the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 193, the nays are 230. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the at purpose does --

bill -- without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. collins: a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. collins: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having isen, recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 260, the nays are 165. ith one answering present. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the gentleman from maryland. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> i object to the motion -- i object to laying the motion to reconsider on the table. the speaker pro tempore: the bjection is heard. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. lofgren: i have a motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: ms. lofgren of california moves to reconsider the vote on passage of h.r.

5038. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i have a motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. mcgovern of massachusetts moves to lay on the table the motion to reconsider. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to table. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. >> mr. speaker, on this motion i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly

prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 216, the nays are 164. the motion is adopted.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on h.r. 863, the elijah e. cummings lower drug cost now act. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 758 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 3. the chair appoints the gentleman from new jersey, mr. payne, to preside over the committee of the whole.

the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 3 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to establish a fair price negotiation program, protect the medicare program from excessive price increases, and establish an out of pocket maximum for medicare part d enrollees and for other purposes. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time. general debate shall not exceed four hours with three hours equally divided among and controlled by the respective chairs and ranking minority members of the committees on energy and commerce, ways and means, and education and labor.

and one hour equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and the minority leader or their respective designees. the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pa lope, the gentleman from oregon, mr. walden, the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. neal, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, and the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, the majority leader or her designee and the minority leader or designee each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone. mr. pallone: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized, without objection. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. chairman. this week we'll 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 life-saving 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 cost now act, finally gives the federal government the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices for the american people. other countries negotiate with pharmaceutical companies and prices in those countries are four, five, or 10 times less to for the exact same drugs. this simply isn't fair. the american people are rightfully fed up. it's time we finally level the playing field and empower the federal government to negotiate a better deal. these negotiations will not only lead to low lower prices for consumers, it will result in significant savings for the

federal government. h.r. 3 takes the resulting $500 billion in savings and re-invent -- reinvests it in the american health care system and the search for new cures. with ecap 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 costs will not bankrupt them or empty their retirement account. we make transformational investments in the medicare program, adding for the first time benefits for dental, hearing and vision coverage. these new benefits willle with make a huge difference in the lives of our nation's seepors. we invest $12 billion in the search for new cures and boosting funding for the national institute of health and the food and drug administration. n.i.h. plays a critical role in the research and development of new drugs and this investment will ensure these cures and treatments become a reality. we also invest in combating the opioid crisis, in community health centers an maternal health care.

finally, beyond the negotiation, we're holding pharmaceutical companies accountable for when they jack up prices, bringing much-needed transparency to the process. so mr. chairman, the status quo is simply unacceptable and unsustainable. it's time to negotiate a better deal for the american people. it's time to pass h.r. 3 and with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. -- the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> drug costs in america are too high. republicans believe this and so do democrats. we all should work together, though, to lower drug costs for consumers. we all should work together to stop anti-competitive actions of pharmaceutical companies that try to game the system and delay access to lower cost alternative medicines an we should all work together, together, mr. speaker, to pass legislation that both lowers drug costs without killing off medical innovation.

unfortunately, h.r. 3 fails on this count and that's not just my conclusion, mr. speaker. the great american innovators who are working day and night to find cures to alzheimer's, cancer, a.l.s., parkinson's and hundreds of other diseases and life-changing therapies are pleading, pleading with us for a no vote to h.r. 3. the democrat's plan. mr. walden: 138 different biotech companies signed a letter to congress five days ago after reading the bill, they wrote, and i quote, this extreme proposal will up end the ecosystem of u.s. biomedical innovation, destroying our ability to attract private sector investment, close quote. these are the companies who develop the new innovations in medicine, they said h.r. 3 will shatter the dreams of patients hoping for life-saving cures. mr. speaker, i have a -- the letter right here that i'll insert in the record. the congressional budget office

also looked at h.r. 3. speaker pelosi's bill. they said it would kill off more than 38 new medical innovations. 38. council of economic advisors looked at it and they said they thought it would be more like 100 new medicines that would be lost. it's no wonder that president trump, the country's strongest advocate for lowering drug prices, said even he could not support h.r. 3 and would have to veto it. i have is his statement of administrative policy here for the record, mr. speaker. my friends on the other side, the democrats, ignore these facts. some have even said, some have said, can you imagine this, that it is worth it, quote-unquote, to forgo cures. slires? it's worth it to never have a cure for alings himmers? to never have a cure for a.l.s.? what about huntington's disease, or parkinson's or rheumatoid

arthritis. the answer for me is no, because one lost cure is one too many. the independent research service read through h.r. 3 and said it's unconstitutional, most likely because of the huge, punitive club it hands the government. if an innovator under the bill on the floor today that the democrats have, if an innovator does not agree with the price the government demands, the government can take 95% of that company's revenues for the sale of that drug. 95%. by the way, it's actually higher than that because you can't deduct it and they have to pay tax. democrats call that a negotiation. i call that a mugging, mr. speaker. a mugging. their scheme is based on what happens with drugs in six other countries and they ignore that in these reference countries and other countries around the world people are denied access to life-saving medicines that americans have access to.

so this is the tradeoff here. if you remember nothing else. it is that we first get access to medicines and then the countries the bill would emwithdrew late and copy and bring the process here, you don't get access to some of these life-saving drugs that americans do here. that's your trade. let me tell you about the family of katy stafford. she's a child living with cystic fibrosis in the united kingdom. she was told by officials she could not receive the medicine her doctor told her would be the best chance of threeringt life-threatening condition because they don't cover it in the united kingdom under their health system. t me tell you about andre, joshua, canadian brother, tragically, both suffering from cystic fine roe sis. their parents had to beg the canadian government to cover treatment for their sons as they slowly lose their lung function. now their oldest son is enrolled in a clinical trial but the

youngest son isn't eligible for. so they must watch as one child gets help and the other child's health declines. fortunately, mr. speaker, american children have access to this new medicine. we cannot allow this to happen in the united states. denial of care is not an american value. but i want to be clear. we all agree that americans do pay too much for prescription drugs. and we need to come back together as republicans and democrats to help solve this issue. there is a better way. because we can reduce the cost of drugs. we can improve health care. we can lower long-term costs. but we don't have to do it at the expense of great american innovation. or restricting patients' access to life-saving medicines. there's a way to do. this members will have an opportunity to support really the only bipartisan legislation to come to the floor, h.r. 19. you'll see it as a substitute. the lower cost, more cures act. which we will offer as a

substitute amendment, is the bipartisan solution. it can be signed into law. this year. this year. not vetoed. not never getting the attention in the senate like h r. 3 will find itself if it gets there. this could become law. this is where we can join together and immediately begin to provide relief to patients and seniors from high prescription drug costs. this ill bill lowers out of pocket spending, protects access to new medicines an champions competition and innovation an most importantly, every single proposal, mr. speaker, every single proposal in h.r. 19, the substitute is bipartisan work. democrats and republicans. we give you this option. this is a serious proposal. it's been described that way. could be signed, would be signed into law by the president, by the end of this year. so let's not force a partisan plan that frankly puts politics over progress, that kills medical innovation and cures.

