Secretary Kennedy testifies at Senate hearing — NBC News

[6:49] and abuse. The law prohibits coverage of certain non-citizens under federal health care programs. [6:57] It removes Medicaid beneficiaries who are deceased, enrolled in multiple states, [7:03] or own a home worth over a million dollars. It also requires individuals who are able to work [7:11] or volunteer or go to school to do so to be able to be eligible for Medicaid, [7:18] a requirement that mirrors similarly intended safety net programs. These common sense reforms, [7:25] along with policies to prevent financing gimmicks, will save taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars [7:32] and ensure Medicaid's long-term sustainability, ensuring the program's dollars reach those for [7:38] whom it was intended. Under the working family's tax cuts, Americans will keep more of their hard-earned [7:45] money and have greater control over their health care. The law expands access to health savings [7:52] accounts so that patients, not insurance companies, can choose the health care that is right for them. [8:00] Individuals with high-deductible health plans can also rely on telehealth services without meeting [8:07] minimum out-of-pocket payments. Republicans also made a historic $50 billion investment in rural health [8:15] care through the rural health transformation program. Beginning this year, all 50 states are [8:22] receiving funds from the program, which will be used to bolster workforces, invest in connective technology, [8:29] and promote preventive health interventions. Working in partnership with Ranking Member Wyden, [8:36] the Finance Committee delivered on our commitment to bring transparency and accountability to the [8:41] prescription drug supply chain through pharmacy benefit manager reforms. The bipartisan law will [8:48] end perverse incentives for PBMs to steer patients toward higher-cost drugs and vertically integrate [8:55] pharmacies. Our work to address anti-competitive consolidation is just beginning, and I look forward [9:02] to continuing these efforts with Ranking Member Wyden and all members of this committee. On a bipartisan basis, [9:09] we also extended Medicare coverage of telehealth and hospital at-home services, ensured Medicare Advantage [9:16] plans maintain accurate provider directories, and removed Medicaid barriers to high-quality, [9:22] specialized health care for children. These extraordinary accomplishments will expand choice [9:29] and lower costs for all Americans. Mr. Secretary, under your leadership, HHS has also taken sizable steps [9:38] to fix the failures in our healthcare system that frustrate both patients and providers. Together [9:44] with the private sector, the administration is breaking down the bureaucratic obstacles that for [9:49] too long have been accepted as the norm. HHS is reducing health insurers' cumbersome overuse of prior [9:56] authorization, which routinely delays care delivery. Through TrumpRx, patients can shop for lower-priced [10:05] versions of their drugs, covered especially by those that are not covered by many insurance plans. [10:11] I appreciate your commitment to making America healthy again by empowering patients with the tools [10:18] and information they need to create a healthier future. Under your leadership, the department has [10:24] focused on addressing root causes and prevention of illnesses. Now, Medicare is becoming a system that [10:32] invests in the whole person, in lifestyle interventions, and our medical schools are equipping providers [10:40] with the education to deploy these services. Thank you for that. Mr. Secretary, I look forward to learning [10:47] more about how we can work together to build on the progress we've made in the last year to put patients [10:52] at the center of our healthcare system. And now I recognize Ranking Member Whiten for his opening remarks. [10:59] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Today we gather to discuss Donald Trump's healthcare blueprint [11:06] for the coming year. Robert Kennedy came into the Office of Health Secretary with sweeping promises of [11:13] restoring the public's trust in government and making Americans healthy again. Now, as the Trump campaign [11:21] pollsters flail about trying to cover up Robert Kennedy's devastatingly unpopular anti-vax [11:30] policies, I believe the witness will try to have it both ways. He'll serve up enough fakery this [11:38] morning to help Senate Republicans ignore the real harm that's being caused while twisting the truth enough [11:46] so he can go back to pushing anti-vax policies that make kids sick when he's out of the hearing room. [11:53] The rank hypocrisy of the Trump administration on health can be summed up in a sentence. [11:59] Good ease for those at the top while American families get sicker and poorer. While Donald Trump and [12:07] the secretary are cozying up to insurance executives by handing over more than 20 billion dollars and [12:14] throwing consumer protections in the trash, Oregonians now play Russian roulette with their healthcare. [12:21] They're trying to figure out how they can go without insurance until they qualify for Medicare [12:29] because they can't afford higher ACA premiums. When Donald Trump cuts the sweetheart deals with the [12:36] big pharma executives rural America continues to struggle often because Republicans have made the [12:45] largest cut to healthcare in American history. What these communities are seeing now I believe is [12:52] only a beginning of how things are going to get worse when the cuts Republicans have hidden and I've [13:00] never seen this and all my time in public service hiding the details until after the election. [13:06] Time and again when Republicans are put in charge of Americans healthcare there's a never-ending flood [13:11] of benefits for special interests while American families get left further behind. Nothing illustrates the [13:18] Trump-Kennedy hypocrisy on health more than their approach to prescription drugs. Donald Trump spent [13:24] the last year hosting executives from the big pharma companies in the Oval Office. He boasted of so-called [13:32] deals to bring down the price of medicine. The details, the important facts about these deals are totally secret. [13:42] My staff spoke with each company involved in these deals. The only thing that's clear is the list of [13:48] goodies that the company's got in exchange. Robert Kennedy is here this morning and he's going to ask [13:54] Congress to codify these sweetheart deals sight unseen. Let me repeat that. People in Congress aren't [14:04] going to see the details about these deals. So while the American people wait for their cost of the pharmacy to [14:11] go down, the administration touts TrumpRx which actually offers higher prices for drugs than what most [14:18] people can get through their insurance. There is no bigger fraud on the planet when it comes to drug [14:23] costs than Donald Trump. Meanwhile, Robert Kennedy has presided over the biggest cut to Americans' [14:30] healthcare in history, a choice that's already kicked Americans off their care, forced hospitals to close, [14:36] and caused healthcare workers to lose their jobs. Since Republicans passed that law, my staff has been [14:43] thoroughly cataloging every hospital, every clinic, and every healthcare provider that has shut their [14:49] doors, reduced services, or laid off staff. So we have the receipts. There have been over 170 closures and [14:58] service reductions across 34 states. Nearly 7,500 healthcare workers have lost their jobs across 24 states. [15:06] These healthcare providers cited the impossible financial challenges caused by the Republican Medicaid [15:13] cuts. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to enter into the record our analysis. Without objection. [15:19] Now, I recently held a forum with healthcare workers at home in rural Oregon in a place where Donald Trump [15:25] got better than 70 percent of the vote. What I heard there underscores the reports that are coming in from [15:31] around the nation. Healthcare providers are walking an economic tightrope, and these communities can't [15:37] afford to lose the services they're providing. So, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to enter into the record [15:42] submissions from five states, including Oregon, as well as news articles from around the country [15:48] that confirm the catastrophe that is playing out on the ground if states contend with the impossible task [15:54] of implementing more than a trillion dollars in cuts. Without objection. Mr. Kennedy is the most senior [16:01] and influential healthcare official in the country. When it comes to vaccines, Robert Kennedy has used this [16:08] once-in-a-lifetime platform to make parents doubt themselves and doubt their doctors. Ninety percent [16:16] of Americans infected with measles during this unprecedented outbreak, mostly kids, have not been [16:22] vaccinated. It is no coincidence that it comes as the person in charge of our country's healthcare [16:28] lays out propaganda about vaccines, all on the taxpayer dime. The secretary has duck-bobbed and [16:36] weaved without taking responsibility of saying what needs to be said. Vaccines save lives in America. [16:43] They keep kids from getting sick. And yet the secretary won't say it in plain straightforward terms. [16:52] He's repeatedly lied before the Congress. First, he lied to me about his trip to Samoa. As chairman, [16:57] I'd like to enter into the record a report by