Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I don't have any more speakers other than myself at this time, so I am prepared to close.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close. I would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this resolution. And in doing so, I would like to point to some of the whereas clauses of the actual resolution. It points out that the President has waged an unrelenting war on Medicaid. It says that, under President Trump's watch, the number of uninsured children has increased, reversing years of decline, largely as a result of substantial losses in Medicaid coverage for children. Over a million children have lost Medicaid and CHIP coverage, and over 750,000 adults have lost Medicaid coverage. And I know that my colleague, the ranking member, who I respect, made reference to pregnant women and said that they would not be included under this block grant. In contrast to that, I want to read something from--the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists was sent a letter, and they say, under Federal law, States must cover pregnant women earning up to 138 percent of the Federal poverty level in their Medicare programs. Almost all States cover pregnant women beyond the Federal minimum. Any pregnant women covered beyond this minimum are, therefore, an optional population, and could be included in a State's block grant demonstration program. So, the fact of the matter is that pregnant women and postpartum women would be included in this. Also, it says in the whereas clauses, not only the guidance that we are trying to reverse here today that allows States to cap their Medicaid funding through a block grant, but the President has also proposed regulations to roll back access standards put in place to ensure beneficiaries receive the care they need. He also issued guidance to allow State Medicaid programs to restrict access to prescription drugs by adopting closed formularies. He proposed massive annual compounding cuts in Federal funding to the program, in direct contradiction to an explicit campaign promise. Last year, the President's budget cut Medicaid by $1 trillion. We are going to get the President's budget next week. I would not be shocked if he didn't cut it again by $1 trillion. We have been seeing this war by President Trump on Medicaid in every way, and that is why we are here today, to say this war against Medicaid has to stop. If the GOP claim that they support Medicaid, which oftentimes they don't, then they should be voting for this resolution. So I urge all my colleagues to support this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an exchange of correspondence between myself and Chairman Bennie Thompson acknowledging the Committee on Homeland Security's agreement to waive consideration of H.R. 3851 did not in any way diminish or alter the Committee's jurisdiction on this or similar legislation in the future. House of Representatives, Committee on Homeland Security, Washington, DC, January 13, 2020. Hon. Frank Pallone, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Pallone: I write to you regarding H.R. 3851, the ``Travel Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act of 2019.'' H.R. 3851 contains provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland Security. I share your interest in seeing this legislation implemented and accordingly, I will not seek a sequential referral of the bill. However, agreeing to waive consideration of this bill should not be construed as the Committee on Homeland Security waiving, altering, or otherwise affecting its jurisdiction over subject matters contained in the bill which fall within its Rule X jurisdiction. I would also ask that a copy of this letter and your response be included in the legislative report on H.R. 3851 and in the Congressional Record. I look forward to working with you on this and other important legislation in the future. Sincerely, Bennie G. Thompson, Chairman.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 32nd Anniversary of the Sumgait pogrom and the 30th Anniversary of the Baku pogrom. On February 27, 1988, hundreds of Armenian civilians living in the city of Sumgait in Azerbaijan were indiscriminately killed, raped, maimed, and even burned alive for no reason other than their ethnicity. This senseless violence was instigated by hostile, anti-Armenian rhetoric from Azerbaijani citizens and officials. Similarly, on January 12, 1990, a seven-day pogrom broke out against the Armenian population in Baku during which Armenians were beaten, murdered, and expelled from the city. Over 90 Armenian civilians were killed, over 700 were injured, and countless others were permanently displaced by the ethnic violence that ensued. For over three decades, Azerbaijan has taken steps to cover up these crimes against humanity and dismiss the atrocities at Sumgait and Baku. Even more disturbing is that the perpetrators of this event and similar violent attacks have been lauded as national heroes by the Azeri government. It is critical for the United States government to recognize and denounce violent assaults against any civilians. I continue to stand with the Armenian people in condemning this horrific massacre. Tragically, the Azerbaijani government's approach toward the Armenian people has changed little since the pogroms were initiated. We still hear the same violent rhetoric and witness intimidation tactics aimed at the people of the Republic of Artsakh. If we do not condemn crimes against humanity and allow them to go unpunished and unrecognized, we only strengthen the resolve of those seeking to perpetrate these crimes in the future. It is especially critical to consider this as we prepare to commemorate the 105th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide in April. I will continue to work with my colleagues on the Congressional Armenian Issues Caucus to remember the victims of the pogroms at Sumgait and Baku and condemn all acts of violence against people who are targeted simply because of their existence. I hope my colleagues will join me in rejecting violent rhetoric and intimidation. In doing so, we renew our commitment to achieving a lasting peace and more humane way of living in the Caucasus.