instead, can't we come together and pass meaningful bipartisan legislation, get it across the finish line and actually find lower costs and more cures for americans? i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time they have gentleman from new ersey is recognized. mr. pallone: i'd like to yield three minutes to mr. clyburn of south carolina, our majority whip. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for three minutes. mr. clyburn: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 3, the elijah e. cummings lower drug costs now act. dr. martin luther king jr. once said, of all the faults of inequality, injustice in health inhumane.e most i believe my dear friend elijah

that h.r. 3ld agree is a giant step toward addressing injustice in health care. this landmark legislation gives medicare the power to negotiate directly with drug companies and extends those negotiated prices to americans with private insurance also. this is a huge win for the american consumer. in the united states our drug prices are nearly four times higher than in similar countries and this legislation provides real price reductions that will put significant money back in consumers' pockets. a portion of those savings will be reinvested in researching new cures and treatments. these cost savings will also extend medicare benefits to cover dental, vision and hearing

and caps out-of-pocket prescription drug costs at $2,000 for those on medicare. in addition, these savings will allow $10 billion to fund provisions that are in my community health centers legislation, to enhance those facilities that serve 28 million americans, half of which are in rural communities. the bill includes a $5 billion funding boost for capital improvements and construction, to expand the footprint of community health centers, an additional $5 billion in funding over five years for a community health center grant. providing consistent funding for and building on the success of community health centers is critical -- critically important

to making quality health care ore accessible and affordable. in my district, where four rural hospitals recently closed, there are eight federally funded community health care centers working to serve almost 190,000 patients. mr. speaker, i urge strong bipartisan support for h.r. 3, a piece of legislation that will contribute to the ending of injustice in health care and help move us closer to making the greatness of america accessible and affordable for all. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield a minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today agreeing with americans that drug prices are

too high. congress must act and we have done so in the energy and commerce committee by passing bipartisan solutions. h.r. 3 is bad policy, a partisan sham, and will result in more than 100 fewer cures. plus it is dead on arrival in the senate. what if that one new drug is the cure for alzheimer's or cancer? under the leadership of ranking member walden, we have solutions that deliver lower costs and more cures to americans. our bill is entirely bipartisan. h.r. 19 lowers the cost of prescription drugs and caps seniors' out-of-pocket costs. it encourages innovation and will increase competition while enhancing transparency and getting more generic medicines to market faster. the american people deserve solutions that will be signed into law. i encourage my colleagues across the aisle to deliver the american people more cures, not fewer, and support h.r. 19.

thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. walden: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: mr. chairman, i yield two minutes now to the chairwoman of our health subcommittee, ms. eshoo from california. the chair: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. eshoo: mr. speaker, i rise in support of the elijah cummings lower drug costs now act. this is in your name, elijah, and i think that you're listening. this bill is the most transformational change to medicare since president johnson signed medicare into law in 1965. why? because it allows medicare to directly negotiate the price of the most expensive drugs in our country, including insulin. the lower price will not only apply to seniors that are enrolled in medicare, but across

all private insurance policies. manufacturers will no longer be able to hike prices faster than the rate of inflation, and, very importantly, it caps the out of costs of seniors for their prescriptions at $2,000 a year. that's going to be a godsend to seniors. something else that will be a godsend to seniors is, with the savings in this legislation, seniors in medicare will have additional benefits that they have been clamoring for for a very long time. coverage for vision, dental and hearing, as well as colonoscopies and other treatments. very importantly, very importantly, i hear a lot about innovation here, this legislation increases funds for the national institutes of health, to research and develop new cures.

it provides almost $3 billion for the f.d.a. to ensure the safety of our drugs, very important, all the committee members know that. it invests in our community health centers and it directs $10 billion to address the opioid crisis in our country. so what's the difference between what the republicans are saying and what the democrats are saying? at the core of this bill, h.r. 3 , is that there will be direct negotiations with the drug manufacturers to bring the price of drugs down. our republican friends do not support that. and we know it works. direct negotiations from the v.a., in the v.a., direct negotiations in tricare, which is the health care system for all of our fellow americans that

wear a uniform and their families. so, this legislation is sensible . millions of americans are not only going to save money, they will finally, finally, finally have the peace of mind that they will be able to afford the prescription drugs that they need for treatment or those treatments that keep them alive. i'm so proud of the work that the committee has done and i recommend this bill to every single member of the house, republicans, democrats, because of the substance of it and what it will bring into people's lives and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey. did you reserve? mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. walden: i'm now going to of north . hudson

carolina. v.a. only cover 24 of the top 50 medicare part d -- b drugs on the v.a. health care formulary. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. housing and urban development republicans and democrats -- mr. hudson: republicans and democrats agree. americans pay too much for prescription drugs. we agree we need to do something about it. we agree our friends and loved ones need access to live-saving -- life-saving cures and treatments. and americans want us to work together in a bipartisan way to get things done. yet today we're considering speaker pelosi's partisan bill. this is an exercise in futility. not only will it stop an estimated 100 new life-saving drugs, it has no chance of being signed into law. i care about the millions of americans like my late grandmother living with alzheimer's. and the thousands of americans diagnosed with cancer every single day. and the children who face life-altering diagnose he's -- diagnoses. i want them to have hope and

want them to have access to the very best medicine. that's why we introduced h.r. 19. bipartisan legislation that could be signed into law by president trump this year. so let's stop the partisan theatrics and get serious about the problem the people are begging us to fix. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. mr. walden: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. chairman, i yield now two minutes to the gentlewoman from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. schakowsky: so, since 2003 the pharmaceutical companies have had free reign to gouge sick people. they forced into law language that prohibited the federal government from negotiating with the drug companies for lower prices. which already the veterans administration does and has done for decades. we know that negotiating for fair prices actually is the home

way that we're going to be able to -- only way that we're going to be able to lower prices and that is what h.r. 3 is going to do. even donald trump has said that, when he was a candidate, when it comes to negotiating the cost of drugs, we are going to negotiate like crazy. that was then. and this is now. the congressional budget office says we're going to save about half a trillion dollars when we negotiate in the most effective way to protect seniors and families and anyone who has insurance. and we're going to be able to use that money to finally help seniors -- senior citizens who need help with their eyeglasses, with their hearing aids, with their dental care. we're going to be able to make such a difference in their lives. 90% of democrats and 87% of

independents and 80% of republicans say they support allowing the federal government to negotiate for prices. the time is absolutely now for us to pass this legislation. h.r. 3, the elijah cummings lower drug costs now act, is the solution that we have been waiting for. a historic step forward in our fight to solve the problem of prescription drug -- the prescription drug pricing crisis that we face in this country. and i look forward to seeing it pass into law and the president of the united states keeping his promise and not breaking it and signing negotiation into law. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from illinois, an incredible, important member of our committee, mr. shimkus, for