the Guardian and the Associated Press disclosing emails [17:03] between State Department officials that make it clear that the secretary was traveling to the [17:09] island nation to promote his anti-vax views. Without objection. Second, he lied to Congresswoman [17:14] Terry Sewell by denying that he said black children should be reparented if they receive treatment for [17:20] ADD and ADHD. And he's continued to lie about the Republican cuts to Medicaid, claiming that there have [17:28] been no cuts. That is an absurd claim that would get him laughed out of any room in rural America where [17:35] public officials and health care providers gather to make agonizing choices about payment cuts [17:41] at this moment. These lies and misrepresentations underscore why, as you know, Mr. Chairman, I asked [17:48] Robert Kennedy to testify under oath the last time he came before the committee. Regardless of whether or [17:53] not he's taken the oath, he ought to remember that you can't lie to Congress. It's a crime. [17:58] Our witness is going to tell the committee this morning that Democrats are interested in protecting [18:03] the status quo. Nothing could be further from the truth. The nation's health care system is broken. [18:09] That's only going to get worse with the Republican cuts that the secretary has been cheerleading for [18:15] from the sidelines. Right now, Democrats on this side, to a person, are leading an effort to reimagine [18:22] health care for American families so it is more affordable, more simple, and less beholden to the [18:28] corporate interests that Republicans empower at every single opportunity. My own take is, is if the [18:35] secretary was serious about making America healthier again, he'd be working with us on dealing with these [18:41] issues rather than going to the side of big insurance and big pharma with sweetheart deals. [18:47] It's an important hearing and I look forward to the questions. Thank you. And with that, [18:52] Mr. Secretary, we turn it over to you for your opening statement. [18:55] Chairman Kripov, thank you. Ranking Member Wyden and members of the committee, thank you for the [19:03] opportunity to appear before you today to discuss President Trump's proposed 2027 budget for HHS. [19:11] First, I'd like to take a moment to express my deepest condolences to your colleague, Senator Mark [19:16] Warner, over the recent loss of his daughter, Madison. My thoughts and prayers with him and his family. [19:24] We stand at a generational turning point. Our children are the sickest generation in modern history. [19:30] And decades of failed policies, captured agencies, and profit-driven systems caused it. Parents across [19:37] this country demanded change and we are delivering it. We're ending the era of federal policies that [19:44] fueled the chronic disease epidemic and replacing them with policies that put the health of the [19:49] American people first. President Trump and I are challenging the status quo and the institutions [19:56] that defended as we work to make America healthy again. In just 15 months, HHS has delivered historic [20:04] wins. We negotiated the most favored nation drug prices with 16 of the largest pharmaceutical [20:10] companies so that Americans no longer pay more than other people in wealthy countries for the exact [20:16] same medications. We're bringing real transparency to healthcare pricing so that patients know the cost [20:23] of care before they receive it. I used the full convening power of the federal government to bring [20:29] health insurance CEOs to the table to reform prior authorization and I brought the 400 largest tech [20:36] companies together to end information blocking so that for the first time Americans will be able to get [20:44] their own health records which they own on their cell phones. We are cutting red tape, speeding decisions, [20:52] and abandoning transparency. We're also cracking down on waste, fraud, and abuse. [20:57] This year, HHS and USDA issued new dietary guidelines that put real whole food at the center of the [21:04] American plate. We flipped the food pyramid upside down and sent a clear message to the American people, [21:11] eat real food. HHS has opened the door to partnerships with industry, trade associations, [21:18] nonprofits, and advocacy groups. More than 50 medical schools have committed to expand nutrition education [21:25] from an average of two hours to 40 hours. Food manufacturers are stepping up too. More than 40% [21:34] of the food industry has committed to phase out petroleum-based dyes by the end of the year and many [21:39] have already eliminated them. In conjunction with these efforts, FDA approved six natural food colorings [21:46] derived from fruits and vegetables. Through President Trump's Great American Recovery Initiative, HHS is [21:53] matching compassion with action to help Americans break the cycle of addiction. At HHS, we are prioritizing [22:02] patients with ultra-rare diseases and their families driving faster access to life-saving treatments. [22:09] We're restoring gold standard science and integrity across the agency. We're protecting children from [22:14] sex-rejecting procedures that expose them to irreversible harms. We're eliminating outdated and misleading [22:22] warning labels on hormone therapies used by women during menopause. We're strengthening oversight of [22:29] organ procurement. We are regulating television advertisements for pharmaceutical industries, [22:36] something the Democrats have been asking for for generations. We're implementing Operation [22:42] Stork Speed to ensure the safety and quality of infant formula. We're applying that same focus and [22:48] urgency to rural America. The Rural Health Transformation Fund delivers the largest investment in rural [22:55] health in our nation's history, $50 billion over five years to strengthen rural hospitals and ensure [23:03] Americans can access the care they need no matter where they live. HHS has also last week announced more [23:10] than $135 million investment this month to expand rural residency programs and nutrition services. [23:19] The data is clear. When physicians train in rural communities, they're far more likely to stay and serve there. [23:26] The President's budget puts all these priorities in action. It invests in prevention because preventing disease [23:32] costs less than treating it. As my uncle President John F. Kennedy said, progress is a nice word. [23:39] It changes its motivator and change has its enemies. We see those forces clearly entrenched interests, defenders [23:51] of a failing status quo and institutions that put profits ahead of the American people. The resistance [23:59] underscores the urgency of this moment. We can reverse chronic disease, improve public health and lower costs. [24:06] I stand ready to work with this committee and Congress to seize this opportunity to implement [24:12] and codify lasting generational reform in American health care for our country, for our children and [24:18] for the health of the American people. Together, we can make America healthy again. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [24:27] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And I believe that your effort and focus on making America healthy again [24:33] and helping us to focus on nutrition and prevention and healthy lifestyles is one of the most significant [24:41] things that you have done among the many that you described in your testimony. In that context, [24:49] in your testimony, you identified nutrition as a bedrock of health and one of the primary levers for [24:55] treating and preventing chronic disease. You also emphasize that it's imperative for our nation's health [25:02] care providers to be equipped to incorporate nutrition into patient care. Securing commitments [25:08] from more than 50 medical schools to provide at least 40 hours of nutrition education is an incredible [25:16] start. I don't think it was very long ago that there was probably very little nutrition taught in medical [25:22] school. And now we are encouraging that to be a focal point. How does HHS plan to build on this progress by [25:30] securing additional commitments from medical schools and expanding nutrition education into other key [25:35] areas such as residency training, medical licensing, and continuing medical education? Thank you very [25:43] much, Chairman. We are we're expanding the number of medical schools. There's already many, many others [25:49] that have signed on since the original 54. We are working with the states, more than a half the states, [25:57] on a MAHA legislative plan, more than a half the states have already required past legislation requiring [26:06] nutrition education and continuing medical education. We have now issued notices to all the hospitals in [26:19] America that they must start serving nutritious foods in the hospitals. Something that, you know, the food [26:29] before that was has been appalling. They're giving diabetic patients jello and custard and a soda drink. [26:38] And we're worried if they want to continue to get Medicaid, Medicare dollars, they need to change that now. [26:43] And then we're driving good nutrition through the WIC program, through SNAP, through school lunches, [26:54] through the Indian tribal services, and other federal subsidies programs as well. [27:00] Well, thank you very much. I want to, I will just tell you that I for one deeply appreciate that [27:06] strong focus on helping us get focused on nutrition. It was a sad thing