Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Barragan).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Delaware (Ms. Blunt Rochester).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), who chairs the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Kim), who is the sponsor of the legislation that encourages State exchanges.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Craig).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), the Democratic Caucus chair.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I think I am prepared to close, but I just want to ask about the time on each side once more.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, I want to acknowledge the many Members who wanted to lend their strong support to this legislation but were unable to add themselves as cosponsors due to this package being combined for floor consideration as part of the Rules Committee proceedings. Those Members include the sponsors of the individual bills incorporated into this package, as well as Members like Representative Sheila Jackson Lee who strongly support our efforts to make healthcare more accessible and affordable. Let me say, Mr. Chairman, in closing, as Democrats, we promised, and we will fulfill the promise, that we are going to make healthcare more affordable, that we are going to bring down the costs of prescription drugs, that we are going to make sure people who have preexisting conditions are protected, and that we are offering robust, comprehensive plans with all the essential benefits as part of the package. That is what this bill is about. That is what the bill last week was about as well, guaranteeing that if you have a preexisting condition, you will get affordable health coverage, and saying that in the case of prescription drugs, 90 percent of prescription drugs now have or could have a generic alternative to bring down costs. They bring them down considerably, but the brand-name drug companies have conspired, in many cases, to make it more difficult for generics to come to market and delayed them coming to market. That drives up the costs of prescription drugs. We have watched this Trump administration sabotage the Affordable Care Act and put out junk plans so people don't have comprehensive coverage and people with preexisting conditions have trouble finding affordable coverage. They have made it more difficult for people to even know what to buy in the marketplace by cutting back on navigators and the outreach that makes people aware. They have also made it so that many people, unfortunately, don't even have options. We are going to do whatever we can. Republicans may like some bills, and they may not like others, but we are going to move forward with a package today and also in the future on whatever we can to make premiums more affordable and to bring down drug prices. Mr. Chair, I urge support for these bills for those reasons, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment sponsored by myself and the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Walden. We have been considering the CREATES Act and legislation like it for years, and it has long been one of my top priorities. So I was pleased to announce a bipartisan amendment that gained the support of our Republican colleagues during the Energy and Commerce Committee's consideration of the CREATES bill. There was only one outstanding concern still to be resolved after that amendment was adopted. And I am pleased now to offer a bipartisan solution to address that concern today. The concern raised during our full committee markup was that there was a lack of specificity in the provisions that describe the communication requirements related to the request and the delivery of the requested samples between the eligible product developer and the license holder. This bipartisan amendment filed by myself and my colleague, the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Walden, will provide the additional needed clarity to ensure that communication requirements in these negotiations are understood so that there is certainty for both parties. So I think we have found agreement with our colleagues across the aisle around a shared goal of discouraging anti-competitive conduct and providing certainty to both brand and generic manufacturers about the sample requests and delivery process. I appreciate the ranking member and his staff for working with me in good faith on this legislation and urge all my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the comments from the gentleman from Illinois. Again, this is an effort to try to make sure that when a patent expires that the samples or formula are given to generic, so they can develop a generic alternative. That is what the CREATES Act is all about. I would urge support for my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I am very disappointed that my Republican colleagues want to strike all of the ACA stabilization measures that we passed through our committee. These are important bills that should have strong bipartisan support, but, unfortunately, my Republican colleagues continue to be unwilling to work together on commonsense proposals that would lower healthcare costs for consumers. Funding for outreach and marketing, why is this even controversial to my Republican colleagues? Outreach and advertising are critical to ensuring that people know about the option to enroll in comprehensive coverage. We know that last year just one in four uninsured people who buy their own insurance were aware of the open enrollment season and the deadline to enroll in coverage. Another commonsense proposal to lower healthcare costs is to provide funds to States to set up State-based marketplaces. Again, why is this controversial? Over the last few years, State-based marketplaces have had lower premiums and better enrollment than the Federal marketplace. Enrollment on healthcare.gov has declined due to the Trump administration's sabotage. Enrollment in the State-based marketplaces has actually increased. The navigator funding provisions the Republicans are trying to strike from the bill, again, this is a program to help hard-to-reach individuals sign up for comprehensive coverage. Finally, the Republicans want to remove protection that would block the Trump administration's expansion of junk insurance plans that discriminate against people with preexisting conditions. I really can't understand why my Republican colleagues who claim to support protections for preexisting conditions want to defend these plans that discriminate against preexisting conditions and put consumers at extreme financial risk, other than the fact this is a Trump administration initiative, so they don't want to oppose it. In addition to discriminating against people with preexisting conditions, these junk plans exclude coverage for many important benefits, such as maternity care. And even when you think you are covered, if you get sick while you are on one of these, the insurance companies find a way to avoid paying the bill. So in closing, this amendment demonstrates what we all know clearly: that Republicans don't want to do anything to actually help lower healthcare costs for Americans or safeguard preexisting condition protections. Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Delaware (Ms. Blunt Rochester).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I would just ask Members to oppose this amendment because it guts the effort to improve the Affordable Care Act. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I just think that the navigator program is so important, and all the outreach that we have in these bills is very important. I obviously support the gentlewoman's amendment because every effort to reach out and educate people about their options in the marketplace is so important.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill, H.R. 987, the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections and conforming changes to the bill.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 986, the Protecting Americans with Preexisting Conditions Act of 2019.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in favor of H.R. 986, the Protecting Americans With Preexisting Conditions Act, introduced by Representative Kuster from our committee. This legislation should not be necessary but, unfortunately, the Trump administration continues to take actions that undermine the healthcare of millions of Americans, including the more than 133 million people with preexisting conditions. Today, we are here because of the Trump administration's proposed guidance last October that would allow States to expand and prop up short-term junk insurance plans, even providing taxpayer subsidies for those plans. In order to take this action, the administration blatantly ignored the plain text of the Affordable Care Act and gutted standards that States must meet in order to test insurance reforms. I believe the administration's action is illegal, but, sadly, this administration has never let the law get in the way of its goals. These efforts will, without a doubt, seriously undermine the health coverage of Americans with preexisting conditions. A coalition of 24 national groups representing millions of Americans with preexisting conditions, including the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Heart Association, and the American Diabetes Association, wrote a letter in strong support of H.R. 986, stating: ``The 1332 guidance substantially erodes the guardrails governing coverage that people with preexisting conditions such as cystic fibrosis, lung disease, cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, rare disorders, pregnant women, and many others rely on in the individual marketplace.'' The patient organizations go on to say that ``these changes fundamentally alter the nature of the section 1332 waiver program and jeopardize adequate, affordable coverage for people with preexisting conditions in the individual market. Halting the implementation of this guidance will protect people with preexisting conditions.'' Mr. Chairman, by encouraging States to promote and expand short-term insurance plans, the administration is giving insurers the green light to directly discriminate against people with preexisting conditions; it is giving the green light to these plans to charge people with preexisting conditions more money; and it is giving these plans the green light to refuse to cover any treatment that is related to someone's preexisting condition. The expansion of these junk plans will also undermine the insurance market, leading to higher premiums for people with preexisting conditions who need comprehensive coverage. This is not the way you protect people with preexisting conditions. The Trump administration's guidance also undermines the ACA's promise of coverage of essential health benefits. The American people should not have to worry about whether their insurance plan covers prescription drugs, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services. This guidance is also bad news for older Americans who could be charged a lot more for their insurance than what is allowed by the ACA. In a nutshell, Mr. Chairman, this guidance is bad news for any American who wants access to quality and affordable health coverage that is there for them when they need it. Junk plans are just that-- they are junk. People shouldn't have to read the fine print to see what is and is not covered, and that is the hallmark of the Affordable Care Act. So that is why we must rescind the guidance. I want to commend my colleague, Ms. Kuster, for her great work on this important bill. I do want to emphasize that H.R. 986 would not do anything to interfere with existing 1332 reinsurance waivers, which have bipartisan support and began under the Obama administration. My Republican colleagues continue to intentionally conflate these reinsurance waivers with the Trump administration's new 1332 waiver guidance from October of last year. H.R. 986 does not affect these reinsurance waivers. I am disappointed that my Republican colleagues continue to make these arguments, but the bad faith is not surprising, given their terrible record on protecting people with preexisting conditions. Mr. Chairman, this bill is necessary because of the ongoing assault by the Trump administration on our healthcare system. I urge my colleagues to join me in standing up for people with preexisting conditions and standing up for people who want access to affordable and quality healthcare. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC, May 8, 2019. Hon. Frank Pallone, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Pallone: I am writing with respect to H.R. 986, Protecting Americans with Preexisting Conditions Act of 2019. As a result of you having consulted with us on provisions that fall within our rule X jurisdiction, and in recognition of the desire to expedite consideration of the measure, the Committee on Ways and Means agrees to waive formal consideration of H.R. 986. The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with the mutual understanding that we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and the Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues within our jurisdiction. The Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or similar legislation. Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding, and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letter on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 986. Sincerely, Richard E. Neal, Chairman.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), who chairs our Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), who chairs our Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee.