Arlen Specter: “contrary to the statement by the Senator from Minnesota, this matter has been considered in the Judiciary Committee as…”

“contrary to the statement by the Senator from Minnesota, this matter has been considered in the Judiciary Committee as part of the markup on the drug patent bill. It was on the floor as a part of the Hatch amendment, which was a part of the defense authorization bill. This measure was also considered by the House, which passed a 2-year patent extension for this drug on separate occasions; in 1992 and again in 1996. It has been so considered as a matter of basic fairness. The FDA delayed action on this matter for some 97 months, contrasted with 27 months on the average. This matter has been considered extensively. I raised it in open session in the Agriculture Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee earlier this week. It had been in the House Agriculture appropriations bill and was dropped in conference. I do not vouch for the provision where it was added to the health care bill after conference. I do not know about that and was not a party to that. But we have a very basic problem in America about research expenditures for drugs that benefit sick people. These drugs benefit everybody including the elderly, the young, and those not in either category. If we are going to expend a very substantial sum of money on research, there is going to have to be a reasonable return. We have a patent period, and the patent period was not honored in this case.”