one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. do you want 10 new drugs, 30 new drugs on the market? 100 new drugs on the market? or zero? h.r. 3 removes research and development investments, which will hinder innovation. innovation doesn't always mean higher costs. take hepatitis c. which lowers and reduces health care costs in the long run. technology and innovation have always had the potential to reduce the time and cost of identifying the developing new therapies which lower the cost of drugs. incorporation of innovative genomic analysis means drug developers can reduce the amount of guess work in identifying candidate molecules for further research. this same technology is being used by drug manufacturers today to help streamline and expedite the process of conducting trials and investments in precision medicine won't mean -- will mean that you don't prescribe drugs that will not work or in some cases make people sicker. that's why i support h.r. 19, the lower cost, more cures act,

which is composed entirely of bipartisan provisions and could become law right now. and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: mr. chairman i, yield two minutes now -- mr. chairman, i yield two minutes now to the gentlewoman from california, member of our energy and commerce committee. the chair: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. matsui: thank you very much. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 3, the elijah e. cummings lower drug costs now act, the most transformational expansion of medicare since its creation. as co-chair of the house democrats' task force on aging and families, i am fighting for the nearly nine in 10 seniors taking a prescription drug because when our system puts profit over patient health, beneficiaries pay the price. with this landmark legislation, we are delivering on the promise to lift up older americans and their families. h.r. 3 negotiates lower drug

prices, it expands medicare to include vision, dental and hearing coverage, it caps out-of-pocket costs, and we extend low drug prices to all americans for private -- with private plans. while there are many reasons to support hrment respect -- h.r. 3, mine is tony from sacramento. tony has type 2 diabetes. she's a single mom and works part-time to care for her child, all while managing multiple chronic conditions. over the last decade, the price of insulin has increased 197% and those increases make it harder and harder for a family to get by. with h.r. 3, drug price savings will be passed on to families like hers. toni could pay as little at $34 per month giving her family the relief they need for other expenses.

for senior, families, and others who need to lift the burden of high drug prices from their everyday live, i ask that my colleagues support this bill and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. recognize the ow health subcommittee, dr. michael burgess from texas for two minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. burgess: in the early days of my medical practice, the the 1980's, i would sit around with other doctors and complain that there were treatments available in europe and they were not available in united states. but congress acted and enacted the prescription drug user fees n 199 , broke the regulatory bottleneck, had -- and the drug approval process has improved to the point where american doctors have more tools at their disposal to alleviate human suffering than any time in the

nation's past. the president weighed in right around thanksgiving with what he thought would be the correct path forward, and indeed, the rule committees last night would receive the statement of administration policy if the president that said he would veto h.r. 3 if presented in its current form. but he goes on to say, the statement goes on to say, h.r. 19 is a far better approach to lowering drug prices and discovering life-saving cures. the president believes there's a path toward. the administration remains committed to working with both parties to pass legislation. so what h.r. 3 represents to me is a lost opportunity. it was an opportunity to work together. the president wanted to work together. but it is a lost opportunity to bring down drug costs for america's patients. we can vote against h.r. 3. we can support the amendment in the nature of a substitute, h reform 19. h.r. 19 could become law this year in 2019. i yield back the balance of my

time. mr. walden: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from california, mr. mcnear nee, a member of the committee. the chair: the gentleman from california has 90 seconds. mr. mcnerney: thank you. i thank the chairman for bringing this bill forward. i rise in support of h.r. 3, the elijah e. cummings lower drug costs now act. we're here today to debate an issue that shouldn't need any discussion from members of the body. we have heard from members back home from people back home, forced to choose between critical medications and basic needs because prescription drugs are just too expensive. just this week, one of my constituents marta, shared her story with me. marta suffers from an autoimmune disease that causes her own body to attack her muscles. without medication she struggles

to see, even the slightest movement feel like a colossal feat, including her breathing. the prescription drugs shea she needs in order to walk or even just breathe was once available for free. but the medication she is now taking costs an outrageous, outrageous $375,000 a year. who can afford that? marta's insurance covers some of cost, it's a constant fight for her to get the medication she needs to be able to live her life. what good are miracle drugs if people can't afford them? as members of congress we must do everything in our power to ensure that they can afford life-saving and life-changing drugs. under h.r. 3, the government would be empowered to negotiate directly with the drug companies to lower prices for the american people. i urge my colleagues to support

h.r. 3 for marta and the millions of americans burdened by skyrocketing prescription drug costs. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: i recognize the top republican on the house oversight and investigation subcommittee, mr. guthrie, for one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. guthrie: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in opposition to h.r. 3. two issues that i often hear about back home are robocalls and drug prices. last week derek spite ideological differences on both sides of the aisle, we came together to address robocalls. i am disappointed that the same cannot be said for drug prices. republicans, democrats, president trump, doctors, pharmacist, patient, we all want lower drug prices. chosen tomocrats have

pursue partisan legislation that will go nowhere. i was pleased to support a bill that had bipartisan solutions to lower drug prices. my democratic colleagues have agreed to these provisions in the past. the lower cost, more cures act will allow the continuation of life-saving innovation in research and lower drug pries for kentuckians. urge my colleagues to support the lower costs, more cures act and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: i yield a minute and a half to mr. welch of vermont, a member of the committee. the chair: the gentleman from vermont is in a hurry. he's not yet recognized but he is for 90 seconds. mr. welch: thank you, mr. speaker. we have done in our committee some bipartisan work that attacks patent abuse and will help bring down the cost of drugs but there is a question. it's not a partisan question. it's really a judgment.

can we stop pharma from what has been relentless price increases. i would call it price gouging, without the government on behalf of the consumer intervening. we are the only country where the government sits on its hands while pharma boosts the prices. president trump cold elijah that's a ripoff. that's what he told him. he said he'd be ok for bringing in safe drugs from abroad. for price negotiation. or as he called it, getting a better deal. his idea which is a good one, incorporated in this bill is let's have an international reference price so we don't pay four, five, six times what they pay in europe. that's a good idea. but bottle to line, the question is -- but bottom line, the ifstion is, will pharma stop we don't step up with relief for

consumers? it won't happen without us asserting that authority as is done in this bill. the benefits are ex-tened to employers who are struggling to pay health insurance for their folks and can't give them a raise, for seniors, and for every individual. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: i recognize the gentleman from west virginia, mr. mckinley, an important member of the committee, for one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mckinley: look, let's be frank. senator leadership has already said they're never going to vote on h.r. 3. we learned today president trump made it clear he would veto it. what are we doing here? if lowering the cost of prescription drugs were really a priority for democrats, they would vote to adopt h.r. 19, the bipartisan alternative. instead, of -- instead of this politically charged bill. h.r. 19 has 35 bipartisan

provisions that passed out of committee. includes 90% of the bill in the senate. h.r. 19 will not only lower drug prices but protect innovation and research into new medicines and cures for diseases like alzheimer's, rheumatoid arthritis, a.l.s., diabetes, parkinson's. the congressional budget office and council of economic advisors both concluded that h.r. 3 would prevent hundreds of new cures from entering the market. therefore i got to ask, the supporters of h.r. 3, which cures for our loved ones are you willing to sacrifice? i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from oregon, mr. schrader, a member of the committee. the chair: the other gentleman from oregon is recognized for 90 seconds, one minute and a half.