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, we as a Congress have worked over the past several years to combat the opioid epidemic and support the millions of Americans with a substance use disorder. That work includes bipartisan efforts to pass legislation like the 21st Century Cures Act, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA), and the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act. Just last month, in the Fiscal Year 2020 funding bill, we supported a public health response to this epidemic with over $4 billion to help with Federal substance abuse treatment and prevention efforts. Also last month, the House passed H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act, which included an additional $10 billion in funding to support public health efforts at the Department of Health and Human Services to combat the opioid epidemic. Earlier this month, the Energy and Commerce Committee had a chance to hear directly from States on how our federal support through these legislative actions has helped save lives. Although we've witnessed an improvement in the number of year-to-year overdose deaths, the availability of synthetic opioids like fentanyl is hindering the progress we've made. Fentanyl is a deadly synthetic drug that is 50 times more powerful than heroin, and 100 times more powerful than morphine. Although it is used in medical settings, we have seen a proliferation of illicitly produced fentanyl, fentanyl analogues, and its precursor chemicals originating from China. Because fentanyl is relatively easy to make and so potent, it is tragically leading to large increases in overdose deaths. We have all heard the terrible numbers that tell this story. In 2017, there were over 47,000 opioid overdose deaths--and 28,000 of those deaths involved synthetic opioids such as fentanyl. My home State of New Jersey, for example, has seen a tenfold increase in deaths involving fentanyl in the last several years. A more complicating factor is that we are now seeing fentanyl increasingly mixed into other drugs like cocaine, methamphetamine, and even counterfeit prescription drugs like oxycodone. This means that many unsuspecting people are dying at the hands of fentanyl when they didn't even realize they were taking it. Mr. Speaker, the nature of our Nation's fentanyl problem is more complex than drug epidemics of the past. In addition to traditional routes, users can purchase fentanyl analogues and fentanyl precursor chemicals online. These purchases, which typically include the most pure and potent fentanyl, are often packaged and shipped through the United States postal system or consignment carriers in small quantities, making detection a significant challenge. All these factors combined make for complex problem, and requires a multifaceted solution. Part of that solution is finding a way to support both public health and public safety actions aimed at stemming the tide of overdose deaths. In February 2018, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) used its authority in the Controlled Substances Act to temporarily place for two years all illicit fentanyl-like substances in Schedule I. With this authority expiring next month, we must do more to understand the true impact of this temporary scheduling order, including its impact on public safety, public health, research, and federal criminal prosecutions. That is why today we are considering S. 3201, the ``Temporary Reauthorization and Study of Emergency Scheduling of Fentanyl Analogues Act.'' The Senate bill would extend DEA's temporary order for 15 months while also tasking the Government Accountability Office (GAO) with an evaluation of the temporary order. Placing a whole class of fentanyl-like substances into Schedule I does not come without implications for criminal justice and research. The National Institute on Drug Abuse within the National Institutes of Health, notes that ``obtaining or modifying a Schedule I registration involved significant administrative challenges, and researchers report that obtaining a new registration can take more than a year.'' It is critical that our response balance the need for legitimate research access that holds potential for improved treatments for pain and addiction, while also putting in place a more long-term solution to the dangerous trafficking of fentanyl analogues. This temporary emergency scheduling order also has international implications. A year after the United States moved to schedule all fentanyl-related substances, China announced it would act and do the same. This class-wide control in China has slowed the rate of new fentanyl analogue encounters in the illicit market. An expiration would also put the DEA back in the position of playing whack a mole, and taking action to schedule fentanyl substances one by one while illicit traffickers continue to evade scheduling and find new ways to flood our markets with deadly synthetic substances. I agree with many of my colleagues that we cannot arrest our way out of this epidemic. The complexity of the fentanyl crisis, and creation of other synthetic drugs, demands a thoughtful, balanced approach that protects the public health and public safety of all Americans. This temporary extension, coupled with GAO's study, will give the committees of jurisdiction time to work on a longer-term solution. It will also give us the opportunity to solicit feedback to help us to better understand the full range of implications that come with class-wide scheduling of these substances.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, we obviously support the amendment.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, as we consider this critical 5G security and supply chain legislation before us, on behalf of Ranking Member Walden, Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chairman Doyle, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Latta, I would like to commend Julius (``Julie'') P. Knapp for the wonderful contributions to civil service he has made over his 45 year career. Mr. Knapp recently retired from his position as the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology. He is well known in our Committee because he has testified before us so many times over the years. We could always rely on his technically precise and straight-forward testimony. Mr. Knapp is an internationally-recognized expert who is known for his pragmatic and fair approach, and his ability to explain, in plain language, engineering issues to policymakers on all sides of an issue. Julie Knapp's career ran in tandem with the growth of the American communications industry. In many ways, it was a symbiotic relationship. He graduated from high school in New Hyde, New York, in 1969, and received his engineering degree from the City College of New York in 1974. Less than a month later, he joined the FCC. At 22 years old, he started out certifying radio frequency devices. He then rose through the ranks to become Chief of the FCC laboratory, then Chief of the Policy and Rules Division for the Office and Engineering and Technology (OET), and finally Chief of OET, where he has served with extraordinary distinction since 2006. It goes without saying that Julie Knapp could have taken the extraordinary skills he perfected at the FCC to Silicon Valley or to one of the trade associations where his work