that that our society had not [27:14] focused on it as well as it should have until now. Republicans established the rural health [27:21] transport transformation program in the Working Families Tax Cut Act to strengthen and modernize [27:28] our nation's rural health care delivery system. We do have a problem in the rural health care system. [27:35] And with this funding, we are hoping that states will be able to implement comprehensive strategies [27:41] that not only expand preventive, primary, maternal, and behavioral health services, [27:46] but also create new access points that bring care closer to home and stabilize our challenged rural [27:52] hospitals. All 50 states received their first year awards ranging from $147 million to $281 million. [28:01] What do you think are some of the most innovative ways that states are now going to be able to work [28:05] to transform their rural health care networks? The states, the applications from the states were really [28:13] extraordinary. We were astonished how resourceful and imaginative they are. Among, I think, the most common [28:22] applications were to maximize the use of AI in diagnostics in health delivery and also just in billing and management of the systems. [28:43] A lot of the money is being spent on telehealth, which is going to bring, deliver rural health care to [28:50] many to areas that are particularly remote in this country, places like Wyoming and Alaska and many others, [28:59] where they were, where health care just simply is not accessible. A lot of the applications were for [29:06] residency programs and for worker recruitment and retention and then just a lot were for [29:13] badly needed infrastructure repairs. We've lost more than 120 hospitals in rural areas [29:20] since 2010. And it's a crisis when they lose that hospital. They're not just losing access to [29:28] approximate health care. They're also losing the greatest economic driver in many of these communities. [29:36] These are, in many cases, the greatest employer. They have the highest pay for their workers. [29:43] And when they close, businesses stop moving to the area. So it's absolutely critical that [29:51] we keep those hospitals open. And that's why this plan raised by 50 percent the amount of the infusion of [29:59] federal dollars that is flowing to rural areas in this country. Thank you very much. My time's expired and [30:05] I want to try to stay at these five minutes. I'm trying to set a pattern here for the rest of the committee. [30:11] And I had questions on telehealth and innovation and AI as well as waste fraud and abuse. You anticipated [30:18] many of those in your answers. Thank you very much. Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [30:22] Mr. Secretary, it sure looks to me like the President is working very hard to muzzle you [30:29] on the issue of the vaccine question. It is very clear you weren't mentioned at the State of the Union [30:37] address. The pollsters that the President has have found that 80 percent of all voters support the [30:42] childhood vaccine for measles and hepatitis B. But at the same time, your handpicked people at HHS [30:49] voted to end the universal recommendation of a hepatitis B vaccine for every newborn. So my question [30:57] to you is we are seeing with measles, we are seeing with vaccines, a problem all over the country. And [31:04] putting infants at risk like this is so dangerous that a court even blocked your new policy from [31:10] taking effect. Why would you be doing something that is so awful for kids on this vaccine issue? I know [31:20] it's been your life work, but you promised that you'd do differently when you came for your [31:24] confirmation hearing. Senator, we under my leadership handle the measles outbreak better than any [31:32] country in the world. This is a global outbreak. Mexico has three times the amount of measles and [31:38] they have one-third of our population. Canada has twice the number of measles and has one-eighth of our [31:44] population. We have about 1,700 cases this year, 2,200 last year. Europe had 33,000 last year and 127,000 [31:58] the year before. There are populations that don't want to vaccinate. Mennonites do not want to vaccinate. [32:05] They have not vaccinated since 1797. It has nothing to do with me. I have not visited Mexico [32:12] or Europe. I had nothing to do with the measles outbreak here. We have limited our outbreak better [32:20] than any country in the world because I've talked to Dr. Abbott or Governor Abbott regularly. I talk to [32:25] Governor McMaster. We send the epidemic intelligence services into their regions when they need it [32:33] immediately and we give them the help we can to end the pandemic. There are going to be people who don't [32:40] vaccinate. The vaccination levels dropped during COVID because people stopped trusting the American [32:47] government. I am here to restore that trust. All I can tell you is that in America today, [32:54] when a baby is born, doctors give the baby a hepatitis B vaccination on day one. With hepatitis B, [33:01] we're talking about a serious lifelong illness that leads to liver failure and liver transplants. There is [33:07] no cure. And as of December, you're still appointing people who are trying to undermine that policy. [33:14] That's not in the interest of families and that's why the president's pollsters are telling them to [33:19] isolate you and keep you from talking about it. But I'm telling you, we're going to make sure that [33:23] the truth gets out. I'm going to move on now to this. That's a mischaracterization of the president. [33:29] I'm asking the questions, Mr. Secretary. I'm moving on now to the drug pricing question and the disclosure of [33:34] these deals. These secret deals with pharmaceutical companies set up a never-ending flood of goodies for [33:40] big pharma. You take Pfizer, for example, the day after Pfizer's CEO stood in the Oval Office with Trump, [33:46] the company's stock prices soared through the roof. Pfizer is going to get a blanket exemption from Trump's [33:53] drug tariffs and all of Pfizer's drugs are exempt from Trump's latest fake scheme to align Medicare [34:00] prices with those in other countries. So it doesn't seem to me that the American people get a whole [34:05] lot, you know, from this. And every Democratic member of our committee is demanding that you disclose [34:13] the deals, the specifics. The public's got a right to know about something of this kind of consequence. [34:19] And every single Democrat up here wants to see this as a transparency issue. Now, yesterday, [34:26] you indicated to my colleague, Senator Merkley, that you would give out some information about the deals, [34:33] but not the real information that would indicate if the deals are so good, why is the Trump [34:39] administration trying to hide them? So my question to you is, yes or no, this is a yes or no question [34:47] reflecting the interest of our colleagues up here. Will you commit to releasing your written [34:52] agreements with the pharmaceutical companies tomorrow? No, I will not. And I can explain why. [35:01] Those agreements contain proprietary information and trade secrets. When you pass the Inflation [35:08] Reduction Act and ordered me to negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies, you put in a provision [35:15] that required NDAs, because nobody's going to come to the table with me if I start releasing [35:21] proprietary information. You seem to be saying we were paying the highest prices for drugs in the [35:27] world. You seem to be arguing that now we're paying the lowest. We've dropped IVF by 83 percent. [35:36] We've dropped GLPs by 89 percent. Insulin, COPD drugs, asthma drugs of the American people, [35:44] now they're paying the lowest cost in the world rather than the highest. And you want to go back on that? [35:49] You can do this better than us. We did it because you wouldn't act. You have a lot more power to [35:56] negotiate than we do. Why don't you just go do it? You've been promising to do it for 20 years and you've [36:03] never done it. We are going to do it, Mr. Secretary. We are going to do it. But when you try to hide the [36:08] information on consequential issues as you're doing on these Trump-Rx things, it makes it harder for us to [36:14] make marketplace forces. You're in bed with Big Pharma. You're telling me you don't have secret [36:19] agreements here and secret meetings here in Congress all the time, every day? Senator Scott. [36:27] Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. Secretary Kennedy, I want to start off by thanking [36:33] you for everything that you, HHS, CDC, did truly an incredible job helping South Carolina, my home [36:43] state, throughout our measles outbreak. South Carolina has experienced the largest outbreak in U.S. history [36:50] since measles was declared eliminated more than two decades ago. From the calls you made to our governor, [36:57] to the countless weekly calls between CDC and South Carolina's Department of Public Health staff, [37:04] to the CDC staff being deployed to the upstate, I know without a question we would not be on the [37:11] right side of this outbreak without your leadership and without your help. And South Carolina [37:17] is indebted to your leadership, and we really appreciate that. Thank you, Senator. I'm very hopeful [37:24] that in just a few days on April 26th, we can declare the outbreak long and gone as long as there are [37:32] no new cases. That is a big deal for a state that has