 25,000-strong Jewish community in the wake of this trial. Several shops owned by Iranian Jews have reportedly been attacked in Tehran. Other reports out of Iran claim that school children are treating Jewish classmates with contempt, and some adults have stopped going to work out of fear or shame. There was some hope that the overwhelming election of President Khatemi would mean a more moderate Iranian government, but so far this has not been the case. The regime's record of closing 19 newspapers over the last month is another reminder of the failure of Iran's ruling class in this regard. There is no better way to regain this promise than to ensure freedom and justice for the 13 Iranian Jews on trial in Shiraz. We here in the U.S. and around the world must be vigilant in pressing for this outcome.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida so much for yielding me this time. He has been such a leader. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 331. As we know, this resolution commends Israel for its decision to withdraw its troops from southern Lebanon and for taking risks for peace and the Middle East. And we should be commending them, all of us together, unanimously hopefully, for the risks that they have taken for peace. This resolution also calls upon the United Nations Security Council to recognize Israel's fulfillment of its obligations under Security Council Resolution 425 and to provide the necessary resources for the United Nations interim force in Lebanon to implement its mandate under that resolution. It also insists upon the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon territory so that Lebanon may exercise sovereignty throughout its territory. It is also important that this resolution calls upon the entire international community to ensure that southern Lebanon does not once again become a staging ground for attacks against Israel, and to cooperate in bringing about the reconstruction and reintegration of southern Lebanon. It is important that we are here this evening. It is important that we are here recognizing the risks that have been taken for peace, and I hope that we will all join together in supporting Israel's actions, the independence of Lebanon, and a secure Middle East peace.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise once again on the floor of the House of Representatives to call upon this House to pass prescription drug coverage for senior citizens and those who are disabled under Medicare and to work for other strategies to lower the cost of prescription drugs for all family members. Today in particular, I am rising to read a letter, as I am every week now rising to share a letter from one of my constituents in Michigan. This week I would like to read a letter from a 76-year-old woman who is a breast cancer survivor from Fenton, Michigan. She is the widow of a disabled veteran. I want to speak more about the fact that we need to be focused on our veterans who do not have prescription drug coverage and are struggling to pay the cost of their medications. Now, as we are approaching Memorial Day, we need to be honoring them by addressing this serious health care issue. But first let me read the letter. Dear Mrs. Stabenow, I am writing to you concerning the high cost of prescription drugs, which, I believe, you are on a campaign to cut the cost of for senior citizens who are on a fixed income and need these drugs. I am the widow of a disabled veteran, who, at the age of 32, was on total disability. I went to work to help out, as we needed the extra money. We had two children. My mother lived with us and took care of the children. My mother became too ill to take care of them, so I had to quit my job and stay home. It was hard financially, but we managed to get by, living on a strict budget. My husband's disability was a condition that he needed me around him all the time. When the boys got older, I tried to work again, but my husband begged me to stay home with him, which I did. My husband died when he was 50. I was able to save a little money, which I intended to use to enjoy a little more life than I had been able to. In 1995, I was diagnosed with breast cancer, which I went through and got on with my life. In December 1999, I had another mastectomy, which I hope I will recover from as well as I did in the case of my first mastectomy. Since the time I was diagnosed with cancer, the cost of my drugs has spiraled up and up. I live on a fixed income. I also have to pay for health insurance. Believe me, I am not complaining, ``poor little me.'' There are many people worse off than me, and this is why I am writing. Maybe my letter will help others. I will give you an estimate of what I am paying every month for drugs. She proceeds through a long list. Her cancer medication is $180 for 31 tablets. Her high blood pressure medication is $21 for a month's supply. Her blood thinner medication is $20 for a month. Nasal spray is $58 for a month. And on and on. The total for each month for my constituent is $377.85 and it continues to go up and up, as she indicates in her letter. She indicates here that she hopes that everyone who needs these drugs will be able to afford them and live a healthier life. Mr. Speaker, today I rise, as we approach Memorial Day, to recognize the fact that not only my constituent from Fenton, Michigan, but four million veterans and four million spouses of veterans in this