mr. schrader: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise today to speak on behalf of h r. 3, the lower drug costs now act of 2019. the bill before us today will finally allow medicare to negotiate the price for prescription drugs to get a better deal for our seniors, a task that's long been successful by the veterans administration, medicaid, department of defense, and frankly, commercial insurance plans. why not allow our seniors to negotiate the best price for their costly drugs? cowl save the taxpayers a lot of money. americans support negotiation. i will point out that while i appreciate the efforts to expand service, the medicare trustees report has shown that the medicare hospital insurance trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2026, a mere six years from now. at the same time, medicare per capita spending is supposed to grow at a rate over 5% a year.

the savings from the drug negotiation portion of this bill, at least a big portion of it, should be put toward ensuring that our seniors continue to have access to medicare. we cannot keep spending money we do not have. as we continue to have conversations around expanding access to health care and lowering cost of prescription drugs, i urge my colleagues to be mindle of the need to address the solvency of our safety net systems. this is a good bill. i urge support. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: i just want to say, we cannot lose sight of how anti-innovation h.r. 3 is. we cannot lose sight of how many cures will never come around as a result of -- these aren't my conclusions. they are, but they're also the conclusions of the congressional budget office, council of economic advisors, hundreds, hundreds of new drugs will never come to market, medicines will never be created, innovation

10% fewer now that drugs will enter the market every year in the 2030's an thereafter, every year, as a result of h.r. 3. this bill will leave people behind. it will result in earlier deaths than otherwise should happen. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. griffith: mr. chairman, in committee i raised issues of unconstitutional takings in h.r. 3. 95% of gross revenues are taken from a manufacturer unless they agree to the price the government offers. it is not negotiation. it is an offer you can't refuse. it is confiscatory and according to acordingly it is unconstitutional.

-- and accordingly, it is unconstitutional. you don't have to believe me, the nonpartisan congressional budget service said this bill likely viles the fifth and eighth amendments of the united states constitution. ladies and gentlemen, i took an oath to support the united states constitution when i entered this body. to support the constitution, you must vote no on h.r. 3. to fix drug pricing, you should vote yes on the walden amendment in the nature of a substitute. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. ruiz, a member of the committee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ruiz: thank you, mr. chairman. we have hundreds of drugs in the market that millions of americans do not have access to and cannot get because they are not affordable.

seniors in my district are walk ugh out of the pharmacy without their medication after seeing the out of pocket costs and saying to themselves, i can't afford this. many seniors are choosing between eating and buying their groceries versus taking their medications. they're not taking their medicine that they need which puts their health and life at risk. i've heard from seniors in my district who face up to $6,000 a month in out of pocket costs for their medicine. to quote one constituent of mine, quote, prescription and health care costs are an astronomical burden, unquote. to quote another, necessary medication should not be treated as a luxey, unquote. so we must bring down the outrageous out of pocket costs plaguing our seniors and families. h.r. 3, the elijah e. cummings lowering drug costs now act, finally answers the call to bring down out of control costs. it does so by empowering medicare for the first time ever to negotiate lower drug prices

with big pharma which will lower costs for not only seniors but also american families with private health insurance. it does so by limiting out of pocket costs to no more than $2,000 a year for seniors. very important to seniors needing expensive medication. it does so by strengthening medicare, delivering vision, dental, and hearing benefits for seniors across this country. every member of the house should do the right thing for seniors and american families. pass h.r. 3 and senate majority leader mcconnell should do his job and bring this legislation up for a vote immediately so that we can strengthen medicare for seniors and lower the cost of medicine for american families. hank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: thank you, mr. speaker. i would point out that the republican alternative also caps costs for seniors, again, for the first time we believe there's a place for that -- where that needs to happen for our seniors. in the committee, the

republicans offered up an amendment that would have taken all the middleman profits, the rebates understands, and put them toward making ins -- rebates, and put them toward making insulin. unfortunately every democratic in the committee voted against that. why, i do not know. but they did. we want more cures and we want lower costs. we can have both. there's no dispute among us, republicans and democrats, the drugs are too high. the question is, can we find a scheme that's both constitutional and doesn't eliminate cures for diseases that people are relying on and shut down innovation in america? i think we can, by the way. i think that's h.r. 19. we'll deal with that later. now i'd like to recognize the gentleman from ohio, mr. johnson, for one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. johnson: madam speaker, americans see a congress paralyzed by impeachment and other distractions. we should change course. do our job. and put our constituents before partisan politics. reducing prescription drug prices is a way to do that.

my friends across the aisle brag about affordable health care in other countries. but they don't mention the hidden costs. look at a young boy from canada, ashton, who in 2018 was stricken with an aggressive form of thyroid cancer. treatments approved by the canadian health system failed. and his life was saved when his family brought him to america for a cutting-edge treatment unavailable in canada. this isn't an isolated incident. as my republican colleagues have described today, the data shows that h.r. 3 takes us in the wrong direction, stifling innovation and reducing future cures. americans are desperately looking for relief at the pharmacy counter. and we can give it to them with h.r. 19, a bipartisan proposal with a real chance of becoming law. and i urge my colleagues to support it. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: may i ask how much time remains on each side?

the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has 12 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from oregon has 12 minutes. mr. pallone: thank you, madam chair. i'd like to yield now a minute and a half to the gentleman from texas, a member of our committee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 90 seconds. mr. veasey: thank you, mr. chairman. for really helping deliver on the promise to work for the people by bringing down the costs of prescription drugs for all americans. this is a historic and much-needed piece of legislation and i'm proud to be a member of the energy and commerce committee in congress to bring this bill to the floor. this past summer, william of arlington, texas, came into my district office, because like so many americans, william was enrolled in a medicare plan and was concerned with the price of his life-saving prescriptions. william was worried about the price of his generic cholesterol medicine. he had been paying $600 a month, $600 a month when he went to his

local pharmacy to fill his prescription. i'm hearing all this about all these other things, protecting these pharmaceutical drug companies, but why is no one talking about people like william that are having a hard time making ends meet and they just want some relief when it comes to these prescription drug prices? that's who we need to be taking care of and defending in this debate. many seniors across the country are living like william. they're on fixed incomes. they are really having a hard time making ends meet. and forcing them to choose between paying for their prescription drugs and their daily necessities is really unacceptable in our country. that's why i'm proud to stand here with my colleagues today to voice support for h.r. 3, the elijah e. cummings lower drug costs now act. i'm proud this legislation will ensure medicare beneficiaries will be covered on things like vision, dental and hearing benefits. i'm also particularly proud -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired.

mr. veasey: i just want to thank our chairman again. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. pallone: i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. veasey: thank you again. i'm just proud that the version of this bill that will help our low-income residents all across this country will be passed into law. there are so many other things that i could talk about, but i have to tell new closing, there are people that are out there hurting. they are making life and death decisions every day and having to choose between whether or not they're going to eat or pay for their prescription drugs. it's unacceptable in this country. i yield back. thank you. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: thank you, madam speaker. i want to point out a couple of things. first of all -- things. first of all, what's really unacceptable is to kill off american innovation in this space. we know from the biotech people that are doing this innovation, they have written us saying it will shatter the hopes and dreams of americans waiting for cures.

it will completely upend the ecosystem of innovation. america is where the innovation occurs. we don't think that has to happen to bring down the cost of drugs, which we also support. we also don't think you should end up in a system like this where in these countries that they want to emulate, like australia, canada, france, germany, japan and the united kingdom, all new medications we have here, they only have between 30% and 60%. 27%act, in cancer there are to 50% fewer cancer drugs in these countries. so you get cancer in one of these countries, if you're an american here, you might get a drug that would prolong your life or cure your cancer. these countries, you have a run of 27% to 50% chance you won't get that drug. diabetes, 10% to 50% fewer. rest pritory, 17% to -- respiratory, 17% to 50% fewer. they deny access to care into life-saving, cutting-edge drugs that we innovate. i'd like to recognize the

gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg, a very important member of our committee, for one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. walberg: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, as i travel across michigan, i constantly hear about the high cost of prescription drugs. hardworking families are simply paying too much. that's why we need to tackle this issue in a bipartisan way. not try to score political points. sadly, h.r. 3 is a partisan, heavy-handed approach that has no chance of becoming law. let's be honest. government doesn't negotiate. they dictate. this drug pricing scheme will ultimately hurt families, stifle innovation and prevent life-saving cures from becoming available to our friends, our neighbors and families. there's a better approach. a plan that's patient-focused and filled with bipartisan provisions that enjoy support in

the senate as well. it's h.r. 19. the lower costs, more cures act. this bill will strengthen transparency, encourage medical breakthroughs, and make medications that families rely on more affordable. if the other side is serious about getting something done, then we should be voting on the lower costs, more cures act this week, and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: i'd like to yield two minutes now to my colleague from florida, mr. soto. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. soto: thank you, madam speaker. you know, back in central florida, we had a town hall where we had everyone from bernie sanders supporters supporting medicare for all to donald trump make america great again red-hat wearing trump supporters. and all of them, regardless of the political spectrum, could

not believe medicare can negotiate -- can't negotiate. what a sham, is what they said. well, today's the day. we're going to end the ban on medicare negotiating. so you can ring your hands, contort the facts, but then you're going to have to go home and explain why you campaigned on ending the ban on medicare negotiating and then you voted no. and then you voted to keep the sham system in place where we don't even allow the government to negotiate for lower drug prices. and it caps out-of-pocket costs at $2,000. that saves $1,196 for the over 124,000 seniors, per senior, in my district. it also applies to the 550,000 people who have private insurance. and what do we do with the $500 billion we save? we finally crack that injustice -- correct than justice for seniors to get dental, vision and hearing coverage. we hear scare tactics, hundreds of drugs aren't going to be

approved. try eight to 15. while 300-plus drugs, according to the c.b.o., will be improved over the next 10 years. so let's stop the scare tactics. is it worth it? of course it's worth it. hundreds of new cures. finally giving dental, vision, hearing coverage. of course it's worth it. $1,196 in savings per senior in my district, of course it's worth it. america put us in the majority because they think it's worth it. so it's time to pass the lower the drug costs now act and i yield back to my chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: we've heard this refrain before, madam speaker. that it's worth it. worth it not to have a cure. a cure for what? we don't know. we know that there are 100 drugs that will never be developed because of h.r. 3. that's what the council on economic advisors said. congressional budget office says 38 in the next 20 years will never be developed. is that the cure for alzheimer's? is that the cure for parkinson's

or a.l.s.? and you say the worth it to up-end the entire ecosystem of innovation in america? that's what we just heard. we heard it in committee too. it's ok. we don't need a cure for this, that or the other thing. 138 of these great american innovators wrote us and said, it's not worth it. you're going to shart the hopes and dreams of people -- shatter the hopes and dreams of people who are hoping that that will be a cure for cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia or s.m.a. oh, by the way, we're developing those cures. but your bill, h.r. 3, kills innovation in america. and that means people will die because they didn't get those drugs because they were never invented. they were never d.n.c. -- we don't have to do that to bring down the cost of drugs. there are bipartisan ways to bring down the cost of drugs without destroying medical innovation in america.

and we want to work with you to do this. h.r. 3 is the purely partisan bill on the floor. the proposal we have is all bipartisan, republican and democrat ideas put together. that will have a positive effect on bringing down drug prices, it will stop the gaming of the system, and it will result in more cures. i now recognize congress' only pharmacist, the gentleman from georgia, an outspoken advocate for our legislation, doing the right thing for patients who he greeted at the pharmacy counter every day, mr. carter, for two minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carter: i thank the gentleman for yielding. he find myself in a situation here where i'm both excited and i'm sad. i'm finally getting the opportunity to address something that was one of my major initiatives coming to congress. and that is to do something about prescription drug pricing. as the ranking member noted, i'm one for over 30 years who was at the front counter telling patients how much their medication was going to be.

i'm the one who watched the mother in tears because she couldn't afford her child's medication. i'm the one who watched a senior citizen try to decide between buying medication and buying groceries. yet never did it enter into my mind that this was a republican or a democrat thing. no. and it never was and it should not be now. this is about americans and about americans trying to get medications. now, i will tell you, in my career, in my pharmacy career, i have witnessed nothing short of miracles in the way of new drugs. i can remember a time when if you were diagnosed with hepatitis c, you were going to die. that's all there was to it. now think about it. we can actually cure it with a pill. how phenomenal is that? that is what research and development has done for us.

now, do pharmaceutical manufacturers need to do a better job with their pricing? yes, they do. but i'm here to tell you where the real problem lies and i've been saying it ever since i've been here for five years, and that is in the middleman, in the pharmacy benefit managers. the ones who hide behind the curtain and are causing this. they bring no value whatsoever to the system. and yet h.r. 3 is going to do away with research and development. you heard it. even if it's 100, even if it's one, that's one too many that doesn't come to market. what if it's the one for alzheimer's? the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. walden: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. carter: ladies and gentlemen, this is too important this should not be partisan -- important, this should not be partisan. thank goodness we have h.r. 19. a bipartisan bill.

everything that is in h.r. 19 is bipartisan. everything. and it brings down the cost of medication without stymieing innovation, without ruining research and development. and i encourage you to support h.r. 3. h.r. 19, excuse me. mr. pallone: i yield myself such time as i may consume. this is a historic piece of legislation before us this evening. is a elijah cummings critical action we need to lower prescription drug prices. unfortunately my republican colleagues continue to peddle big pharmaceuticals talking points. even the trump administration health and human services secretary who was a drug company

executive himself acknowledged, i quote, that drug companies ke to claim if one penny disappears, american innovation will grind to a halt. i'm appalled by this argument. if the federal government and the american taxpayers who are the largest innovators. and they have enjoyed support is the largest support of biomedical research in the world and this is the treatments and cures. research shows that prescription drug products were discovered through taxpayer n.i.h. research and grants. ccording to a report, n.i.h. -funded research contributed 210 new drugs approved by the f.d.a. between 2010 and 2016.