been suffering for months and months through this [37:40] challenge. Thank you. It is thanks to your leadership and the leaderships of the folks that I mentioned [37:48] from CDC to the HHS to our folks on the ground that this day has finally come. While it is hard to find [37:56] positives, it's really hard to find a silver lining through this process. If we did, it is early, [38:04] detection matters a lot. The more time we spend on figuring out how to get ahead of it, the better off [38:12] we will all be in the future. That is why last month I, along with several of my Senate colleagues, [38:18] introduced the PREDICT Act to strengthen and expand wastewater surveillance. When someone is infected [38:25] with a virus like measles or the flu, they shed viral material, often before they even are aware [38:33] that they are sick. CDC helped work through the sequencing of positive wastewater samples from 20 [38:40] wastewater sites testing for measles in South Carolina. This critical work highlights the best [38:46] kind of government, one that works in the background on prevention and saving lives using smart science. [38:54] It is an idea that should reach every single community across the country, not just a handful of [39:00] communities who have the resources to deploy. By utilizing these tools and monitoring the spread of [39:07] disease early, public health officials can see an outbreak coming days or weeks before hospital [39:13] emissions begin to rise and take steps to intervene in moments when time is truly of the essence. [39:22] Americans deserve a public health system that sees threats coming before they become emergencies, [39:29] and the PREDICT Act brings us one step closer to that reality. Secretary, as we look forward to lessons [39:38] learned from this outbreak, can you please commit to working with me on wastewater surveillance such as [39:45] the PREDICT Act? Absolutely. Senator, thank you for your kind words about the management of the measles, [39:58] and I just had a wonderful interchange of series with Governor McMaster, and I want to thank all the [40:08] health department in South Carolina for the hard work they did with CDC to end the outbreak. I absolutely [40:16] will work with you on the PREDICT Act. It's something that's very personally important to me to have more [40:23] wastewater surveillance. And we are also putting $325 million in this budget into a new biothreat radar system [40:33] that will integrate with the microbial surveillance that wastewater treatment plan to detect pathogens [40:44] as soon as they emerge in our country and elsewhere in the world. That's really important because [40:49] your new system, the biothreat radar system, it strengthens outbreak detection, and I think it would [40:55] be a perfect fit for us to take this PREDICT Act and put it under that umbrella, so to speak. I look forward [41:02] to working with you, Senator. Thank you very much. For those unaware of South Carolina's the negative [41:08] impact of measles, it was the largest outbreak, hundreds of hundreds, nearly a thousand cases, [41:15] and it was a response, all of government response, where we saw HHS, CDC, the Secretary working together. I [41:22] know we have disagreements around this dais, but when you need help and they show up and it's effective, [41:30] you should take the time to say thank you. Thank you very much, Senator. Thank you. Senator Bennett. [41:36] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Genney, for being here again. For decades, [41:40] parents in this country were able to send their kids to school without worrying about whether they [41:45] could come home with a dangerous case of the flu or a dangerous case of the measles, as my colleague [41:51] from South Carolina is saying, last year we saw the largest number of children die from the flu in [42:00] modern history. Are you familiar with that, Mr. Secretary? Yes, I am. And have you told President [42:09] Trump about that, that last year was the largest childhood death of flu in modern America? Well, [42:16] that's one of the reasons that FDA just approved two new vaccines for influenza A and influenza B. [42:25] Because you would agree that last year was the worst year on record in terms of [42:30] flu deaths in modern history, not in the old days. Right. In the old days, we were having hundreds [42:36] of thousands. You're right. Of course. And do you agree that 89 percent of the children who died from flu [42:46] were unvaccinated? I don't know the exact number. That is the exact number, Mr. Kennedy. And it was, [42:55] you know, I think of interest to a lot of people in America that you took down the communications from [43:05] HHS on the flu, the importance of getting a vaccine, when you first became the secretary. And I just wondered [43:12] whether you regret having done that. You're now saying that you're approving vaccines for the flu. [43:19] I approve lots of vaccines. I've spent a billion dollars, authorized a billion dollars, developing [43:26] new vaccines, including a universal flu vaccine. So are you, you know, I think the last year, the flu vaccine [43:34] had a something like a 20 percent efficacy. So having these having these single antigen vaccines [43:43] is not serving the public interest. The Cochrane Collaboration said they simply don't work. [43:48] For the record, Mr. Secretary, that I assume you no longer believe that the flu vaccine is destroying [43:55] children's brains, that there's zero evidence that the flu vaccine prevents any hospitalizations or any [44:02] deaths because today you're here agreeing that the vast majority of kids that died from the flu were [44:09] people without vaccines. And you're saying that you're now approving vaccines. We're making sure [44:15] that we follow the science, Senator. Well, I hope you'll follow the science because that's what put us [44:20] in the position 30 years ago of essentially having measles declared at an end in the United States of [44:28] America. Well, many nations have lost their elimination status, including Canada, the UK, [44:36] a lot of Europe this year because of the outbreak. And the outbreak has nothing to do. I mean, [44:41] I would hope that the, well, I know you said the outbreak has nothing to do with you. That was your [44:46] answer to Ron Wyden. You're the chair, you're the head of the agency. You're the head. My agency has no [44:53] jurisdiction over Canada, Mexico, the UK, Australia. I would agree with that. I would agree with that. [44:58] We are, I think everybody on this dais believes that the United States of America ought to be leading [45:04] in these matters. That's why we're so discouraged by your cuts to NIH because that's going to make [45:10] it harder for us to lead. That's why we are so discouraged by your cuts to Medicaid that are [45:16] making it impossible to invest in rural America. That's why there are no cuts to Medicaid, Senator, [45:21] as you know. There's no cuts to Medicaid. That is absolutely, Mr. Kennedy. Look at the [45:29] Congressional Budget Office this week. They say we are increasing Medicaid spending by 47 percent [45:36] over 10 years. That's not a cut, except in Washington. Okay, you can, it is a cut when it [45:42] comes to the rural hospitals all over America that are having to close because of the Medicaid cuts, [45:48] and those are real dollars. They were closing before I came in here. Now they're not closing. [45:54] Let me just ask you, do you realize that last year the United States had the highest number of measles [46:01] cases in 30 years? That the last time we had more than that was before? The whole world did. The whole [46:09] world did. Yeah, we were the leader, Mr. Kennedy. We still are. We have a 92 percent vaccination rate. [46:15] We have one of the highest vaccination rates for measles on earth. So are you taking the position, [46:21] let me ask you, are you taking the position, as your CDC director has taken, that the measles vaccine [46:29] is vital to keeping American children healthy in this country? Are you taking that position today? [46:36] That has not been your position. That's my position. We promote the measles vaccine. Thank you, [46:41] Mr. Chairman. That is, that will be, I hope, I hope you will go out to America and promote this, [46:46] the idea that you have nothing to do with this. The measles vaccine prevents measles and 97 percent [46:52] of the people who take it. I've always said that. That's what the science says. We, I would ask you [46:57] to please underscore it because there's a reason that we are having these outbreaks, Mr. Chairman, [47:02] and that is the misinformation that's been propagated. If you would have a change of view, [47:06] that's excellent. Let's get it out there to the American life. Senator Langford. [47:11] Hey, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Kennedy, good to see you again. Thanks for your work on this. You have been [47:18] one that has spoken out often on vaccine issues and to be able to provide clarity in this area. And so [47:24] I appreciate your engagement on this so much lately. I want to talk to you about a little [47:28] bit about pharmacy benefit managers. This has been an issue that we've talked about before, you and I, [47:33] and that we talk about often around this dais. We have now passed a piece of legislation that [47:37] de-links the compensation between the price for pharmacy benefit managers and the price of the [47:42] drug, which I think is exceptionally helpful to be able to work towards the