country have no help for their prescription drug coverage. We are talking about people who were willing to lay their lives on the line. This Monday we will honor those who gave their lives in service for our Nation. And in light of this and these statistics, I believe we need to call upon all of us to act immediately to address the issue of the high cost of prescription drugs, particularly for our older Americans where we have the opportunity by just simply passing Medicare coverage, by modernizing Medicare, to cover the way health care is provided today with prescription drug coverage. We can honor our veterans by fulfilling the promise of health care that was made to them. Each one of our servicemen and women, as they come to the service of our country, they sign on the dotted line; and we, in return, indicate to them the promise of health care. Not only are we not fulfilling the health care promise to our veterans as it relates to full funding health care for our veterans, but when we have 4 million of our veterans, 4 million of their spouses that do not have any access to help cover their prescription drug coverage, we need to act. There is something wrong; and we need to take it very, very seriously. It is not right when someone who has cared for her disabled husband, someone who is a disabled veteran, his wife, who goes on to have health care problems herself, who has saved a little bit in her life now finds herself using all of those little bit of savings in order to pay for her medication and then find herself on a fixed income paying almost $400 a month for medications. We need to act. It is time now to lower the cost of prescription drugs and to modernize Medicare.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join this bi-partisan effort to improve the provisions of section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. This much needed revision of section 110 seeks to ensure that the law enforcement objectives of the 1996 law are preserved without adversely impacting Michigan's strong tourism and Trade industry. Mr. Speaker, to those of us who always opposed the provisions of section 110 that would produce enormous backups at our borders, this bill represents a much needed and long awaited compromise. The people of the great State of Michigan, some of whom cross the international border to Canada every day, are well served by this revision. I look forward to finding further ways we can improve our security and ensure the free flow of tourists and goods through the state of Michigan.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Home for Children during their 75th Anniversary Gala Celebration. The VFW National Home for Children, located in Onondaga Township in rural Ingham County, has been serving our country, our state, our families and our children for 75 years. Through the initial efforts and determination of Amy Ross, a young woman from Detroit, this unique and cherished place has grown in the last several decades to include over 70 buildings on 629 acres nicely situated on the Grand River. The VFW National Home for Children has created an inclusive community to assist families of those who served our country who can benefit from the assistance of a caring family environment. The National Home provides a variety of structural programs to help children develop the many skills that will enable them to succeed as young adults. Each of these programs, such as family living environment for orphans, single parent programs and pre-school education and day care, provide essential assistance for our veterans and their loved ones. In addition, the Home's Education Department has a library, media center and computers that allow everyone to hone useful skills in our information-age connected economy. Tutoring is provided for students as well. Mr. Speaker, the National Home also provides a dynamic roster of extra-curricular events throughout the year. These diverse activities include trips to cultural destinations throughout the state and beyond, such as the Detroit Zoo, fishing on Lake Erie, watching hockey games in Kalamazoo, canoeing on the Grand River, cross-county skiing and spending a day at Cedar Point in Ohio. I was proud to support the VFW National Home for Children as a state legislator, and I am proud to rise today to commend the VFW National Home for Children on their 75th anniversary. This is a milestone which highlights many decades of service and commitment to the betterment of our future leaders.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 701, the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999, and in support of the motion to recommit the bill to guarantee that any expenditure of funds will not jeopardize Social Security and Medicare. I strongly believe that eliminating the national debt and securing the financial future of Social Security and Medicare should be our top priorities. We must take advantage of our economic good times to secure these successful programs and rid this nation of its public debt. During consideration of H.R. 701, Congressman Shadegg offered an amendment that purported to accomplish these goals. While I strongly supported the spirit of my colleague's amendment, it appears that its real intent was to prevent the strong conservation programs in the bill from being funded. The amendment stated that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) must provide ``certification'' that