americans are lisks longer, heart disease, stroke and cancer mortality rates are on the decline. act, h.r. 3 mmings will strengthen innovation by investing direct funding to continue this momentum. this money is delivered to the agency to provide sustained predictable investments to our researchers at our world class universities. this bill will advance research in cancer and rare diseases and others. it also provides additional funding for phase two and phase three clinical trials. it will pay dividends for patients. i'm so tired of hearing the republic cap claim that h.r. will kill new drug innovation.

it is the same fear mongering ey have used to get out of their out of control prices. now is the time for us to deliver our to patients to live long by lowering their drug prices and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. walden: i can't help but just respond. our information is based on fact, not rhetoric. it coments from the independent congressional budget office who works for all of us. d when they evaluated h.r. , cbo said the pelosi plan would result in fewer new drug products coming to market. c.b.o., you control that all you want but the congressional

budget office said 38 new cures can be developed in the next 20 years if bill would be lost. up to 38. was the croum of economic advisors, new medicines would not come to market because of h.r. . the great american innovators wrote to the speaker and the republican leader and said the cures would be shattered by h.r. and unform h.r. is an unprecedented and government intervention in delivery that will limit patient access. these are the people that when they get a cure and develop a cure, but hopefully they develop a cure for diabetes, they will

rush out to say we developed a cure. but it's these innovators that do the development of the drugs. the congressional budget office said and i quote when it comes to h.r. spending on n.i.h., the effects of the new drug interventions would be modest. we have supported increases in additional research at n. innovators nd the spread in these startups that are begging us not to blow up the system to get drug prices down. we are willing to work on both sides of the aisle to do that. but you don't have to destroy innovation in america. h.r. independent analyses shows will do exactly that.

mr. stivers.ute to mr. stivers: i commend the ranking member. i have a concern about the costs that h.r. and h.r. 119 could have on small manufacturers through the part d redesign. they serve the low income subsidy population and would disproportionately affect their access to lifesaving and lifechanging medications such as drugs for mental illness. i ask to enter into a colloquy to ensure small manufacturers are not penalized as this process moves forward. mr. walden: i thank the gentleman from ohio. i'm hopeful after this clinical exercise we could work on a

bipartisan basis like we were doing before. the speaker unform shut down the discussions. i look forward to working with the gentleman from ohio to make sure that the population is not adversely and i yield such time as i may consume. i appreciate the gentleman for bringing up this important issue. and i reserve the ball aps of my time. the chair: scrart. mr. pallone: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the republicans keep saying they want to work with us. every time we have suggested to them the only way to reduce produces that i know of is by having some kind of negotiation. we are talking about the drugs for which there is a monopoly. these are the brand-name drugs which there is no generic

alternatives. every other country that we have mentioned, because we subsidize them and as the american people get ripped off, australia, candidate yeah, japan, france, they bring prices down by negotiating. when you have these negotiators and have the power because they want to sell their drugs to bring the prices down. if you don't do that, then you have no effective way of bringing prices down. we know. when medca care part d was established, the republicans insisted they put in this clause in part d that said the government can't negotiate prices. that's why we have to pass this bill. the government has no power to

do that. why not give the government the ability and they refuse to do it. they want to work with us on a bipartisan basis but refused to do negotiated prices that gets id of that clause that the department of health and human services can negotiate prices. we are subsidizing drugs that are being sold in other countries. it's not fair. why should we let the drug companies continue with this monopoly? we are moving h.r. 3. that is the basis for h.r. . and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from oregon has two minutes remaining. mr. walden: i recognize mr. allen for one minute. mr. allen: thank you member. we all agree that prescription drug prices are skyrocketing and

congress must act. the question is how do we go about it? h.r. 3 is a radical takeover of the pharmaceutical industry and will prevent americans from accessing potentially lifesaving cures. according to the white house council of economic advisers will prevent 100 fewer drugs entering the u.s. market. fact three, some countries as proposed under this legislation have experienced a decrease to innovative new medicines and supply shortages for in-demand ug drugs. we have an alternative. h.r. 19, the lower cost more cures act. i urge you to work together in a bipartisan way or h.r. 19. and i yield back.

mr. walden: can i get a time check? the chair: the gentleman has one minute remaining. mr. walden: i reserve at this point unless he has no other speakers. mr. pallone: i'm prepared to close with my three minutes. i'll go ahead and close as well. the chair: the gentleman is ecognized. mr. walden: let's go through this real quickly. democrats have said it's not worth it to have future cures. worth it not to have future cures. the congressional budget office 8 cures will not come about. hey said we want a model after foreign countries and you have

fewer access to drugs for diseases. the chart lists those individually. we can do this better and can work together. the congressional budget office said when we created medicare part d, having the government in charge of pricing would have a neglidgeable effect. they believe that today. if you want to deny new cures to patients and go on a system because you die because the medicine is not available, vote for hf h.r. . op the gaming by the pharmaceutical companies. and i yield back. mr. pallone: i yield such time as i may consume. with h.r. 3, we are one step

closer to fulfilling our promise to making prescription drugs more affordable. today here in the united states, drug companies can charge whatever they want because there is no competition and the federal government has no ability to negotiate drug prices. the american people are getting ripped off. and in other countries, negotiations occur and prices are lower than here in the united states. the american people have been subsidizing prescription drugs for the rest of the world and fed up paying more for the exact same drug than someone in a similar developed country. we are empowering the federal government to negotiate prices with the drug manufacturers. what we are doing with the savings that comes from this bill is we are providing additional benefits to seniors. dentalis medicare part b

coverage and new dental benefit and will provide for screening and preventtive services and new vision coverage, h.r. 3 has new vision coverage glasses or contact lenses. and it adds a comprehensive hearing benefit and adds new hearing benefits that provides hearing hearing benefits. we are investing in more money to go to n.i.h. and more money for community health centers. the bottom line is we are trying to save out of pocket costs. now, all this at the same time that we are lowering prescription drug prices through negotiation by the secretary of health and human services and understand once that price is set for medicare, that price is

available in the rest of the market with those were nurns coverage. this is a win-will be for the american people. i don't know how the republicans way y there is any other and they haven't given us any suggestion. i ask my colleagues, this is a transformational. please sort us and should be supported on a bipartisan basis and i yield back. the chair: the the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all the time for the energy and ommerce committee has expired.

the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. neal, will control 30 minutes. the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, will control 30 minutes. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. neal: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself four minutes.

the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. neal: madam speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 3, the elijah cummings lower drug costs now act. i'm delighted to have been asked to join with my colleagues, mr. pallone and chairman scott, in authoring this historic legislation that delivers on a democratic promise to meaningful -- meaningfully stabilize and lower the very high cost of prescription drugs in the united states. as a recent ways and means committee report details, americans pay on average four times more for the same prescription drugs as patients in other similarly developed countries. an overwhelming majority of americans, 95%, believe this disparity is unacceptable and i certainly agree with them. h.r. 3 will level the playing field for patients and taxpayers by giving the health and human services secretary the power to

negotiate better prescription drug prices in medicare and throughout the private market. it also caps medicare beneficiaries' out-of-pocket prescription drug spending at $2,000. according to c.b.o., h.r. 3 will save american taxpayers over $500 billion. we will vigorously reinvest these tremendous savings into unprecedented dental, vision and hearing medicaid coverage expansions. these are benefits that are directly associated with positive short and long-term health outcomes and seniors deserve meaningful access to them. h.r. 3 also expands eligibility to low-income subsidy programs so that seniors can get help to lower their out-of-pocket costs. these changes ensure seniors can afford life-saving medications, protect medicare beneficiaries with pre-existing conditions

from discrimination, and give older americans access to commonly needed and life-transforming health services. millions of americans will see improvements to their quality of life and to their financial security. i have long believed that we need to look at ways to reinvest health care across the spectrum and h.r. 3 does that by doubling our investment in maternal, infant and early child hoom home visiting programs, -- childhood home visiting programs, a proven tool to reduce child morbidity. it also provides a leg up for low-income adults to fill good-paying health care jobs currently unfilled because of a lack of trained workers. expanding hpog programs will help low-income adults gain new skills, earn good jobs and help

to address health worker shortages that exist across our 50 states and u.s. territories and in american indian communities. i am pleased and proud of the medical innovation and research that is undertaken daily around the nation, especially in the commonwealth of massachusetts. but i'm also concerned that this innovation is becoming out of reach for consumers who can simply not afford its discoveries. h.r. 3 gives patients the ability to benefit from and afford innovative drugs. in addition, the legislation reinvests savings from lower drug prices back into a very important part of the massachusetts economy, the national institutes of health, to fund additional groundbreaking, life-saving research. the elijah e. cummings lower drug costs now act is a commonsense proposal that will allow americans to live healthier lives and save money as they move along the way.

i urge my colleagues to support this legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. brady: madam speaker, why should patients have to choose between affordable medicines and a life-saving cure for alzheimer's, a.l.s., parkinson's or cancer? why should parents with sick children be forced to wait longer for the newest breakthrough that could save their lives? why should americans face a shorter life because the costless and most painful drug is the one that's never created? at the depths of nancy pelosi's drug bill is a dangerous tradeoff. lower prices in the short term, but fewer life-saving cures in the future. not just a few cures lost, but many according to the independent congressional budget office and the council of economic advisors.

up to 38 cures lost, according to the congressional budget office, up to 100 according to the cacea. the california life science association predicts nearly nine of 10 new drugs would never be available, never from their research in small biotech companies have the pelosi bill becomes law. this is a cruel and false choice. which is why this bill would quickly die with no real bipartisan support in the senate. as republicans, we believe we need to do both lower drug prices and accelerate new life-saving cures. our bill, the lower costs, more cures act, lowers out-of-pocket costs for americans by cracking down on overpriced drugs, empowering seniors to choose the right place to get medicines, which can cut the cost of chemotherapy in half, pulling back the curtain on those who set drug prices, forcing drug companies to justify their

increases, and list their prices in their ads. and we accelerate, not kill, life-saving medical cures. we permanently make it easier for americans to deduct high medical expenses from their taxes. allow them to use their health savings account for over-the-counter medicines, including feminine hygiene products, and save seniors over $300 each year on their medicines in the popular medicare prescription drug program. all these proven ideas are bipartisan, all of these can be passed by congress, all of these can be signed by president trump this year if democrats abandon their partisan games and recontinue what was our bipartisan work that got shelved for the pelosi drug bill. i'll finish with this. as a member of the ways and means committee, we in the republican congress joined with president george bush in 2003 to create an affordable drug plan

for seniors. the time leader speaker pelosi and democrats tried their best to kill it. she famously predicted that creating the crucial part d prescription plan for elderly would, quote, end medicare as we know it. can you imagine how many seniors' lives would have been lost if she had succeeded in stopping the affordable medicare drug program that 43 million seniors have come to depend upon today? nancy pelosi and democrats were dangerously wrong then. can americans afford the pain and risk when they are dangerously wrong again? madam speaker, we have an alternative that lowers costs and accelerates cures in h.r. 19 , that's the solution. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. neal: thank you, madam speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, congressman doggett.

mr. doggett: thank you. there's only one problem with this bipartisan plan that the republicans have embraced. it will not lower manufacturers' prescription drug prices by a penny. and as to the phony argument that there's some cures out there that will be lost by this legislation, it also does not stand the test of analysis. the suggestion is that eight out of 200 drugs over the next 10 years may not be presented. not new cures, but in many cases if we look at the current market, these are simply reformlations of existing drugs that manufacturers use to extend their monopoly position. and all this about a bill that frankly i'm not all that enthusiastic. i think this legislation was originally advanced as a narrow approach to win over republicans and that doesn't appear to have been too successful this evening. for that purpose, it may have merit. but as a model for comprehensive

future legislation on prescription price gouging by government-approved monopolies, this narrow measure does not. its negotiation scope is restricted to insulin and certain high-cost, high-volume drugs. despite our pledge to repeal the republican-imposed prohibition of medicare negotiation, it still remains illegal, a violation of federal law, to negotiate lower prices for 2/3 of the medications covered by medicare. that includes epipens and many other treatments. and no negotiation for lower prices is assured even when the taxpayer paid for much of the research to develop the drug. price gouging is not limited to one disease or one class of drugs. and this bill also does not provide protection to 30 million uninsured americans that they will get any lower prices. i look forward to a new congress with a president who wants to follow the campaign promises that president trump has

ignored, to provide relief for all americans with a comprehensive solution to contain this big pharma monopoly power. e -- and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: madam speaker, i'm really pleased to yield two minutes to one of our key members, ways and means committee, the gentlelady from indiana, mrs. walorski. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. walorski: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today in strong opposition to h.r. 3. this misguided, partisan legislation was written behind closed doors, it would result in fewer cures, less innovation, and worse health outcomes. we all agree that prescription drug affordability is a vital issue for the american people. however, we shouldn't be sacrificing new cures in the process. the bill tells patients with cancer, alzheimer's and other terrible diseases to keep waiting for the cures they so desperately need. that's why i support h.r. 19,

the lower costs, more cures act. this bipartisan bill will lower out-of-pocket spending while also protecting access to new medicines and cures. madam speaker, we have an important opportunity to work in a bipartisan fashion for the american people. but here we are again considering a partisan bill that has no path forward in the senate. this has become such a disturbing trend. i urge my colleagues to vote against this flawed legislation so we can work together on a bipartisan solution and yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. neal theal thank you, madam speaker. with -- mr. neal: thank you, madam speaker. with that, let me yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, congressman blumenauer. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and i appreciate his leadership. i strongly urge that my colleagues reject the cynical approach that is being advanced by our republican friends. think about it for a moment. we're talking about challenging the monopoly that the republicans gave the -- making