is so well regarded and appreciated. Instead, he chose to serve the United States through multiple administrations as a public servant, and his longtime contributions will make a positive difference for generations to come. It's not surprising that Mr. Knapp's outstanding work has brought him numerous awards and accolades within the government and in the engineering community. In 2012, he received one of the highest honors for a civil servant, the Presidential Distinguished Rank Award. He also received the FCC's Gold and Silver awards and the Eugene C. Bowler award for exceptional professionalism and dedication to public service. Here in Congress, we have been the fortunate beneficiaries of that dedication to public service. He has briefed generations of Members and congressional staffers on the intricacies of how spectrum works and why we need to harness it with careful consideration. He has provided significant and substantial input on all of the spectrum legislation passed by Congress in recent memory. Mr. Knapp helped usher in the modern age of communications. He played an instrumental role in helping us make spectrum available to fuel our nation's economic and innovative growth. If you are accessing a mobile device right now, using WiFi or buying the latest wireless gadget, you are likely benefiting from Julie Knapp's work. Julie Knapp epitomizes the non-partisan ideal of a public servant. As the leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, we are grateful for his invaluable longtime service to our nation, and extend our sincerest thanks to him for dedicating his life to building America's communications systems.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 535.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 535, the PFAS Action Act of 2019, is a comprehensive package of strategies to regulate PFAS chemicals, clean up contamination, and protect public health. PFAS are an urgent threat to public health. They are toxic, persistent, and being found in the environment across the country. These ``forever chemicals'' have long been linked with adverse health effects, including cancer, immune system effects, infertility, impaired child development, high cholesterol, and thyroid disease. Mr. Chairman, the EPA has known about these risks for decades and has allowed this contamination to spread. Last year, EPA announced its PFAS Action Plan. It was woefully inadequate, and since that time, we have learned that EPA is not even keeping the weak commitments it made in that plan. The EPA failed to meet key end-of-the-year 2019 deadlines. It failed to produce a regulatory determination for drinking water. It failed to produce hazard determinations for chemicals under Superfund. It failed to initiate reporting under the Toxics Release Inventory. The Trump administration is failing hundreds of impacted communities, and Congress must act for communities like Hoosick Falls, New York; Parchment, Michigan; Parkersburg, West Virginia; and far too many more. We need to act on behalf of States like my own State of New Jersey that are doing everything they can--adopting protective State drinking water standards and pursuing natural resource damage cases--but facing strong opposition from Federal agencies under the Trump administration. There have been over 500 detections of PFAS in drinking water and groundwater sources in New Jersey, and this is simply unacceptable, Mr. Chairman. It is time for Congress to take action and use every tool available to stop the flow of PFAS pollution into our environment and our bodies. That is exactly what the PFAS Action Act does. This bill requires EPA to immediately designate two PFAS chemicals as hazardous substances under Superfund, the two most studied of the PFAS chemicals. EPA committed to make this designation in their action plan last year but has failed to fulfill that promise. The legislation requires that, over a 5-year period, EPA reviews all other PFAS chemicals and decide whether to list them under Superfund. During that 5 years, the bill will require comprehensive health testing of all PFAS chemicals. This is a really important point. You may hear my colleagues talk today about the need to base decisions on science, and this bill will generate that science. The two chemicals will be regulated upfront because we already have the science on them. Other PFAS will be regulated if, over the next 5 years, the science concludes that they are hazardous. The bill also includes a moratorium on any new PFAS during that same 5-year period. This will provide EPA the time it needs to ensure it has enough science to really evaluate new PFAS. H.R. 535 also requires a drinking water standard that will cover at least the two chemicals and others at EPA's discretion. Importantly, the drinking water standard will have to protect public health, including the health of vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, infants, and children. Because treating drinking water to remove PFAS is expensive, the bill includes grants for water utilities. Mr. Chairman, this bill includes a voluntary PFAS-free label for cookware, which may be expanded through amendments to include additional categories of consumer products. This label will empower consumers to take steps to protect themselves from exposure to PFAS. The bill requires guidance for first responders, to help them minimize their exposure to PFAS chemicals. This is important because PFAS is commonly found in firefighting foams. Taken together, this is a serious, comprehensive, and reasonable bill that should garner strong bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I thank Chairman Tonko for all that he did to put this package together and, of course, the sponsor of the package, Mrs. Dingell from Michigan, who has faced so many problems in your home State, Mr. Chairman, where Mrs. Dingell is also very involved. The bill includes a number of pieces of legislation before our committee by members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, as well as other Members of this body. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, January 6, 2020. Hon. Frank Pallone, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Pallone: I write concerning H.R. 535, the PFAS Action Act of 2019. There are certain provisions in this legislation that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. In order to expedite floor consideration of H.R. 535, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure agrees to forgo action on the bill. However, this is conditional on our mutual understanding that forgoing consideration of the bill would not prejudice the Committee with respect to the appointment of conferees or to any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation that fall within the Committee's Rule X jurisdiction. I also request that you urge the Speaker to name members of this Committee to any conference committee which is named to consider such provisions. Please place a copy of this letter and your response acknowledging our jurisdictional interest into the Congressional Record during consideration of H.R. 535 on the House floor. Sincerely, Peter A. DeFazio, Chair.