the public debt will be fully paid by 2013, that there will not be an on-budget deficit, and that the Social Security and Medicare trust funds will not fall into a deficit in the next five years before any CARA funding could be dispersed. As the CBO has asserted, it is not able to make such certifications, but can only provide estimates. Because of these technical imperfections in the Shadegg proposal, I believe his amendment would permanently block all CARA funding. For this reason, I joined 207 of my colleagues in voting against this amendment, and supported the motion to recommit the bill to ensure that Social Security and Medicare would truly be protected. I am a cosponsor of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act CARA, because I strongly support increasing the federal investment in conservation. This bill will make an important, dramatic change in the funding of conservation programs. It establishes a permanent funding source for these programs by setting aside royalties earned from off- shore oil and gas drilling. This funding will be directed toward, coastal conservation, land acquisition through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, wildlife conservation, urban parks and recreation, historic preservation, federal and Indian land restoration, and endangered species recovery. Additional funds are also designated to increase federal payments for the Payment in Lieu of Taxes payments and the Refuge Revenue Sharing programs. I urge my colleagues to support his bipartisan legislation.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening again to talk about a critical issue facing all families in the United States, and particularly seniors, and that is the high cost of prescription drugs and the lack of coverage by Medicare. This is a critical issue that faces Michigan families. I hear from seniors every day about their struggles, choosing between the cost of food, being able to pay the utility bill, being able to get their medications. Last summer I set up a hot line in Michigan asking those who had stories to tell to call and share those with me, and also for individuals to write me letters and send me copies of their prescription drug bills. I have received hundreds of those from across the state. I have begun sharing those each week on the floor of this House. It is critical that we pass prescription drug coverage under Medicare, to modernize Medicare to cover the way health care is provided today, and do it as soon as possible, and I intend to be here and share stories every week until that happens. We know that there are 12 percent of the population that are seniors, but seniors purchase 33 percent of all prescription drugs. Over one- third of the 39 million Medicare beneficiaries, 15.5 million people, have no prescription drug coverage at all, and millions have insufficient coverage or must pay expensive copays. So you are talking about individuals, many of whom are living on Social Security, with a small pension, who are now finding themselves in a situation where they are needing to use medications, and the costs are going up and up. What do they do? Too many of them decide, do I buy my groceries today, or can I stretch it just a little bit longer and be able to afford my medications? On top of that, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, drug prices rose by 306 percent between 1981 and 1999, while the consumer price index rose 99 percent during the same period, so we are seeing drug prices going up three times as fast as the consumer price index or other kinds of products. The price for prescription drugs is expected to be 12 to 15 percent higher than in 1999. Not only are costs rising, but the volume of prescription drug use is also increasing. The number of prescriptions is expected to increase from 3 billion today to 4 billion prescriptions by 2004. So what we are seeing is, as more and more people are using prescription drugs, it is wonderful that we have the new discoveries and the fact we have that available, and the fact that people can live longer and healthier lives is wonderful, but we are seeing a product going up three times as fast as the consumer price index in the pricing structure, and we see too many seniors that do not have any help at all for covering the costs, even though seniors are the ones that use the most prescription drugs. It makes no sense. We also see that prescription drug coverage now is very much a part of the way health care is provided today. When Medicare was set up in 1965, it was in-patient care, operations and prescription drugs in the hospital. Now we see most of the care being done on an outpatient basis, being done through home care or prescription drugs that allow people to avoid having surgery and to be able to live at home with their family. This is a good thing, but only if we make sure that Medicare is modernized to cover the new way health care is provided. It is time for that to happen. It is past time for that to happen. I would like to share now a letter from Louise Jarnac of Cheboygan, Michigan. I am very grateful that she wrote in to me and shared her comments and thoughts. Dear Congresswoman Stabenow, I am sending three of my prescription drug bills and one of my brother's. I sure hope you can get some help for the elderly. It seems everything is more important than our health. I am 80 years old and my brother is 78 years old. These prescription