Burgess, McMorris Rodgers, Latta vote against Democrats’ drug-pricing bill

Holding out for their own bipartisan drug-pricing legislation, U.S. Reps. Michael Burgess (R-TX), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), and Bob Latta (R-OH) on Dec. 12 voted against the the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act, H.R. 3.

Nevertheless, the Democrats’ proposal received U.S. House of Representatives approval on a 230-192 vote.

“Unfortunately, the Speaker and the Democrats are moving forward in a partisan exercise, directing the federal government to set drug prices and it will stop innovation,” Rep. McMorris Rodgers said from the House floor last week. “America will fall behind as the global leader, and we can see what impact that has all over the world — hundreds and hundreds of fewer drugs entering the market.”

Rep. Burgess, ranking member of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, agreed, saying H.R. 3 “abandons the framework that has so successfully fostered American biomedical innovation, and therefore impedes patient access to future treatments and cures.”

“In the early days of my medical practice in the 1980s, I used to gripe with other doctors that there were treatments available in Europe that were not yet available in the United States,” he said. “Thanks to the establishment of user fees and other significant work done by Congress to clear the regulatory bottleneck and speed the drug approval process over the past four decades, American doctors now have more pharmaceutical tools available to treat their patients than those in other countries. I cannot support legislation that will jeopardize patient access to care.”

Reps. McMorris Rodgers, Burgess and Latta instead reiterated their support for the Lower Costs, More Cures Act of 2019, H.R. 19, the bipartisan bill Republicans proposed as an alternative.

“I want to stand on the side of innovation, more breakthroughs, and helping millions of people with the ravages of disease that they encounter every day,” said Rep. McMorris Rodgers.

Rep. Latta, who also voted against H.R. 3, pointed out in a Dec. 10 opinion piece published in the Lima News, that H.R. 19 wouldn’t “crush investment” in the research and development of new cures.

“When confronted with the realities of what H.R. 3 would mean for fewer new drugs, some Democrats have said it is ‘worth it’ to lose new cures in order to pass their partisan plan,” wrote Rep. Latta. “But, when it comes to drugs that improve or save a loved one’s life, we know it is not ‘worth it.’ Our bipartisan plan stands in stark contrast as it increases low-cost options for patients by bringing more generic and biosimilar competition to the marketplace faster. It puts politics to the side and prioritizes what Americans need most — more cures and better access to affordable medications.”

Rep. Burgess also said that he supports the solutions proposed in H.R. 19.

“This is policy that can become law in 2019 as it contains more than 40 bipartisan policies that have been championed by members on both sides of the dais in both the House and in the Senate,” said Rep. Burgess.

If enacted, H.R. 19 would lower drug costs while protecting access to new treatments and cures; cap out-of-pocket costs in Medicare Part D; prevent pharmaceutical companies from gaming the system; and promote healthy competition for lower-cost generics, he added.

“There is consensus in Congress that we must act to lower drug costs for American patients but passing a bill that the Senate will not take up and President Trump has stated publicly that he will veto, will not accomplish that goal,” Rep. Burgess said. “H.R. 19 can become law and provide real savings for American patients.”

Rep. McMorris Rodgers added that H.R. 19 would build upon the work accomplished under the 21st Century Cures Act.

“We want to see more generic drugs come to market faster, finally make insulin more affordable for our seniors, lower out-of-pocket spending, close the donut hole, access new medicines and cures, and require price transparency,” she said. “Every single provision is bipartisan.”

H.R. 19 remains under consideration in three House committees, while H.R. 3 now advances to the Senate.