consumer, the any willing [47:47] pharmacy, which PBMs have been fighting to destroy our independent pharmacies around my state and around [47:54] the country. We're losing more than one pharmacy a day now around the country, often because of what [48:00] PBMs are actually doing to them in the compensation structure and the way they do the scoring on this. [48:04] So I appreciate that. That law has now been passed. Y'all are in the process of implementing that. [48:09] We want to continue to be able to work with your team on the implementation. Any questions that [48:13] your team may have or that any way that we can actually help in the process, we want to be able [48:17] to stay engaged on this because this has been a passion area for us for quite a while. And it's been [48:21] a real interest for you as well. Senator Maggie Haston and I, we have a piece of legislation that takes [48:26] another step on this dealing with the pharmacy benefit managers and that is this issue of tiering [48:33] that has been out there. Now, your team has put out a clear statement to say there's an expectation [48:37] that when a drug is released in the biosimilar or the generic level, it's actually put on that tier [48:42] to be sold. But you and I both know that's not happening. You have said it. We're trying to make it [48:48] clear in law as well to be able to give you the reinforcements that you need on that to be able to say [48:53] when a generic or biosimilar is put out there, it needs to be put on that lower tier cost and not [48:59] put up on the more expensive brand cost because that will ultimately drive the generic out of [49:03] business. The brands know that. We want to be able to push back against that. So I would ask only for [49:08] your help and your team's help on technical assistance to make sure that we get this language [49:12] right so that whenever we can get this passed on the tiering issue, we can actually get that enforced [49:18] as quickly as possible. And thank you, Senator Lamford, for your leadership on this issue. [49:23] It's been a long time coming. It's a bipartisan issue. Everybody knows it's a problem. I think [49:29] the biggest fix, as you pointed out, was delinking the compensation to the PBMs from the list price of [49:38] the pharmaceutical, which created the perverse incentive of having them choose. They're supposed [49:44] to be looking out for our interest, but the higher cost, the highest cost pharmaceutical would get [49:49] to net them the most profits. So they were giving us a higher cost rather than lower cost. There's a [49:56] couple of the PBMs that have now, well, Sigma, David Cordani has, I think, taken the lead in expanding [50:05] transparency. So the industry has a template for doing this. But we need to keep working on this to make [50:14] sure that they're actually, to the extent they're working in the system, that they're doing what [50:21] they were meant to do, which is to lower cost for consumers rather than raise it. [50:26] Yeah, that's our target as well. I've told the PBM companies, hey, I'm not opposed to your company. [50:31] I'm just opposed to you trying to shut down my independent pharmacies and raising the prices of [50:35] consumers. That's the biggest issue that's out there on that. We want to get lower price and greater [50:40] access on this, not less and less on it. I want to switch this up to you and I have not spent a lot [50:45] of time talking about, but it's continuing to be able to rise. And that's the issue of assisted [50:49] suicide. We now have three states, California, Colorado, and Vermont, that disability groups are [50:55] filing charges against some of the assisted suicide laws, because it seems to target those with [51:01] disabilities. And the Americans with Disability Act passed in 1990. That act has worked to be able to [51:08] protect those with disabilities, not incentivize them to take their own life. And so this is an [51:13] ongoing conversation on this. And I think my question for you today is, is HHS engaging? Some [51:19] of these lawsuits are out there among states right now. And I know you're not engaging in the lawsuits. [51:24] What is HHS doing to be able to protect those with disabilities that may be targeted [51:28] by these assisted suicide laws? I mean, to me, I think those laws are abhorrent. [51:35] And we see in Canada today, I think it's the number one cause of death is assisted suicide. And as you [51:43] say, it targets people with disabilities and people who are struggling in their lives. And I don't think [51:56] we can be a moral society. We can't be a moral authority around the globe if that becomes institutionalized [52:03] throughout our society. So I'm happy to work with you in whatever way we can. [52:08] Great. Love to have the help on that. We've now seen a rise of people with eating disorders that [52:12] are giving access to assisted suicide. And this is just wrong in a multitude of ways. One quick [52:17] statement. We'll follow up on this in writing on it. Oklahoma is still pursuing the Title 10 dollars [52:22] that the Biden administration took away from my state of Oklahoma because we would not promote [52:27] abortion in the state. So they removed Title 10 funding from us. It's about $9 billion on that. [52:33] We'll follow up with your team on that one as well. But we're still trying to be able to get [52:36] access to those dollars the Biden administration tried to punish my state. [52:39] We will work with you to try to fix that, Senator Lane. Thank you. Senator Hassan. [52:45] Thank you, Mr. Chair and Senator Wyden for holding this hearing. Thank you, [52:49] Secretary Kennedy, for being here this morning. Look, I have noticed that while HHS has done relatively [52:57] little promotion of the lifesaving measles vaccine that we were all just discussing, [53:01] you have been doing a lot of your own self promotion using official government channels [53:07] and resources. HHS produced a video of you and Kid Rock exercising and drinking milk in a hot tub, [53:15] I think at his pretend White House. Another official video features a dramatic sequence of you as a [53:22] shirtless WWE fighter. You also posted a video on government accounts that depicts you as a video game [53:28] hero. And you've even posted multiple photos of your younger self over time, your face, [53:35] to say that you alone are the leader taking on big pharma in this administration. [53:41] Does the President know about this self-promotion campaign that you're carrying out with the [53:45] official HHS resources? I didn't know about a number of those videos. [53:51] We have a... They've all come out like in the last six weeks or a couple of months. [53:56] I just happen to not see them. I have no idea. So you don't know how your own [54:02] team is managing official U.S. resources and promoting you in the process. So the President [54:09] hasn't authorized you to use HHS resources for these vanity projects? You know, I was asked the [54:14] other day by one of the senators about the Kid Rock video, how much it cost the U.S. government, [54:20] and I asked my team how much it cost, and they said zero. So... [54:24] Well, so... Interesting. I mean, you were at Kid Rock's home. [54:30] Did the President authorize you to use official HHS resources for these vanity projects? That's my [54:35] question. Have you discussed them with the President? Did he authorize the use of them? [54:39] I've never discussed it with the President. [54:41] All right. So as far as you know, he hasn't authorized it. Now, let me move on to a couple of [54:46] other decisions that you've made. Did the President approve your decision to fire all 17 members [54:52] of the CDC's Vaccine Committee in June of 2025? [54:55] Uh, you mean, did I talk to him directly? We talked to the White House DPC. [55:04] So, again, my question is about the decision process in this administration [55:12] about firing 17 members of the CDC's Vaccine Committee that is established under law. Did the [55:20] President approve that decision to fire the CDC's Vaccine Committee members in June of 2025? [55:25] Well, uh, yes, he did. [55:28] Yes, he did. Okay. So now you also made changes to the Vaccine Committee charter just two weeks ago. [55:34] It appears to get around the federal court decision that said you had improperly disbanded [55:40] the Vaccine Committee. So did President Trump authorize you to do that? [55:43] Uh, DPC did. Which is the, uh, the Domestic Policy Council, which is in the White House. [55:51] So the Domestic Policy Council did, but have you discussed with the President? [55:56] I don't know if it made, it was elevated to the Presidential level, but it was... [56:00] So you're making, you're making extraordinary changes to the vaccine charter so that you will be [56:09] able to bring on quacks and conspiracy theorists to guide vaccine policy in this country. And you [56:15] haven't discussed it with the President. Look, I am asking these questions because it appears to me... [56:21] We're required to upgrade the charter every two years. [56:24] This is my time, sir. I'm asking these questions because it appears to me that you're focused on [56:29] promoting yourself over everyone else, promoting your own theories over actual scientific inquiry, [56:35] promoting your own unqualified lackeys over doctors and scientists, and promoting images [56:41] where you think you look cool rather than messages that will help people live healthier lives. [56:46] It is always about you and building a platform for yourself, which means it's never about the American [56:53] people or their public health and safety. Is that a question? Is it a question? [56:56] Because I'd like to answer it. Let me go on to my next question. [56:59] I agree with you that all Americans... That wasn't a question if I'm not allowed to answer it. [57:02] You answered questions and I drew those conclusions from your answers and that's why I have this time [57:08] on the dais and you do not. Now, I agree with you that all Americans should have access to healthy food. [57:14] However, President Trump has made it far harder for families to afford their groceries. [57:20] As I am looking at my time, so I'm going to hold this question for the next hearing where I will see [57:26] you this afternoon. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Cortez Mastel. [57:32] Thank you. Let me keep in the line of the conversations about whether the president [57:38] understands what you're doing here. Just yesterday, there is an article in the Wall Street Journal, [57:45] Oncologists versus the FDA and RFK Jr. I can't hear you, Senator. [57:51] There are many concerns from oncologists in this country, because under your administration, [57:59] the life-saving drug for metastatic melanoma has not been approved. And in fact, you've been asked [58:10] about this in hearings. And according to the article in the Review Journal, so I want to give you an [58:16] opportunity to correct some of this. You said every panel within FDA, all the career panels, the career [58:22] scientists who looked at the drug said it was not effective. According to the Wall Street Journal, that [58:26] isn't true. The initial panel that reviewed Replimun's RP1 recommended approval. Secondly, [58:35] when you sent a rejection letter, you parroted that Replim, not only was it a one-armed trial, [58:41] and all the people who were testing it also received a chemotherapy drug. So we don't know what [58:47] the effect was. And again, the fact check, no patients in the trial received chemotherapy. [58:53] Let me also reiterate, oncologists in this country, oncologists who treat patients with cancer, [59:01] life-saving drugs, are asking and anticipated that this drug would be approved. There is no concern. [59:09] And my question to you is, based on the misinformation that you have said in previous [59:14] hearings about this drug, are you prepared to change your position and actually move forward? And does [59:21] the President understand that your decision that you're making is preventing oncologists in this [59:27] country from treating cancer patients with a life-saving drug? Yeah, I mean, first of all, [59:33] I had nothing to do with this decision. This decision comes out of FDA, and we trust the process there. [59:39] And I've been told by Marty McCary that every panel that looked at that drug unanimously voted [59:47] against it. And they voted against it because it does not appear to work, because the trial was a [59:53] one-armed trial when the company was asked to do a two-armed trial. But clearly that's misinformation. [59:58] I would ask yourself. Mr. Kenney, no, I'm going to ask you. Why would I ever reject a drug that worked? [1:00:03] Why would you prevent the opportunity for life-saving drugs to an individual? [1:00:07] That's a great question. Why would you take a second look at this? [1:00:09] Why would you take a second look at this? Why would I? [1:00:11] That's exactly right. So I'm going to ask you to take a second look at it. [1:00:14] What kind of perverse motive are you describing to me? [1:00:16] My next question for you, Mr. Kennedy, is this. [1:00:18] If the drug works, we're going to approve it. [1:00:21] Let me just say, I appreciate your comments earlier in this administration going after waste, [1:00:28] fraud, and abuse. I think the healthcare fraud and abuse control program is important. [1:00:32] I've been calling for more funding for it. I think it's essential that HICFAC has the dollars [1:00:39] that it needs to go after in healthcare fraud. But let me ask you this. As we are fighting for [1:00:45] funding for it to go after healthcare fraud, this president has actually pardoned at least two people [1:00:53] convicted of healthcare fraud in just the first year of this administration. Mr. President Trump [1:01:00] commuted the sentence of Lawrence Durand who filed more than $205 million in false claims to Medicare [1:01:06] by taking advantage of people seeking treatment for severe mental illness. Someone who defrauded Medicare [1:01:11] for hundreds of millions of dollars. He no longer faces consequences and wiped out $87 million obligation [1:01:18] in restitutions and fines. Have you talked to the president about the fact that he is actively [1:01:24] undermining your agency's work to combat fraud? The president doesn't consult me on his pardons. [1:01:31] I don't know anything about that case. What I do know is that during the Biden administration, [1:01:37] they purposely opened the door for hundreds of millions of dollars. I'm not talking about the [1:01:42] past I'm talking about now. So that answers go. Yeah, but you're talking about one case I don't know [1:01:46] anything about. Why would I know anything about that case? Let me tell you the reality in my state, [1:01:50] Mr. Secretary, with respect to the Medicaid cuts. Effective May 1st, Boulder City Hospital in my state [1:01:57] will no longer be able to support inpatient stays longer than 24 hours and will transform into a rural [1:02:04] emergency hospital rather than retain the current designation as a critical access hospital. According [1:02:10] to the CEO, it is because of the financial constraints exacerbated by the upcoming Medicaid provider [1:02:19] tax cuts due to HR 1. 71 people will lose their jobs because of HR 1 and those Medicaid cuts. This is [1:02:26] one of my rural communities. This is going to be devastating for so many and this is the first that [1:02:31] we're seeing in my state. My question to you is what are you going to do to make sure that our rural [1:02:37] communities aren't left in a health care desert without a reasonable way to access those services? [1:02:44] We're putting the largest investment in history into rural hospitals. There's never been anything [1:02:49] like it. Prior to the rural health transformation. Apparently that's not true for my rural hospital [1:02:53] in Boulder City and many other are concerned, so you don't have an answer for that either. [1:02:56] There's rural hospitals are closing at an alarming rate around the country long before President Trump got [1:03:02] in here. Thank you, Senator Daines. Chairman, thank you. Secretary Kennedy, welcome. It's good to see [1:03:12] you here again. Good to see you, Senator Daines. Since you were first nominated in this role, [1:03:18] it's been your goal in the Presidents to make HHS the gold standard of science. I appreciate your [1:03:25] sincere commitment to that goal and the role you're playing in restoring America's leadership in [1:03:31] scientific rigor, transparency, and public health. And before I get into a more specific public health [1:03:38] question, I just want to follow up on the exchange you just had about the rural health care in our [1:03:44] country. And Montana, I think when you think Montana, you think rural. We love that about our state. But I want [1:03:51] to build on what you just said, Mr. Secretary, because there was a transformative $50 billion investment [1:04:00] that Senate Republicans made in working with the Trump administration to strengthen health care [1:04:07] across rural America in our working family tax cut bill. This has been $50 billion. Following a [1:04:15] competitive application process, Montana is receiving a $233 million investment from the Trump administration, [1:04:26] the fourth highest funding award of all 50 states to stabilize and modernize rural health care [1:04:34] delivery throughout the state. Mr. Secretary, could you touch for a moment on the real change this [1:04:41] investment will have on rural health care access delivery and outcomes in places like Montana as well as [1:04:49] hospitals across America? Yeah, I mean, I would, and I would, I would refer in my answer to the Senator's criticism, [1:04:57] the Senator's hypothesis that some future cut Medicaid is closing hospitals in her state. [1:05:06] If the medic, right now Medicaid pays about 7% in total to rural hospitals. Oh, it's about 20 million, [1:05:15] 20 billion dollars a year to all the rural areas in our country. We have now increased the influx of [1:05:24] federal dollars by an extra 10 billion dollars a year. It's astronomical. It's a 50% rise in the money [1:05:31] that rural hospitals are getting traditionally from Medicaid. So any, first of all, we're not cutting Medicaid, [1:05:39] and they keep saying we are, but the Congressional Budget Office says we're raising it by 47%. [1:05:43] And in addition to that, this fund is putting an unmatched flow of federal dollars into those [1:05:53] hospitals. And, you know, President Trump cares that all these hospitals are closing. We got to keep rural [1:05:59] America alive, and you cannot do that without local health care. Mr. Secretary, I met yesterday with our [1:06:05] hospital administrators from across our state. They came in, CEOs came into my office, and we were talking [1:06:11] about enthusiasm, excitement they had about what's happening right now, as you just articulated. [1:06:18] And the fact you're also going after the fraud that's occurring right