drug prices take a big chunk out of our Social Security, since that is our full income. I am a widow and live alone, therefore, I have all the expenses all by myself. The last time I got my prescriptions it was $99.99 for Prevacid, this time it is $130.49. Most of the time I can't afford it and I go without until I can get it again. I think Social Security should be used for our security and not for other things. Thank you, Louise Jarnac. Mr. Speaker, Prevacid, like another commonly known drug--Prilosec, is prescribed to inhibit gastric secretions. It is used to treat heartburn or other symptoms associated with GERD (Gastroesophageal reflux disease), ulcers, or other acid related disorders. Without treating these symptoms, Mrs. Jarnac's condition could develop into cancer. Furthermore, these diseases are extremely painful, and Mrs. Jarnac is unable to afford the medication on a regular basis to control the pain. Mr. Speaker, it is time we do something about this, and make sure our seniors are not put in this position.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, on April 12, I led an hour of debate on the topic of prescription drug coverage for senior citizens. I read three letters from seniors around the state of Michigan who shared their personal stories with me. On that day, I made a commitment to continue to read a different constituent letter every week until the House enacts reform. This week, I will read a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Arnold Crook. Modern medicine has changed dramatically over the last three decades. When Medicare was created in 1965, most medical treatment was provided in hospitals. Surgery and other inpatient treatments were the norm and Medicare coverage for long hospital stays was a priority. Today, with the benefit of breakthrough pharmaceutical discoveries, many diseases can be controlled and treated with medication rather than lengthy hospital stays. Routine surgeries and procedures are performed on an outpatient basis. Medicare needs to be modernized to reflect these changes in our nation's healthcare delivery system. The number one advance in medical science of the 20th century is the development of life-saving drugs. It is critical that Medicare covers prescription drugs, so that seniors can have access to the best and most medically advanced treatments. Furthermore, the price of prescription drugs is rising at a dramatic rate and we need to do something to make prescription drugs more affordable. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics, drug prices rose by 306 percent between 1981 and 1999, while the Consumer Price Index rose just 99 percent during the same period. In other words, prescription drug prices have increased at a rate three times higher than inflation. The letter I will read tonight comes from a couple who reside in Hillsdale, MI. I am saddened to say, their story is not unique. I have asked seniors from all over Michigan to send me their personal stories about the prices they pay for prescription drugs and many of them send me copies of their bills. Mr. and Mrs. Arnold Crook sent me a bill that shows they paid over $1,125 for their prescription drugs last year. Here is their story. ``Madam, we have a income of $800 a month between the two of us. Beside, we have our household costs. We can't go [out] or do anything because [it] takes all of our income for the cost to live. Some weeks [we] wonder just how long we can go on. It [our prescription drug bill] keeps going up in cost and [we] cannot live. Mr. and Mrs. Arnold Crook.'' Mr. and Mrs. Crook and thousands of older Americans like them need our help. Creating a Medicare prescription drug benefit to help cover the costs of their medications would make a big difference in their finances and in the quality of their lives. These seniors are a part of the ``greatest generation ever'' who helped build the strong economy we are enjoying today. Our nation is in economic good times and I believe it is time to fix the Medicare program so that it includes a prescription drug benefit.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to Reverend Roger Pohl who has been called to become the new director of the Ecumenical Center and International Residence (ECIR) at the University of Michigan. Reverend Pohl currently is senior minister of the Pilgrim Congregational United Church of Christ in Lansing, Michigan. He serves on the Human Relations Board of the City of Lansing and as chairperson of the community's Alliance Against Hate. A 1969 graduate of Yale University Divinity School, Reverend Pohl has demonstrated immeasurable dedication to both domestic and international cooperation and understanding. This is a time to both say goodbye to a dear friend on behalf of our Lansing church home and community as well as to extend warm heartfelt congratulations on his new job. The campus ministry that Reverend Pohl will lead has three main objectives: (1) to facilitate global education in the hope that peace may prevail; (2) to promote the ethical and religious bases for enduring friendships; and (3) to be an international community where people of the world may learn to live together and care for one another. Furthering international understanding, global friendship, and interfaith dialogue are areas in which Reverend Pohl indisputably has a wealth of knowledge, experience, and longstanding commitment. I thank Reverend Pohl for the example he has set for people across the globe and wish him continued success as he prepares for this worthy journey of multicultural leadership.