It's been two months since the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Build Back Better Act, which includes reforms that aim to bring down prescription medication costs, and advocates for people age 50 and older say it's time for the Senate to get the job done. It could be a rare chance for bipartisanship in Congress.

Bob Murphy, director of AARP Colorado, said letting Medicare negotiate with drug companies to lower drug prices has broad support with voters from both major parties.

"Just strictly from a taxpayer's viewpoint, allowing Medicare to negotiate prices on prescription drugs, and it's crazy that they can't, would save taxpayers just billions and billions and billions a year," he said.

All Republicans and two Democratic senators oppose Build Back Better, and President Joe Biden recently conceded that only chunks of the $1.7 trillion measure might advance. Drug companies also have opposed allowing Medicare to negotiate prices, claiming that high profit margins help companies reinvest in research for new medicines.

Murphy noted that the pharmaceutical industry spends $161 million a year lobbying Congress, but it doesn't outnumber AARP's 38 million members. He said older Americans living on fixed incomes require more than four medications a year, on average - and they are tired of paying drug prices three times higher than the rest of the world.

"Many of our members are, in fact over 65, and over 70, and are in that group of people that are taking four-and-a-half prescriptions a year," he said. "We have the people on our side calling into senators' offices to say, 'The time is now, do it.' That's something that 'Pharma' doesn't have, the people. We do."

The price of medicines to treat chronic conditions has risen by 300% since 2005. Murphy said passing drug-price reforms would go a long way to blunt the effects of inflation.

"If a gallon of milk was inflated at the same price as prescription drugs since 2006, it would cost over $12," he said. "And a gallon of milk is not life-saving - prescription drugs are."

Congress faces increasing pressure to adopt changes to keep Social Security on firm financial ground in the years to come.

North Dakota retirees are sharing their thoughts about key challenges facing the program. It is not losing money as fast as once thought but a recent federal report predicted Social Security will be unable to pay full benefits a decade from now if moves are not made ahead of time.

Eddie Johs, a retiree from Fargo and an AARP volunteer, receives Social Security benefits in addition to a pension. He feels he is one of the lucky ones who does not rely solely on monthly payments from the safety net.

"I realize many people don't have a pension," Johs noted. "Social Security is just a lifeline for those people."

He said some self-employed individuals and those receiving lower wages face barriers in securing larger nest eggs. Johs will attend a Social Security Summit hosted by AARP next Tuesday at the Fargodome from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. He hopes fellow retirees listen in to what elected officials and others have to say about potential solutions and the program's impact.

Congress has long been at odds over how to address the solvency issue. Democrats often push for higher earners to be taxed on more of their income, while some Republicans have floated raising the retirement age. Johs suggested a variety of changes are likely needed but he is skeptical about asking people to work longer for the benefits they've earned.

"People that work construction or work outside, city employees, that'd be tough to work at age 65 and up when you do outdoor physical work," Johs stressed.

Currently, the full benefit retirement age is 66 for those born in 1955, and it will gradually rise to 67 for those born in later years. In the U.S. House, the Republican Study Committee has called for what it describes as "modest adjustments" to the retirement age to account for increases in life expectancy.

As advocacy groups take a victory lap for moving lawmakers to finally allow Medicare to negotiate lower prices for 10 widely-used medicines, a new report detailed how the makers of those drugs have gouged billions of taxpayer and consumer dollars.

Kyle Herrig, senior adviser for the group Accountable.US, said drugmakers have exploited U.S. patent laws to control prices for decades.

"These kinds of tactics keep prices high for the consumers," Herrig pointed out. "And often lead to patients skipping doses, disproportionately impacting lower-income Black and Latin American communities."

Drugmakers have routinely paid competitors to delay the introduction of cheaper generic versions of popular drugs. They have also kept prices high by resetting patent protections by slightly altering a drug to secure a second patent. Drug companies have long argued high prices are necessary to finance the development of new lifesaving medicines.

Even though U.S. taxpayers invested nearly $12 billion in the research and development of the drugs negotiated by Medicare, Herrig said pharmaceutical makers have also flooded the courts to keep prices high.

"Despite taking billions of taxpayer dollars for drug development, these big pharma companies unleashed an army of patent attorneys to keep lifesaving medication exclusive and more expensive for seniors and other patients," Herrig contended.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., worked with groups including AARP to push Congress to allow Medicare to use its purchasing power to bring down drug prices. She said medications do not work if you cannot afford them.

"It is fine to make profits, but not to the extent that you're actually hurting Americans' health," Klobuchar asserted. "In the United States of America, no one should be forced to choose between filling their prescriptions or filling their grocery carts."

Oregon has more than 270,000 veterans. Many of them may not know they're eligible for home modification grants through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. An AARP survey found 60% of veterans aged 45 and older weren't aware of grants available through the VA.

Juanita Jimenez-Soto, AARP national veterans and military families manager, said her organization analyzed five grants from the VA and developed a guide to help veterans navigate through them.

"They allow you to buy, build or modify a home to meet their long term needs. Now these grants provide eligible veterans with a disability rating of one all the way to 100% up to $117,000 to pay for renovations," she explained.

Jimenez-Soto noted financial aid for home modifications are free for people who qualify. The VA offers more than $150 million through these grant programs each year.

AARP's survey also found that nearly a quarter of veterans say they would need financial aid to stay in their current home. Jimenez-Soto added that it's important for people to think not just about their current needs but also what they might need in the future.

"We find that a lot of times veterans may not need that modification - that handrail in the bathroom or that ramp - but as you age your body will change sometimes," she continued.

Jimenez-Soto said veterans need to remember they earned these benefits.

"Sometimes a veteran may not think that they are deserving of those benefits. Maybe someone else who's also served, they think, 'Well they could need it more.' The thing is, there is enough money out there in these programs to apply for them and get them," she said.