it illegal to negotiate drug prices. and as a result you have heard already in the course of this debate that our constituents pay four times more on average than other countries. sometimes it's 67 times as much. but what, what would happen if we were able to slightly restrain that monopoly power and have a little exretigs? the republican -- competition? the republicans say they are so cynical, they say the first thing that the drug companies ll do, not cut executive bonuses, not cut back on stock buybacks, not cut back on bizarre advertising, the first thing the pharmaceutical industry would do in the vision of the republicans is cut back on vital research. give me a break. they already spend less on research than they do on the aforementioned items that i mentioned. and i really believe, even

though we have big differences with them, and i think we settled some of those scores in the recent trade negotiations, i have a hard time believing that they would make patients suffer instead of cutting back a little bit on executive compensation or stock buybacks. we have stood firm in our trade negotiations and i hope my colleagues will vote in this legislation that will lower prescriptions $2,000 and savings that will spapped medicare benefits that will include vision, dental and hearing. and it re-invests the savings of rug innovation, med will research -- 0 seconds.

the chair: gentleman is recognized. r. blumenauer: reswrect this cynical view if we timely take back the part of the monopoly powers that the republicans gave to the pharmaceutical companies. i yield back. mr. brady: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. schweikert. mr. schweikert: this is one of those when we talk about three minutes, there are so many things we agree upon about the rage we feel about the pricing mechanisms but so many things that are being said that is absolutely wrong from the new bileic companies that i believe

h.r. is going to do incredible vial especially to our society and you have to understand we are living in the time of miracles, there are are cures that would not happen under h.r. . hem ngle shot that cures feel yeah. at shot is going to be dramatic. but here's actually one of my concerns. one of my incredible concerns, you understand the pricing efficiency. this is a reference pricing bill. what is a year of your life worth if you are healthy. one year of healthy life. what is it worth to you. in great britain, that's $37,000. if it comes in $37,000 001, you

are going to do this. and pharmaceutical break through is 19,000 and give you one year of healthy life, you don't buy it. you are importing this type of cruelty. you get to look at someone's face and say, we imported thaw european model sap say that isn't worth to us. we are better than this. we can do better. we agree that the pricing mechanisms are unfair. the way capital is moved around. but h.r. 3 is going to do so much more damage and i can build you a financial model and you will raise the cost of functionally health care because the cures that are coming don't

come anymore. you want to import that type of cruelty in our society. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. neal: the gentleman asked me what a year of my life is worth, i would say an awful lot. let me yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pascrell. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pascrell: frank pallone, richard neal, and bobby scott, i thank you for the aligeave cummings act. the science and innovation behind lifesaving drugs is years beyond. and newedicine chest of jersey is integral but with the breast blessing, the curse of

high course lingers. it falls on us to address exploding costs. it nands the best science and not the highest prices. if medications are not affordable, it can be livesaving. allow helping us to medicare to negotiate fair drug prices. you rejected then. medicare beneficiaries will save $150 billion in our lower pocket costs and part d beneficiaries will see a discount of 55% on current prices of the first drugs. and our seniors will benefit

from cost sharing and a cap on out of pocket expenses and medicare would cover dental, aring and vision air instead of empty promises. this legislation requires drug nufacturers to justify price incan crises. manufacturers will be accountable. this bill also includes the re-authorization to help the community grant program to provide education and training for low-income individuals for health occupations that are in igh demand or experiencing low shortages. i yield back. thank you. the chair: jabbed. mr. brady: i'm horpped to yield four minutes to a small business person who has offered quality

health care for his workers, mr. kelly. mr. kelly: i'm going to read a letter from a family back in pennsylvania, the sturets and their three daughters and it starts off. my name is sarah stuart. it's my understanding that the house ways and means committee is having a hearing. now it appears this legislation does not have bipartisan support and needs to take a more ball apsed approach the balances like my 10-year-old daughter. my daughter suffers from a pearson syndrome that occurs as utated geeps and cells prevent producing energy.

it is difficult to diagnose because it affects every individual differently. er systems have included being lood transfusion dependent and becoming type one diabetes etic and losing her hearing and vision and developmental delays when having a body that runs on limited energy. it has been heartbreaking to endure this disease. my message is simple to you and to the rest of the committee, is there no cure or treatments, each day is a struggle to keep her balanced and her body is to cope with this terrible disorder. all we have is hope. impactdon't let partisan

to innovate new therapies. the clock is ticking and madi is ticking. i went to visit the sturets and i saw this adorable child and her mom told me she has so much energy and she has so much energy. and when i looked at the family and i looked at the sisters, i thought this isn't fair. she's never had a chance to live her life and already doubled the chances of what the life expectancy is. what the mom is saying, don't let political bickering stand in the way of developing and innovating a new source that could save her life. last year there were 80 same

children that had the same condition. this christmas, hopefully, the 40 that are left will have a chance to celebrate it. i don't know how the sturets are registered and i don't know how they vote and i don't care but i know how they pray and they pray every night not just for mattie, but for all the rest of the scommirn that have this horrible disease but in the people's house and on the floor of the people's house we don't look at each other as republic caps and democrats but how we are reallyr are dads and moms and if we cannot come here and agree that the hallmark of america and always been her ability to develop and innovate ap to be the savior of the rest of the

world, then what are we doing? do we make this to be a political battle? do we want to look in the eyes of a 10-year-old -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. kelly: and say to that child, you know what, it's not just in the cards right now because we can't get to do the right thing for the right reasons and let good things happen. we allowed ourselves to be so damn political and so divided that we turned our backs on the people who sent us here. matey stuart can't develop the drug herself. mr. and mrs. staurt can't develop the drug themselves. and the people can't help matey

develop the drug. we can. you know it stops innovation, h.r. 3. it's about something better, something great that is going to save somebody's life. let's talk about the substitute, the lower cost and more cures act. i wish we had unlimited time to speak on this issue. the clock is ticking. please, do the right thing for the right reasons. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. mr. neal: our bill will invest $10 billion for new and innovative cures. let me recognize the gentleman from chicago, congressman davis for two minutes. mr. davis: i rise in strong

support of h.r. , the aligeave cummings the lower cost drugs cost act. it is the solution whose time has come. according to the c.b.o., this ill will save $440r8 billion from medicare alone which could be used to provide other services to seniors and people with disabilities. i thank the democratic leadership for including my lls to reduce maternal mortality by doubling the mack vee program and by expanding the opportunity grant programs to train low-income individuals to help relieve the health shortage that exists in this country. elijah cummings would be proud

of this bill, proud of this bill to carry his name. i urge passage and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields ack the balance of his time. mr. brady: i yield two minutes to a member of the ways and means committee, mr. lahood. mr. lahood: and i rise tonight in opposition to h.r. , the fewer cures and more government control act. the overal costs of prescription drugs are too high and there are bad actors in the system and i wonder why we are debating that puts a system. we should be finding ways to find more companies to gaming in cures and drive competition for lower costs. during consideration of h.r. 3