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, as a Michigan State University graduate, it brings me great pleasure to honor three outstanding members of the Spartan's National Championship Basketball Team. These young men, each hailing from Flint, have reminded us all, through their own dedication, commitment, discipline, and hard work, of what it truly means to be a champion. Mateen Cleaves was the motivational leader of this talented basketball team and kept them focused all the way to the NCAA National Championship Title. After returning for his senior year, Mateen was sidelined for half the regular season with a foot injury. He came back to lead the Spartans to a Big Ten Championship, #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament, and a National Title. Described by Coach Tom Izzo as the ``hardest worker'' he has ever coached, Mateen re-injured his foot in the final game of the tournament only to come back into the game and finish as the MVP of the Final Four. Morris Peterson emerged as one of the conference's top players last year and finished his final season as the Big Ten Player of the Year. Not only did he receive this award but was also voted to his second All-American and Big Ten First Team. Throughout the year, the Spartans turned to ``Mo P'' to provide leadership and results. He did both. He led the team in scoring and was the consistent ``go to guy'' when the game was on the line. Charlie Bell just finished his third year with the Spartan Basketball program. He had to make a very awkward adjustment this year, due to the absence of Mateen. Charlie, a shooting guard by nature, was forced to play point guard for the first half of the season. He not only handled the change well, he led the team to an impressive record while running the Spartan offense. Charlie was elected to the third team All Big Ten and the All Final Four Team. Thankfully, Charlie will be with the Spartans next year as we try to repeat as NCAA National Champions. Beyond the success of each of you on the court, you three have fully represented the values of ``unity'', ``teamwork'', ``leadership'', and ``excellence''--both on and off the court. You have been role models whose contributions have enriched your native Flint, MSU and the State of Michigan, as well as the entire nation. I wish each of you a future filled with continued success, happiness, and prosperity and I want to thank you for all the excitement and joy that you brought into the lives of Spartans around the globe.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) very much for all of his efforts. He is tireless in his efforts coming to the floor of the House not only on the important issue of prescription drug coverage and lowering the cost for seniors but the Patients' Bill of Rights and some other important issues for health care. So I appreciate his leadership on all of these important health care issues. As my colleagues know, I have been involved in the great State of Michigan in an effort that I have called the prescription drug failure fairness campaign, where we have put together a hotline for people to call and share their stories. I have encouraged people to send me copies of their high prescription drug bills so I can bring them to the floor. And I am continually coming down and sharing stories. I started on April 12 of this year bringing letters down to the floor. I am down again. And I am going to continue to share stories of people in Michigan until we can get this right and until we can pass a plan that really does the job. As my colleague indicates, the plan, unfortunately, that is being proposed on the other side of the aisle I believe takes us back to where we were before Medicare. Before Medicare, half the seniors in the country could not find health care insurance or could not afford it. So to say that we are going to rely on that same kind of system for prescription drugs just does not make any sense. Medicare needs to be modernized. It is simple. Everybody understands it. It covers the way health care was provided back in 1965 when it was set up in the hospital, operations, prescriptions in the hospital. As we know, most care is provided now on an outpatient basis in the home and with prescription drugs. And so, it is critical. I believe it is the number one quality-of-life issue for older Americans today is to address the issue of the high prescription drug costs and to modernize Medicare. I want to first commend Newsweek this week, who has a feature story called ``The Real Drug War.'' They talk about this problem and what is happening. I urge my colleagues to have a chance to take a look at this article. They do mention what a number of us are doing, the fact that I did take a bus trip to Canada with a number of the seniors that are from Michigan. We lowered the costs by 53 percent just crossing a bridge. Just crossing a bridge from Detroit to Windsor, we lowered the cost 53 percent. I also want to commend Newsweek, who is doing live talk. They are the hosting a live talk on the Internet tomorrow at noon. So for anyone listening who would like to participate and share their story at noon tomorrow, Eastern Daylight Time, they can log on to Newsweek.com. I am anxious to see what people are sharing through that mechanism. I