Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), the ranking member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from California.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher), a member of our Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Republicans are pointing to the Congressional Budget Office's score of their bill as proof that healthcare programs are already using the QALY to discriminate against people, but that is simply not what the CBO score says. It is ironic Republicans would point to CBO's analysis, given it highlights my exact concern that this bill's reference to other ``similar measures'' is ambiguous and undermines drug price negotiations. It is precisely this uncertainty that would result in a chilling effect on States and Federal agencies being willing to look at the cost of prescription drugs. Again, I take no issue with banning QALYs, and I offered an amendment in committee to ban QALYs when this bill was marked up, but that is not what this is about. This is an effort by the Republicans to back up pharma and make sure that we don't look at cost measures; that we don't negotiate prices, which they oppose in Medicare; and that we simply let the pharmaceutical companies charge whatever they want. Imagine what it would be like if the pharmaceutical companies could charge whatever they want. Not only would it cost another $1.1 billion, which is what the CBO says, but it could undermine any efforts to lower the cost of prescription drugs throughout any Federal and State programs. What does that mean? What does that mean for people? How would we continue to fund programs for seniors, for the disabled, for anyone if we cannot adjust the cost issue and keep costs down for prescription drugs? There is no effort here on the Democrats' part to continue with QALYs. We are opposed to them, but you have to continue to be able to look at costs in a nondiscriminatory way. That is what is not going to happen if this bill becomes law. There will not be any way or any effective way for any Federal, State, or local agencies to look at cost measures, and costs will continue to skyrocket, exactly what pharma wants. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt that the pharmaceutical industry would like to see the gains we have made to lower drug prices through the Inflation Reduction Act halted or reversed. That is why they have brought numerous Federal lawsuits against the law in courts throughout the country, even as the Department of Health and Human Services just announced opening offers for the first 10 drugs selected for negotiation to bring down costs. This bill would simply provide a new avenue for the pharmaceutical industry to pursue litigation intended to hamper the IRA and the negotiation program overall, and it doesn't stop there. It could strip States of one of the only tools that they have to negotiate Medicaid drug rebates. Now, while proponents of this legislation would have you believe that this bill just extends current law, unfortunately, that is not the case. It expands and changes current law. It applies the language from the Inflation Reduction Act in a new context and broadens its applicability to ban the use of other similar measures across the Federal Government, and that means limiting the ability to look at costs. If we don't have the ability to compare drugs and see which ones are effective and which ones cost more, then we won't have the ability to lower costs. What that means is we allow pharma to charge whatever they want. The CBO says this is going to cost another $1.1 billion, which is why the Republicans seek to cut the Prevention and Public Health Fund to pay for it. But this is going to lead us down the path of saying that we can't look at cost at all. That means that costs will balloon for Medicare, for Medicaid, and for prescription drugs. The consequence of that is you can't pay for other programs that help seniors, that help poor people, that help veterans, that help those in the military with their health and the quality of their health. This is a very dangerous piece of legislation, and Democrats are speaking out against it because of the consequences and our ability to fund health programs around the country at every level. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the Republicans' decision to offset this bill by raiding the Prevention and Public Health Fund underscores the real intentions. They are not seeking to improve the lives of those with disabilities or end the use of discriminatory measures, but to push forward with a partisan bill that will raise prices and cut critical funding used to improve public health. The Prevention and Public Health Fund was established in the Affordable Care Act to provide for expanded and sustained national investment in health prevention and restrain the rate of growth in healthcare costs. Republicans have consistently sought to undermine, slash, and redirect these essential funds for unintended purposes. Cutting the Prevention and Public Health Fund decimates our ability to effectively prepare for the next pandemic, respond to ongoing public health threats, and puts our States and local healthcare partners at a disadvantage moving forward. Nearly 200 public health organizations sent a letter earlier this week expressing strong concerns with the manager's amendment, noting how detrimental cuts to the Prevention and Public Health Fund would be. It is the height of irony that Republicans claim this bill would reduce discrimination for those with disabilities, while also cutting Federal investment in programs that improve the lives of those with disabilities. The American people deserve better. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Chairman, I feel very strongly about why we need to oppose this bill, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it. Democrats, and, hopefully, some Republicans, too, have spent a lot of time trying to reduce the cost of prescription drugs--and the States, as well. The bottom line is that we know that prescription drugs now are, if not the majority, a significant portion of healthcare costs. If the Federal Government or the State government, or any government, is going to continue to provide quality care in this country, we must rein in the cost of prescription drugs, not only the cost but also have our agencies determine what drugs are effective and what drugs are not. We have no problem as Democrats in banning QALYs. I have said that over and over again today, and I will keep repeating it. The bottom line is the way the language of this bill is constructed, it could easily lead to a situation where no Federal, State or government agency could effectively look at whether or not a drug is effective and what the cost is or make any decisions to pay for it based on the actual costs. Now, sure, we could live in a world where the government pays unlimited amounts of money for everything--and I am sure pharma would love that because they like to charge whatever they want to increase their profits--but that is not a real situation. If you don't rein in the cost of prescription drugs, it not only is going to cost more for individuals out of their pocket, but it also means that the government can't provide services to people with disabilities or to seniors or to veterans. That is why the CBO was saying that this bill is going to cost another $1.1 billion, at a minimum, and possibly even more in the future, if you read what the CBO has actually said. Republicans have a pay-for rule, so they say that if it is going to cost more, they have to pay for it in some way. Well, how do they pay for it? They cut the Prevention and Public Health Fund, the very fund that is used to prevent worse diseases, worse outbreaks, fund local public health programs so they can deal with public health in an effective way. How is that beneficial to people with disabilities or anyone? It certainly isn't. That is why there is so much opposition by various public health agencies to cutting this prevention fund to pay for this bill. There is no justification for this bill. There was an opportunity in the Energy and Commerce Committee. I submitted language that would say not only would we ban QALYs, but we would ban any kind of discriminatory measures being used. The Republicans wouldn't accept that. This is what we are left with, a bill that is very dangerous, that is just a giveaway to pharma. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose what I consider rather dangerous legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I appreciate and respect the views of the disability community and their strongly held belief that the use of QALYs in Federal health programs is discriminatory. That is why I do not oppose this amendment. However, the amendment does not cure the problem with the underlying bill. This bill is a Trojan horse that purports to ban discriminatory measures like QALYs but in reality does a lot more. This bill has the potential to ban a broad swath of cost containment measures that are not discriminatory and could harm the very communities that this bill is purported to help. Those with disabilities need access to lower drug prices and healthcare services, and the Federal Government's and States' ability to use nondiscriminatory health measures is essential to bringing down costs. Otherwise, without leverage to get a better deal, we are stuck paying whatever pharma wants. The CBO agrees. That is why they estimate this bill will increase Federal spending by over a billion dollars in the next 10 years and potentially tens of billions of dollars more in the years ahead. For this reason, I do not oppose the amendment, but, unfortunately, it does not resolve my concerns with the underlying bill. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the life of Mr. Marques A. Hudson. Mr. Hudson, a resident of Piscataway, New Jersey, died in the line of duty on January 26, 2024 after responding to a three-alarm house fire in Plainfield where he served as a firefighter. I know I join with his family and friends in paying tribute to his memory and the ultimate sacrifice he paid in service to our community. A member of the Plainfield Fire Department since December 2021, Mr. Hudson made an impact on the department and community during his two years of service. His contributions and commitment have been recalled by the City of Plainfield, the department, and his fellow firefighters. Not only was Mr. Hudson a dedicated public servant in Plainfield, he was also an active member of the Piscataway community. As a Little League coach, Mr. Hudson was a role model and mentor to the players and his sons. Mr. Hudson is survived by his loving family, including his beloved partner D'onnah Jones, sons Kaleb, Josiah, and Isaiah Hudson, mother Vickie Hudson, sister Jacqwetta Hudson-Bonus, brothers Allen and Jaquan Hudson, nephew and nieces, and many other relatives and dear friends. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that my colleagues will join me in honoring Marques A. Hudson for his heroism and sacrifice, and his dedication to his family and community. Mr. Hudson demonstrated character and leadership throughout his life and was deeply committed to each endeavor he undertook. He will be remembered fondly by all those he has inspired and those whose lives he impacted directly.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the life of Dr. Michael Brantley. Dr. Brantley passed away on January 6, 2024 after a life filled with countless personal and professional achievements. A U.S. Army veteran, Dr. Brantley honorably served our country, serving as a Captain and a Chief Laboratory Officer. In addition to answering the call to national service, Dr. Michael Brantley was a dedicated public servant and community leader of his hometown of Neptune and the surrounding area. As a member of the Neptune Township Committee (including terms as Mayor and Deputy Mayor), Chairman of the Neptune Township Police Oversight Committee, and a member of the Wesley Lake Commission, Dr. Brantley continually gave back to his community. A graduate of Morgan State College and Meharry Medical College School of Dentistry, Dr. Brantley was also a prominent dentist, operating his own dental practice in Asbury Park for more than 35 years, and shared his knowledge and experience through leadership positions at various medical facilities. His passion for healthcare and his commitment to the community and public service have been widely recognized. Among many other honors, Dr. Brantley was inducted into the Neptune High School Hall of Fame and received the Health Care Service Award from Brookdale Community College. Dr. Brantley leaves behind his loving family and friends, including his beloved wife of 37 years, Jacqueline. His generous spirit was a joy to everyone he met, and he will be remembered fondly by all those whose lives he impacted. Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that my colleagues will join me in honoring Dr. Michael Brantley for his leadership and dedication to his community and our nation.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to recognize Tassie York as she was sworn in on January 1, 2024 as the first African-American female mayor of Neptune Township, New Jersey. A lifelong resident of Neptune, Mayor York has served on the township committee since 2020, most recently as Deputy Mayor. She has dedicated herself to the residents of Neptune, focusing on health care, housing, women's rights, employment, and equality; issues she intends to make a priority under her administration. Throughout her life, Mayor York has exemplified a commitment to serving the community. She began her career at Head Start, and currently works as a Family Service Specialist for the State of New Jersey. In addition, she established and co-owns a local estate sale business, volunteers at the Jersey Shore Rescue Mission in neighboring Asbury Park, and tutors young students. Having received her Theology and Divinity degree, Mayor York also serves as an Associate Minister of United Fellowship Baptist Church. Her broad background and personal experiences bring a unique perspective to her leadership and support her efforts to bridge and advance the diverse population of Neptune. Mayor York has distinguished herself as an exemplary public servant, and I am confident she will lead the Neptune Township committee effectively. She has established herself as an advocate for the community of Neptune and beyond, and her service is truly deserving of this body's recognition.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2365, the Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson's Act. I am honored to rise in support today of this bipartisan legislation. Our work here today will allow people, of all backgrounds, who have experiences with Parkinson's to have hope for a future with more research, treatments, and cures. This bipartisan legislation will bring diverse federal and non- federal stakeholders together along with patients and caregivers, to build a national strategy for prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and cures for different forms of Parkinson's Disease. This bill is also a historic step in our federal government's work to research and share data on this disease, following the model of the National Alzheimer's Project Act which became law in 2011. Parkinsons's disease, affecting more than 1 million people in the United States and nearly 10 million people worldwide, is the second most common and fastest-growing neurological disease. Although typical diagnosis occurs around age 50, this is not an ``older person'' disease and does not look the same for every patient. When a large population of people have a disease like Parkinson's disease, it is a matter of life or death to have an accurate understanding of how many people have the disease, where they live and why they have it. Shining a light on research that looks not only at genetic factors but also environmental factors, will provide promise for all aspects of the disease and potential triggers. I want to thank my colleagues, Chairwoman McMorris Rogers, Representative Tonko, Representative Wexton, and Representative Bilirakis, for working with us to ensure we as a country take this historic step in combating Parkinson's disease on all fronts. It is a wonderful legacy to our champions to name the legislation after two tenacious fighters who