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), our majority leader, and I want to thank him for prioritizing this PFAS package and making it one of the first things that we do in 2020.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, this week, we will fulfill a promise we made to the American people to make prescription drugs more affordable. No American should be forced into choosing between putting food on the table for their family and taking a lifesaving drug, but, all too often, that is exactly what is happening. The American people are getting ripped off because drug companies have a monopoly on their drugs until generics come to market. They can charge Americans whatever they want, and they do. H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act, finally gives the Federal Government the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for the American people. Other developed countries negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies, and prices in those countries are four or five or ten times less for the exact same drugs. This simply isn't fair, and the American people are rightfully fed up. It is time that we finally level the playing field and empower the Federal Government to negotiate a better deal. These negotiations will not only lead to lower prices for consumers, it will also result in significant savings to the Federal Government. H.R. 3 takes the resulting $500 billion in savings and reinvests it in the American healthcare system and the search for new cures. We cap out-of-pocket costs for seniors in the Medicare Part D program for the first time, giving seniors the peace of mind of knowing that their drug cost will not bankrupt them or empty their retirement accounts. We make transformational investments in the Medicare program--adding for the first time benefits for dental, hearing, and vision coverage. These new benefits are going to make a huge difference in the lives of our Nation's seniors. We invest $12 billion in the search for new cures and treatments by boosting funding for the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration. NIH, as we know, plays a critical role in the research and development of new drugs, and this investment will ensure that these cures and treatments become a reality. We also invest in combatting the opioid crisis, community health centers, and maternal healthcare. And finally, beyond the negotiation, we are holding pharmaceutical companies accountable for when they jack up prices, bringing much-needed transparency to the process. Mr. Chairman, the status quo is simply unacceptable and unsustainable. It is time to negotiate a better deal for the American people. It is time to pass H.R. 3. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), our majority whip.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), who is the chairwoman of our Subcommittee on Health.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), a member of our Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney), a member of our committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch), a member of our committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Schrader), a member of our committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz), a member of our committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, may I inquire how much time remains on each side.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey), a member of our committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Soto), my colleague.

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, this is a historic piece of legislation before us this evening. H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act, is the critical action we need to lower prescription drug prices for Americans across the United States. Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues this evening continue to peddle Big Pharma's talking points and say that this bill will stifle innovation. Even the Trump administration's Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, who was a drug company executive himself, acknowledged that drug companies like to claim that ``if one penny disappears from pharma's profit margins, American innovation will grind to a halt.'' Frankly, I am appalled by this argument, Madam Chair. It is the Federal Government and the American taxpayers who are the largest investors in innovation. In fact, the National Institutes of Health, which has long enjoyed bipartisan, bicameral support, is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. For decades, publicly funded research has laid the foundation for the treatment and cures that patients use today. Research shows that many patented prescription drug products were first discovered through taxpayer-funded NIH research and grants. According to a report by the National Academy of Sciences, NIH-funded research contributed to the development of all 210 new drugs approved by the FDA between 2010 and 2016. The impact is clear: Americans are living longer, healthier lives; heart disease, stroke, and diabetes are less deadly; cancer mortality rates are also, overall, on the decline. The Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act, H.R. 3, will strengthen innovation--I stress, strengthen innovation--by investing $10 billion of direct funding to continue this momentum. This money is delivered to the agency over 10 years to provide sustained, predictable investments to our Nation's brightest researchers at our world-class universities and medical research centers. This bill will advance research in cancer, rare diseases, regenerative medicine, and antibiotic resistance, among others. It also provides additional funding for phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials. History shows us that investments like these will pay dividends for patients. Madam Chair, I am just so tired of hearing the Republican claim that H.R. 3 will kill new drug development and innovation. It is just the same tired fearmongering that the big pharmaceutical companies have used in an effort to lower their out-of-control drug prices. We, as Members of Congress, work for the American people, not Big Pharma. And now is the time for us to act and deliver our promise to patients who rely on prescription drugs to live long and meaningful lives by lowering their drug prices. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.