think it is important to recognize that in the last 20 years we have seen a huge increase in the cost of prescription drugs. The price increases from 1981 to 1999 have gone up 306 percent, while at the same time the Consumer Price Index has gone up by about 96 percent. So, in other words, the costs of medications have tripled, have gone up 3 times as much as the cost of living for everything else, which is a critical issue. As the gentleman mentioned also, the second piece is price discrimination. If one has insurance, if they are in an HMO, then they have somebody fighting for them to go out and negotiate a group discount. If they are a senior or if they are a woman who has breast cancer, and we have done a study in my district on women with breast cancer and the kinds of drugs they need to use and the costs, or if one is a child, any family member who walks into the drugstore without insurance, they are out of luck. They pay whatever the market will bear; and unfortunately, the market today for the uninsured is at least twice, if not three or four times, higher than someone with insurance. We can start with Medicare. Medicare can fight for the seniors of this country if Medicare coverage is put into place so they can negotiate a group discount, just like every other insurance carrier. I would like this evening to share a letter from Mrs. Johnnie Arnold from Decatur, Michigan. I am so grateful for Mrs. Arnold's letter, and I wanted to share it. It is like so many letters that we have all received. She says, ``Dear Congresswoman Stabenow, I am writing about my prescription drugs. I am 76 years old and get $280 a month drawing from my husband's Social Security. He is a notch baby,'' which is another problem, ``and only gets $661 a month.'' So that is $941 a month that they receive. ``Our supplemental insurance costs us $281.34 a month. We are having a struggle for my drugs I need. I have had open heart surgery and complete thyroid removal for a cancer. I have high blood pressure and I have had aorta aneurysm surgery. I am in a wheelchair part-time and have been turned down three times for SSI now. My Vasolin high blood pressure medication is $65 for a month's supply. My Claritin is $80 for a month's supply. My other medications are an additional $85.26, and I have additional medications, not counting the Claritin, that come to $150.26. I do not buy the Claritin every month because when you add up all of my drugs after my supplemental insurance payment, I cannot afford them. ``Lasix used to be $6.27. Now it is $18.25. It takes all my husband's Social Security to pay utilities, insurance and his supplemental insurance.'' So it takes all of his Social Security to pay utilities, insurance and his supplemental insurance. That is two-thirds of their income. ``Help us, if you can. Mrs. Johnnie Arnold.'' We need to pay attention to this. We need to have a sense of urgency. Mr. and Mrs. Arnold are every month literally trying to decide do we buy our food now, do we afford this medication, that medication, do we pay the electric bill, how do we survive and remain at home and keep our health and benefit from the medications that are currently available today? I think Newsweek is right. That is the real drug war. This is the drug war we are fighting right now, the drug war to lower the prices of prescription drugs for everyone; and for seniors who use the majority of medications this is life or death for too many people, and it is a situation that we can correct. Instead of putting up those kinds of programs that just sound good on the surface but do not do anything, to do what I know the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is going to talk about tonight, what he is going to talk about in terms of the plan that we are supporting that really does something, now is the time to do it. We have economic good times. If we do not do it now, when do we do it? If we do not get it right now, we never will. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) very much for allowing me to participate in this important discussion.

Ms. STABENOW. Right.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 179th Greek Independence Day. On March 25, 1821, the Greek people started a battle that would lead to independence after more than 400 years of Ottoman rule. Fortunately, Greek culture survived the Ottomans. Greek civilization inspired the framers of our constitution. The Greek political tradition had profound influence on our founding fathers and helped shape America's political foundation. The pursuit of freedom is just one of the many ideals which have historically bound us together. Greek-Americans have made such a enormous contribution to American culture and American life. Today, Greek culture flourishes in America-- in places like Detroit, Michigan and elsewhere in the Great Lakes States. As a member of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, I want to take this opportunity to salute the Greek people on their historic achievement. Greece is a dedicated U.S. ally. I congratulate Greece for 179 years of independent rule and for a legacy that will last forever. My fellow colleagues, please join me in honoring Greek Independence Day.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, today I join with my colleagues in what has become an annual event in which none of us take great joy in. Today, the Turkish government still denies the Armenian genocide and it does so to its own detriment. All of us would like to see the denial in Ankara end. The Armenian genocide happened. The historic fact, Mr. Speaker, is that 1.5 million Armenians were killed and over 500,000 deported from 1894 to 1921. On April 24, 1915, 300 Armenian leaders, writers and intellectuals were rounded up, deported and killed. 5000 other poor Armenians were killed in their homes. The Turkish government continues to deny the Armenian genocide and claims that Armenians were only removed from the eastern war zone. America has been enriched in countless ways from the survivors of the Armenian genocide who have come here. As a representative from Michigan, I want to especially highlight that we have been blessed by the contributions of the Armenian communities. Today I rise to call upon the Republic of Turkey, an ally of the United States, to admit what happened. Mr. Speaker, we want Turkey to see its history for what it is so it can see its future for what it can be. Let us all rise today to commemorate the Armenian genocide and hope that events like it never happen again.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I thank my colleague, who has been a terrific leader, really a pioneer, in this effort. He has been down here making the case. As the gentleman says, there is more than one strategy. There is a discount by allowing pharmacies to purchase directly from the Federal price schedules. There is opening up the borders to allow people to bring drugs back in, or to do mail order. Fundamentally what I believe is the long-term solution that we have to come to is taking the health care system for our seniors in the country today and modernizing it to cover the costs of medications. That is the way health care is provided today. We have an opportunity, a once-in-a-generation opportunity where we have choices we can make with a good economy. In the long run, this saves money by making sure that we keep people healthy and out of the hospital, and allow them to be able to continue to live vigorous lives and be able to have their health care needs met. It makes no sense not to do it right. I want to thank the gentleman for joining me. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), who has been a terrific leader in Northern Michigan, in the Upper Peninsula. He has been doing studies and meeting with people weekly to hear their concerns. I know the gentleman shares our concern and determination.

Ms. STABENOW. I thank the gentleman very much for his efforts. I know this adds another dimension in our rural parts of the country in Michigan, up north in the UP, where it is more difficult to get to a hospital or other facilities as well. We need to really be strengthening our home health care and medications so people can be living at home and living with family, and having the opportunity to be independent. They have longer distances as well to drive, and it complicates health care provision, I know. I want to thank the gentleman for all of his work. He is at the front end of what is happening, and I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) for that. Mr. Speaker, let me just stress again that we have within our means the ability to solve this problem. Medicare was started in 1965 because half of our seniors could not find insurance or could not afford it. It has now become a great American success story of having a promise that every senior has some basic health care available to them once they reach age 65 or if they are disabled. What we have today, though, is a false promise, because we cannot provide the kind of health care or access to the kind of health care that is practiced today. That is predominantly through our prescription drug strategies for providing health care. More and more of health care is provided through medications, and if the health care plan does not cover medications, people are in very tough shape. Our goal is to modernize Medicare to cover the way health care is provided today. That is it. We are hoping that our colleagues will want to do that. My greatest fear is that there will be proposals put forward to subsidize the high cost, help seniors pay for the high prices, but not do anything to get a handle on the prices or bring some accountability to those prices. We need to have somebody negotiating on behalf of seniors through Medicare to get the same kind of group discounts that people do if they go through a private insurance company or through an HMO. That is what can happen. The purchasing power of Medicare can make that happen, if we act this year. We have the ability to act, we have the resources to act, and we can do that on behalf of all of our seniors if we have the political will to make it happen. We did it with Y2K and we can do it with Medicare and prescription drugs for our seniors. Mr. Speaker, I know the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) has been from northern Ohio, bordering right on Michigan, and we have a lot of ways in which we work together fighting for our seniors, for our families. She has also been a champion on this issue, as well. I will just say in conclusion that we are going to keep going every week, every week, every week, until this gets fixed, because we can do no less for our seniors.

