Here's a partial transcript of Senator-elect Thune's appearance on Kudlow & Cramer last night:
CRAMER: Now, Mr. Thune, a lot of our viewers are concerned about two issues involving health care. One is they would like to see health care more affordable. But, second, a lot of our viewers own shares in drug companies. The drug companies have been great producers of jobs. The drug companies have also, I think, done wonders to develop, really, life-saving medications. I understand, from your briefings, that you favor importing drugs from Canada. That would crush the profit margins of a lot of our drug companies. Is that really the right way to go?
Mr. THUNE: Well, I think that anything that we can do to create competition here in the mark--you know, Canada uses a system of price controls that keeps drug costs down. But what happens is then the American consumer bears the brunt and all the cost of the research that the drug companies do because a lot of these other countries around the world impose these disciplines, these price controls. I think that allowing for--again, assuming it's the same manufacturer, same quality, same drug, allowing for reimportation helps create more, you know, competition here in this country. I also think that getting generics to the market more quickly is a good thing to do.
And I think, frankly, that the increasing costs of prescription drugs is something that--in the overall cost of health care, is probably one of the biggest drivers in that people here, seniors in South Dakota and seniors around the country, are increasingly frustrated with what seems to be this non-stop spike in prescription prices. And I think that--so I do support it. I do support allowing for reimportation. I support, you know, making generics more readily available and more quickly available in the marketplace today because I think, ultimately, if you've got--the more competition that you have out there, the more it's going to have a positive impact on prices. And I don't think the drug companies are going to be hurt by that. I think they're doing just fine.
KUDLOW: Well, w...
Mr. THUNE: And we've got some great innovations and some great, you know, success stories out there with these prescriptions. But I do think that competition is really important in keeping...
KUDLOW: With all respect, I'm afraid I have to disagree strongly with you on every factor, but I want to move on. We only have a short period of time. Two other issues that are of great interest to Wall Street and investors: tax reform and Social Security reform. Could you kind of give us your short takes on those?
Mr. THUNE: Well, I think with respect to tax reform, I hope that that's--I hope both those issues are really issues that the president, with the strong performance that he had last week, can, you know, take some very bold action in trying to address. And I think that--I believe that it's time for tax reform. It's long overdue. The cost of compliance in this country and the choking effect that has on the economy is hurting our ability to create jobs and hurting our--ability of our companies to reinvest. And so I think that tax reform's long overdue.
And I think Social Security is a structural problem that we're going to deal with sooner rather than later. And I think it's better to take the steps that are necessary to fix it now because the Social Security trustees have said that if we wait, it's going to be a $10 trillion unfunded liability going forward. So I think those are both issues that I'm hopeful the president is going to lead with some bold proposals. And I hope the Congress can work together across party lines to do something that is meaningful to bring about serious reform. And I think it is going to require putting the politics aside.
CRAMER: All right. Senator Thune, people are living longer. This great--we've made great advances in life-saving drugs. Why can't we raise the retirement age to 66 next year and three years later raise it to 67 and solve the Social Security problem?
Mr. THUNE: Well, you know, the increase--you know, raising the retirement age is already in effect. It's coming in incrementally. It's gradually going to 67 over a period of time. And, you know, frankly, we're living longer; that's a good thing. But it does create demographic challenges for Social Security that are going to have to be dealt with. And I think that a preferable approach is the one that I'm in support of, and that is allowing younger workers to, you know, use personal retirement accounts to invest, create a bigger nest egg for the future. In fact, the Social Security Actuary has said that that sort of a program would bring the Social Security Trust Fund into solvency by the year 2029. And so I would prefer that approach.
I certainly am not in favor of raising taxes or of reducing benefits. Raising the retirement age is going from 65 to 67, but I think that's something that, politically, is awfully difficult to sell, too. But I do believe that this is an issue where both sides are going to have to say, you know, `We're going to quit hammering each other in an election year.' This is a structural problem that has to be addressed, or the next generation of Americans are not going to be able to enjoy the Social Security program that the current generation enjoys.
Recent Comments