will not and did not succumb to the disease without making a mark. Although Rep. Wexton believes that many of the benefits from this legislation may not come to fruition in her battle against the disease, I disagree. The fact that she is fighting every single day, with grace, strength, and humor, is the motivating benefit from today. We see her face and hear her clear voice in every aspect of this bill. Her sheer determination, with the thousands of advocates who have shared their stories, brought us all together today and will be honored in this work. This bipartisan work before us is the backbone of our Committee, and I am pleased we once again embraced the same principles to ensure that all patients are included in a plan to end this deadly illness. It is my deep belief that this legislation will make significant strides to end Parkinson's and will provide our family members, caregivers, and friends with real hope.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1042, the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act. Our imports of Russian nuclear fuel date back to the megatons for megawatts disarmament program at the end of the Cold War. That program has been over for a decade now, and we have developed a dependence on Russian uranium. Our Nation's nuclear reactors currently depend on Russia for nearly 15 percent of their enriched uranium. This is troubling because over the last 2 years we have seen how Russia tries to wield its energy resources as a weapon. It is simply unsustainable. I support ending our dangerous reliance on Russia for enriched uranium, but if we are serious about energy security, we cannot simply switch one foreign dependence for another. That is why we must invest in our own uranium fuel cycle here at home. Right now, we have limited fuel facilities to provide the nuclear fuel our existing fleet needs, much less the advanced fuels that future reactors will need. Any move we make to end our reliance on Russian uranium must be partnered with a build-out of our domestic uranium supply chain. Otherwise, any action would just increase cost to consumers and impact reliability. That is why in committee, Democrats attempted to partner this bill with authorizations to the Department of Energy to invest in U.S. domestic enrichment and conversion capacity. Unfortunately, those efforts were initially rejected by our Republican majority, therefore, I opposed this bill at that time. Fortunately, the committee has now advanced legislation that authorizes those investments in our domestic fuel cycle, and that language will be included in the final defense authorization bill. With that legislation set to become law, I am now much more comfortable moving this bill. After passage of the defense authorization bill, we must ensure these important programs are funded at the levels authorized so we can finally end our dangerous reliance on Russian uranium. The combination of banning imports of Russian uranium and investing in domestic capacity will provide private industry with both the certainty and the incentives it needs to invest in the nuclear fuel supply chain. This will help us become a world leader again, not just in fuel production for our current reactors, but in fuel production for the next generation of reactors, as well. I urge support for this bill, Mr. Speaker. I ask that we support this bill on a bipartisan basis. It is a good bill at this point, and we want to get it to the Senate as quickly as possible. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5378, the Lower Costs, More Transparency Act. This bipartisan bill does exactly what it says it does: It delivers lower healthcare costs for the American people and brings much-needed transparency to our Nation's healthcare system. Access to affordable healthcare remains a major challenge for many American families. More than 40 percent of adults say they have either delayed or forgone medical care because of high costs. Prices for healthcare services also vary widely. Consumers often have difficulty obtaining price information to begin with. Another problem is that the information can be misleading or inaccurate, making it difficult for consumers to compare prices across healthcare providers before receiving care. Too many patients are forced to wait until after they receive care and receive their medical bill to see what they actually owe. H.R. 5378 brings some much-needed transparency to the healthcare system by codifying and strengthening important price transparency protections. It is a victory for everyone who has ever struggled to navigate and understand the cost of a healthcare procedure or a prescription drug at the pharmacy counter. These measures will empower consumers and employers with data on the prices hospitals charge and the rates insurers pay so that they can compare prices and save money. It also increases transparency of how pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, affect drug prices at the pharmacy counter. This will also help increase competition and lower healthcare costs for Americans. We have added new language in the bill to enhance the privacy protections for consumers' health information and to ensure that the full protection of the HIPAA privacy rule is applicable. I also want to mention, Mr. Speaker, the bill reduces costs for patients by ensuring Medicare beneficiaries are not paying more for the exact same drug because it was administered in a hospital outpatient department instead of a physician's office. It will also build on Democrats' work to rein in the soaring cost of prescription drugs by requiring the FDA to provide more information to generic drug manufacturers during the development process. This will help speed up the path to market and increase competition sooner to lower drug prices faster. All of these provisions in this bill will help make healthcare and prescription drugs more affordable for the American people. I also want to mention, Mr. Speaker, that H.R. 5378 will also make healthcare more accessible to American families thanks to critical investments in our Nation's public health programs that serve low- income and uninsured patients. The bill includes increased funding for community health centers at $4.4 billion per year, an unprecedented 10 percent increase over current funding levels. Community health centers are a critical source of primary healthcare for more than 30 million patients, 1 in every 11 Americans. These centers deliver high-quality, affordable healthcare to some of our most vulnerable communities, and this increased funding will allow these centers to continue providing this critical care. The bill increases funding for the National Health Service Corps, which places doctors in high-need communities. It also includes an unprecedented 7 years of funding, more than double the funding under current law, for the Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education program to support the training of primary care physicians in community-based settings. This program helps address doctor shortages in underserved areas as graduates of the program are likely to practice close to their training sites and to care for underserved patients. This long-term funding will help bring more certainty to the program to ensure that teaching health centers can plan and recruit for their residency programs. Finally, the bill also reauthorizes and increases funding for both the Special Diabetes Program and Special Diabetes Program for Indians. These programs provide critical investments in diabetes research and care. I will also mention that H.R. 5378 eliminates looming cuts to Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospitals to support these high-need hospitals that provide care for large numbers of Medicaid and uninsured patients. The increased funding for each of these public health and workforce programs is essential to ensuring access to care for our constituents across the country. All of this funding is fully offset with policies that will further strengthen our healthcare system and help reduce costs for American families. Mr. Speaker, when a version of this bill came before the Committee on Energy and Commerce, it passed unanimously with bipartisan support. Chair Rodgers and I have been working on this bill all year, and I commend her for her ongoing commitment to get it across the finish line. It is an important bill that delivers meaningful results. I will also take an opportunity to thank some of the staff who have worked on this. From my committee staff, I thank Tiffany Guarascio, Waverly Gordon, Una Lee, Saha Khaterzai, Rick Van Buren, Stephen Holland, and Lydia Abma. From the Republican staff, I thank Nate Hodson, Sarah Burke, Grace Graham, and Corey Ensslin. Floor action today simply would not have been possible without months of long-term commitment by the staff on both sides of the aisle to get this done. I think you can tell that I really think this is probably one of the most important bills that will come out of the Committee on Energy and Commerce this session. It is truly bipartisan, which is another thing I think is very important right now. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill to lower healthcare costs for the American people and to make healthcare more accessible. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, let me say that I concur with my colleagues and partners in crafting this important bipartisan piece of legislation that is intended to codify and improve upon the robust requirements that exist in the regulations that have been implemented by both the Trump and Biden administrations. With this bill, we seek to bring true health price transparency to lower costs for patients, employers, and unions purchasing health coverage. This bill is a floor, not a ceiling, and I intend that the implementing agencies will use the discretion left to them to ensure that health plans and insurers disclose the detailed price information and necessary data on reimbursement rates for healthcare items and services. We intend to follow this colloquy with a bipartisan letter to the agencies reiterating our expectations in greater detail. In addition, in further colloquy with Chair Rodgers, I address a technical change that needs to be made to the bill in negotiations with the Senate. In the new version of the bill, we have limited the drug price data flowing to small employers in order to strengthen health privacy protections for their employees. However, I want to make clear that we did not intend to exclude multiemployer, public sector, or retiree-only and union health plans under this new provision, and we are committed to fixing this issue before the bill becomes law. Ranking Member Bobby Scott also agrees with this perspective. I ask Chair Rodgers if she would concur with me that we make sure this issue is addressed in our negotiation with the Senate and before the bill becomes law.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.