Dear Chair Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, FSGG Subcommittee Chair Joyce, FSGG Subcommittee Ranking Member Hoyer and distinguished members of the House Appropriations Committee:
The Coalition for Contact Lens Consumer Choice – representing millions of consumers, taxpayers, and independent market competitors – urges you to reject the restrictive House report language regarding contact lens purchase options as you finalize the FY 27 Appropriations agreement.
For years, our coalition has advocated for the rights of the nearly 50 million Americans who wear contact lenses. Consumer advocacy organizations, online retailers, and independent providers have worked to preserve a competitive marketplace where consumers can access lower prices, better service, and the freedom to shop where they choose.
Unfortunately, this mission faces a persistent, multi-front threat: for years, the American Optometric Association (AOA) has waged an orchestrated campaign to weaken the consumer protections embedded in the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Contact Lens Rule. Every year, the optometric lobby attempts to use the appropriations process to insert inaccurate claims and misleading “patient safety gap” arguments into committee reports—not to protect patients, but to build a legislative intent track record and lay the groundwork to subvert established consumer rights, shield themselves from competition, and force consumers back into higher-priced doctor’s offices.
Consumer choice is increasingly important as American families continue to face the elevated costs across essential goods and services. Contact lenses are a recurring healthcare expense for millions of Americans, many of whom pay for their lenses out of pocket. Congress should not use the appropriations process to undermine competition or restrict consumers’ ability to shop for affordable vision care.
Competition is Essential to Keeping Vision Care Affordable
Vision care and corrective lenses represent a recurring, essential healthcare expense for millions of hardworking families, many of whom pay out of pocket for their contact lenses. Maintaining a robust, competitive marketplace is vital to keeping these costs manageable.
As former Federal Trade Commission Acting Chairman and Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen highlights in a recent analysis, the FTC’s Contact Lens Rule and the Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act (FCLCA) promote competition by enabling consumers to shop around for the best combination of price and convenience. Competition among sellers encourages lower prices and innovation, including faster delivery and improved customer service.
Importantly, the Contact Lens Rule does not sacrifice patient safety for consumer choice. The Rule requires sellers to verify a consumer’s prescription before dispensing contact lenses. These verification requirements provide an important safeguard while allowing consumers to choose where they purchase their lenses.
The Current House Language Relies on Fictitious Safety Concerns
The House FY 27 FSGG report language repeats provisions from previous cycles concerning the purported health risks associated with “non-compliant automated telephone verification.” This language is unnecessary and risks interfering with the established federal framework governing the sale of contact lenses.
Misguided Premise: Automated telephone verification is a fully permissible, highly efficient method of prescription verification explicitly contemplated by Congress and upheld by the FTC.
Inappropriate FDA Incursions: The FDA regulates the safety and efficacy of contact lenses as medical devices. The FTC, pursuant to the FCLCA and its Contact Lens Rule, oversees the marketplace practices governing prescription release and verification. Appropriations report language should not blur these distinct statutory responsibilities or create uncertainty about the federal framework governing contact lens sales.
Protecting the Contact Lens Rule for the Future
The appropriations process should not be used to impose new restrictions on a competitive marketplace absent clear evidence that existing law is failing to protect consumers.
The current framework already requires prescription verification before a seller may provide contact lenses. The more pressing consumer concern is ensuring that patients receive their prescriptions as required by federal law so they can exercise their right to shop among competing sellers.
Consumers should not be forced to return to higher-cost purchasing channels simply because a particular verification method is inconvenient for a prescriber or less favorable to a traditional business model. Competition benefits consumers by creating incentives for lower prices, better service, and continued innovation. Taxpayers, who help fund government employee health plans, likewise benefit.
As negotiations proceed, we respectfully urge the Senate Appropriations Committee and congressional negotiators to reject the House’s restrictive contact lens report language and preserve the existing federal framework governing prescription release and verification.
Maintaining a competitive contact lens marketplace is essential to protecting consumer choice, promoting affordability, and ensuring that millions of Americans can access the vision care products they need at competitive prices.
Thank you for your leadership and consideration of this important matter.
Sincerely,
The Coalition for Contact Lens Consumer Choice