now in these programs. The [1:06:23] American people want the right people help. They want the fraudsters removed. And I appreciate your [1:06:29] leadership on that. And that's delivering real results and outcomes for the American people. [1:06:34] Back on the issue of safety, I want to go back to my earlier comment. [1:06:37] And I want to continue the conversation we had around what HHS is doing to apply the principles [1:06:44] of safety for the American people as it relates to the federal regulations on mefapristone. [1:06:52] You've stated the FDA is conducting a comprehensive safety review, which they are, [1:06:56] and I encourage you to see that review through completion guided by the best available data. [1:07:06] Some of the evidence we already have today points to some serious real-world consequences as it relates [1:07:12] to safety for women. We know about the outcomes to the baby, but I'm talking about the outcomes now to [1:07:17] women. In fact, there was analysis of over 865,000 mefapristone prescriptions compiled from insurance [1:07:26] claims found that 11 percent of women experienced a serious adverse event. That typically means going [1:07:34] to the ER, serious medical care required within 45 days of taking mefapristone. That's 22 times higher [1:07:45] than the FDA's long-standing estimate of less than 0.5 percent. In the first half of 2025, over 27 percent, [1:07:55] in fact, of all abortions in the U.S. were chemical abortions provided by online clinics, and that number [1:08:02] continues to grow. Given the fact there's a lot of disturbing data that already exists, will you [1:08:08] implement interim safeguards as well as look at reinstating the in-person dispensing requirement [1:08:16] until the full safety review is completed? [1:08:20] Mr. Regrettably, Senator Danes, I cannot comment on that because of the litigation. I've been advised [1:08:27] by the Office of General Counsel not to talk about it. [1:08:30] Mr. Well, I, um, maybe I can use this question. [1:08:34] Mr. I have read that study. [1:08:35] Mr. Right, and the actual adverse effects are 22 times what the FDA had on the label, and so we want to [1:08:46] see action taken because women are being harmed by mefapristone. [1:08:52] Thank you, Senator Warren. [1:08:53] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So after President Trump and the Republicans slashed health care for millions [1:09:00] of families, the President pitched his TrumpRx website as the answer for Americans who are worried [1:09:08] about health care costs. He claims that TrumpRx has reduced prices by as much as 600 percent. [1:09:17] Six hundred percent, which I think means companies should be paying you to take their drugs. [1:09:23] But let's do some real math here. Take one drug, Protonix. A 30-day supply of this heartburn medication [1:09:31] costs $200 on TrumpRx, but there is an identical generic version of this pill called Pantoprazole. [1:09:43] Secretary Kennedy, do you know how much it costs for a 30-day supply of that drug at Costco? [1:09:49] Oh, but I would say this, Senator. President Trump has a different way of calculating. [1:09:57] There's two ways of calculating percentage. If you have a $600 drug and you reduce it to [1:10:02] 10, that's a 600 percent reduction. I understand that you know I only [1:10:05] have five minutes. Do you know what the drug costs at Costco? [1:10:12] I do not. The drug is $16 at Costco. TrumpRx charges $200 [1:10:20] for Protonix and Costco charges $16. Let's do another one. Tietosin is a treatment for heart [1:10:29] arrhythmia. It costs $336 on TrumpRx, or you can get the generic at Cost Plus Drugs for $12. [1:10:41] So you tell me, Mr. Secretary, are patients better off paying $336 on TrumpRx or $12 at Cost Plus Drugs? [1:10:51] You're comparing apples to oranges because you're comparing the brand drug to the generic drug. [1:10:58] Yeah, to the exact same drug. [1:11:02] Well, people should be buying the generic and we will be directing them to the generic. [1:11:06] To the exact same drug. [1:11:07] Yeah, we'll be directing them to the generic. [1:11:09] So tell me, tell me, Mr. Secretary, you think people ought to be paying $336 [1:11:14] instead of $12? [1:11:15] Well, a lot of people, a lot of doctors prescribe the brand, so we're giving them 600 percent reductions [1:11:22] on the brand. We will be directing them to the generic whenever it's available. [1:11:27] So here's the thing. We know about brand names versus generic. It's a big pharma talking point [1:11:35] in order to fool people into buying a more expensive drug. The generic is chemically the same. And here's [1:11:42] the thing. If you're buying a drug on TrumpRx, there is a more than one in four chance [1:11:50] that Trump's discount is actually a price hike. And for an empty big pharma guy, you sure don't seem [1:11:58] worried about steering patients to more expensive drugs that are going to pad big pharma's profits. [1:12:04] But there's more in this deal. In exchange for these scam discounts, President Trump has exempted [1:12:12] these drug companies from his 100 percent tariffs. So think about that. Big pharma makes billions of [1:12:19] dollars in tariff relief by listing their drugs on TrumpRx. And then they don't even lower the costs [1:12:28] on many of these drugs. That is a great deal for big pharma. So Secretary Kennedy, [1:12:33] here's my question. Did you sign off on these sweetheart deals for big pharma or was this [1:12:41] all President Trump's idea? The tariff relief is only applicable [1:12:46] if the company has agreed to produce the drug in America. They have one year to do so. [1:12:53] Well. And then they don't get the tariff relief and then it is going to bankrupt them. [1:12:58] So you're the one who negotiated these? [1:13:01] Did I negotiate the deal? [1:13:03] You negotiated these deals. Will you make those deals available to us so we can see them? [1:13:08] I didn't personally negotiate them. [1:13:10] All right. Did your team negotiate these deals? [1:13:12] Yes. [1:13:13] Will you make those deals available to us so we can see them? A little transparency? [1:13:17] We will make the deal. I've already said this. I'm happy to make the deals available, [1:13:21] except for proprietary information and trade secrets, which when you pass the IRA. [1:13:27] I will hold you to that, Mr. Secretary, because if these deals with big pharma are so great for [1:13:32] Americans, then we should be able to see what promises have been made. [1:13:37] You have the power to make this deal yourself. Why don't you do that? Why did you? We did this [1:13:41] because you refused to do it. [1:13:43] I think what we've got is Trump. You have a lot more power to negotiate than we do. [1:13:48] Trump's stakes. [1:13:48] We've got the lowest prices in history. [1:13:50] Americans are getting crushed by health care costs and you and Donald Trump [1:13:53] are actually making the problem worse. The American public deserves better. [1:13:58] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:13:58] The millions of people who are using Trump Rx disagree with you. [1:14:06] They've got a better than one out of four chance of paying more at Trump Rx than they would if they [1:14:15] went to Costco. That's not much of a deal for the American people. [1:14:18] Not on branded drugs. [1:14:21] Oh, so your answer is Americans should just not take prescription drugs. [1:14:24] We are directing people. We will be directing people to the generics, the cheapest available, [1:14:30] but a lot of doctors prescribe the brands and we're giving them massive reductions in the brands. [1:14:36] So those mass, mass discounts are that people can pay 600 percent, they can pay hundreds of dollars [1:14:45] or more on Trump Rx or they can get it for 12 bucks. [1:14:49] This is the second instance of the secretary denying the public's right to know. [1:14:55] That's all that the members on this committee have asked for. [1:14:59] All right. Thank you, Senator Wyden and Senator Warren. [1:15:04] At this point to the rest of the members of the committee, [1:15:06] we're going to take a five or 10 minute break and then we will come back and resume the questioning. [1:15:14] The Senate will, I mean, the committee will recess. [1:15:17] I wanted to ask a couple, I have three subjects that I want to go over if I could. [1:21:51] One, no, no, no, no, no, no. Ernie Moniz once said, [1:21:58] I read the four year quadrennial energy report for our nation and he thought that was crazy. [1:22:04] But, you know, when somebody spends that, I think it probably took them two years to write [1:22:09] what was our four year energy outlook, somebody needs to read it. [1:22:13] So I actually think you covered a lot of subjects there. [1:22:16] So I wanted to ask about that because I have priorities that I wanted to cover [1:22:20] and see if we could get your commitments on them. [1:22:22] One, you talked a lot about Indian health care, which I appreciated. [1:22:26] I've met with several of my tribes. [1:22:30] One issue is that we don't have for urban, you know, IHS does their thing. [1:22:34] You've addressed trying to fix that. [1:22:35] But Indian urban health needs the full FMAP funding. [1:22:40] We got a fix, myself and Senator Murkowski, but it only lasted for two years. [1:22:46] And so we would like to see urban Indian health get the full federal medical assistance [1:22:53] for the Indian health care programs. [1:22:55] And would you work with us on that? [1:22:57] Absolutely and