Ms. STABENOW. I would reclaim my time and thank my colleague for that information and would be happy to join with him in the issue of generic drugs, as well, as we look at how we lower the costs of prescriptions, because there are a number of different strategies that need to happen today, that need to address how we bring more competition with generics, how we allow the prices to go down because we have Medicare negotiating a group discount. Right now seniors do not have anybody. If they do not have private insurance, a senior citizen today does not have anybody negotiating a group discount for them while others do have people, whether it is insurance coverage or their HMO. Let me also share the information: I do have enclosures that I appreciate Joe and Ethyl sending me their expenditures from January 1, 1999, until November 6, 1999. Mr. Korn's total prescription drug cost for this 10-month period was $1,515.36. The total cost for Ethyl, who admits she cannot afford everything she needs, was $324.02. One of my concerns I hear from friends of mine who are physicians are concerns that people are not purchasing what they need, or that they are taking it the wrong way. I had a physician in Michigan join me at an event and share the fact that he had lost a patient because she was taking her medication every other day, instead of when she needed it, every day. I have had stories of individuals talking to me about cutting their pills in half so they will last longer. This does not make sense. In our country, with the greatest innovations, the greatest health care innovations, the best research, we need to make sure that our seniors have access to these new medical options that are available, and are not picking between their food, paying their bills and their medicines, and that is what is happening with too many people today. I want to share one more story, and that is Donald Booms from Lake City, Michigan. I very much appreciate Mr. Booms sharing his story with me as well. Dear Congresswoman, recently I saw a story on TV about seniors not having insurance for prescription drugs. I am one of those people. I take three prescriptions daily and they cost about $200 a month. My wife is currently on Blue Cross. She goes on Medicare in April of this year, which means she, too, will be without insurance for prescription drugs. She is a diabetic and takes seven prescriptions a day. Her costs will be about $260 a month. Together we will be paying nearly $500 a month for our prescription drugs. Together our Social Security checks are about $1,100, minus $300 for Medicare and Medigap insurance payments, and we have $800 a month to live on. There surely does need to be something done with prescription drugs for seniors. Thank you, Mr. Booms. There is something wrong when you are having to take $500 out of $800 a month in order to pay for your medications. Once again we are talking about a story of a couple on a fixed income, prior to retirement having access to health care and coverage, going into Medicare and retiring, and then finding themselves in the situation where they are taking the majority of the money that comes in every month just to pay for their medications. I have hundreds of stories like this, hundreds of stories of people who are struggling every day to pay for their medications and to remain healthy. When we took our trip to Canada, from Detroit to Windsor, there was a gentleman on the bus named George who is 79 years old, almost 80 years old. He continues to work in order to pay for $20,000 a year in prescription and other health care costs for his wife. His wife is on 16 different medications, and he continues to work so that she can ``live,'' as he puts it, so that she can remain with him. As he was telling me, there were tears in his eyes talking about how he had to keep working so that he could make sure his wife would remain with him and would be alive. Another gentleman shared with me the fact that he takes one pill a month, and, because of our wonderful new innovations, which we are very appreciative of, that one pill allows him not to have open heart surgery, but the one pill costs $400. When a pharmaceutical drug company comes forward and says that in order to be able to cover the cost of prescription drugs and address these high costs for seniors we would lose our research, that is just baloney. Twenty cents on every dollar that Mr. Booms or that the Korns are paying, 20 cents on every dollar is going to research. What we are seeing today is a whole new effort of advertising so that, as my colleague who talked about generic drugs said, the companies want to make sure we ask for the brand name. So we are paying more for advertising than for research. So the reality is there is a way to get this right if we have the political will to do it. I believe, and I want to call on my colleague from Maine in a moment who has been such a leader as well in this issue, but I believe if we can solve Y2K, because it was a serious issue and we could not afford to let the lights go out and could not afford to let the computers go down, and brought all the American ingenuity together to fix what needed to be fixed, we did it. The lights were on January 1. Why can we not bring this same American ingenuity to help our seniors? Why can we not lower the cost of prescriptions and modernize Medicare to get it right? We can. I am going to be down here every week until we do it. I yield now to my good friend the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Ms. STABENOW. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.