enthusiastically. [1:22:59] Okay, great. [1:23:02] You can call me directly on that. [1:23:04] Great. [1:23:05] So appreciate that. [1:23:06] This is a really big issue. [1:23:07] People don't understand, but we have 150,000 American Indians and Alaska Natives [1:23:11] that live in urban areas like Seattle. [1:23:14] And so when they only get half the money for the care that everybody else gets, [1:23:18] it creates a disparity in actually being able to deliver that care. [1:23:21] Okay. [1:23:22] Second issue is in the cuts to Head Start, [1:23:26] in the cuts to the administrative issues and Head Starts and not putting out the new [1:23:30] RFP for proposals, Walla Walla, which is, yes, a real place, [1:23:39] they may have to shut down their whole Head Start program. [1:23:41] So are you going to put out requests for proposals for funding for Head Start? [1:23:47] A request for proposal for, I mean, I mean, Head Start, we have, you know. [1:23:57] There's been some administrative cuts. [1:24:00] And so one of the things they haven't put out are these RFPs that allow programs in small communities [1:24:06] to actually apply for those federal dollars and then be able to keep their program open. [1:24:11] I think what I should do is send you a letter on this. [1:24:14] I mean, you know, I'm very committed to Head Start. [1:24:16] My family started at Head Start. [1:24:19] I just, we protected it in the budget. [1:24:22] I just put 62 million extra into it so that they can do good nutrition. [1:24:27] I'm happy to work with you to make sure. [1:24:29] I think this is an area where we might say, yes, [1:24:31] Secretary, would you call the administrator in Walla Walla, Washington? [1:24:34] Okay. [1:24:35] So the big question I wanted to ask about is this issue of WISER. [1:24:42] I don't know if you've heard about this. [1:24:44] And you mentioned briefly in your testimony the coverage of modernization of CMS in technology. [1:24:54] And the concern that I wanted to try to address today is something that's been raised in our [1:24:58] newspaper in Seattle. [1:25:00] We obviously know a lot about AI because we have a big AI community. [1:25:03] But what's happening is AI is being used as a denial device for the CMS system. [1:25:11] And it's apparently had some problems where it's not taking a few days to find out whether you're [1:25:18] going to get covered or not. [1:25:19] It's basically taking weeks to find out that you're denied on things that never were a prior [1:25:27] denial before. [1:25:29] And so what I'm worried this is a gentleman who had some back issues and wanted to get what [1:25:37] would have been under Medicare an approved system by his doctor whether he could have that steroid [1:25:45] or whatever care he could get. [1:25:46] Now he's under this WISER application process which can just turn down and deny. [1:25:54] So we have hospitals calling me about this. [1:25:56] I have doctors calling me about this. [1:25:58] I have patients calling me about this. [1:26:00] So I appreciate if you take a look at it. [1:26:03] The issue. [1:26:03] Yeah. [1:26:04] Yeah, go ahead. [1:26:05] Okay, first of all that kind of delay is unacceptable and we will work with you on it. [1:26:11] The WISER model, you know, we're doing, we do only 5% prior authorization across Medicare and Medicaid. [1:26:22] And, but we found we were being ripped off by certain categories of procedures that are not [1:26:32] good for the patient and a lot of time they're unnecessary and they're very lucrative for the [1:26:36] doctors. [1:26:36] Skin substitutes went in three years from being 250 million to 23 billion. [1:26:45] The spinal surgeries, certain kind of spinal surgeries which is from maybe the one he's in [1:26:51] and then knee arthroscopic surgeries. [1:26:53] But this is. [1:26:53] So the AI targets those and I don't know what happens then but anyway it shouldn't be delayed [1:27:00] and we will try to work with you to fix it. [1:27:01] I just want to bring in my last point because I know my time is, I'm sorry, [1:27:04] but this is exactly the point. [1:27:05] Somebody might have had a bright idea. [1:27:07] I think AI should be used for advancing research and finding things that might take us years to [1:27:12] figure out and find them out in months instead. [1:27:14] But to use AI as an app or a tool that might deny people and then cut them off of Medicare when [1:27:20] this part of Medicare was never a referral is making me anxious that somebody really does think [1:27:28] that AI should be used to judge our Medicare services. [1:27:32] And so it makes me anxious. [1:27:34] So I appreciate you saying you. [1:27:35] It's supposed to allow us to detect fraud early. [1:27:38] There's probably kinks in the system. [1:27:40] I will work with you to, you know, try to straighten that out. [1:27:44] But as I said, we were getting ripped off for 23 billion dollars just by one category of procedure. [1:27:51] I don't want Mr. Magnusson, who I showed, to be ripped off though. [1:27:54] And I think that's the scary thing about AI is that if we really think we're going to put AI in [1:27:59] charge of deciding on instead of doctors, I think we're going to have some real problems. [1:28:04] And also, would you think about the transparency on this? [1:28:06] Because if you created that model or that app, or I think here's a third party, [1:28:11] what is the transparency that we all have about how that app works? [1:28:15] Yeah, it's supposed to have a human supervisor. [1:28:19] So that human and prior authorization is denied that there's supposed to be a human being [1:28:24] who checks that off and that the AI just identifies at the outset. [1:28:29] We want to know before so that we're not, I hear what you're saying. [1:28:31] So thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:28:33] Senator Barrasso. [1:28:37] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:28:38] Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here today. [1:28:40] I really applaud what the administration's doing in terms of focusing on making America healthy again. [1:28:45] And we can agree that addressing chronic diseases is not a simple task. [1:28:49] At its core, making America healthy depends on prevention. [1:28:53] I believe that as a doctor who practiced a long time, was involved with the Wyoming Health Fairs, [1:28:56] all focused on prevention. [1:28:58] There is something called the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. [1:29:02] It has a 40-year history of providing independent, evidence-based recommendations on preventive care. [1:29:08] It's part of HHS. [1:29:10] And as a doctor, I've relied on these recommendations over the years. [1:29:13] They've helped shape the standard of care across the country from cancer screening to heart health. [1:29:18] And I believe, actually, if more people followed the recommendations, our country would be a lot healthier. [1:29:24] Last week, before the House Ways and Means Committee, you said you thought the task force had been [1:29:29] lackadaisical and negligent for 20 years. [1:29:32] I mean, they did a lot of good work on breast cancer prevention, cervical cancer, alcohol in pregnancy. [1:29:37] And then you said you'd planned to bring on new members with a clear mission. [1:29:41] So over the last year, they've canceled and not rescheduled multiple meetings of the task force. [1:29:47] The department has. [1:29:48] One of them was just on three days' notice. [1:29:51] I'm concerned that these actions show that we're not really prioritizing this important task force. [1:29:56] So how are you demonstrating that you have a serious and consistent plan to reform the task force on [1:30:02] prevention? [1:30:02] And what exactly do you believe the Preventive Services Task Force has been getting wrong? [1:30:07] The task force is critically important. [1:30:12] It plays a critical role in getting compensation, CMS compensation for important approved interventions. [1:30:24] We consider that critical. [1:30:26] The meetings were intermittent. [1:30:28] I know I have not done a good job at getting the meetings out there. [1:30:31] We are going to change that. [1:30:35] And then we are going to we're posting a applications that a number of the [1:30:43] of the members are rotating out and I think there's only five left. [1:30:47] We're going to we're posting applications. [1:30:50] We're going to get resumes on this week. [1:30:53] We encourage people to send in resumes who are on all these different specialties. [1:30:57] The number of specialties were not well represented on the committee. [1:31:01] And we want to increase that to make sure that everybody is represented there. [1:31:07] And to increase the number of meetings and also increase the transparency of the meetings. [1:31:13] In January of 2026, the addition of the American family physicians, a lot of physicians that practice [1:31:19] all across the country read, they follow this. [1:31:22] Dr. Doug Campos-Altcult raised some concerns about the future of the task force that we're talking about [1:31:26] here. Particularly he talked about the risk of undermining its independence and evidence-based [1:31:32] methodology. And Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that this [1:31:36] article I could submit to the record. [1:31:40] Without objection. [1:31:41] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:31:42] And I share his concerns because what we've just seen for the last year. [1:31:45] The task force's methodology is grounded in an independent review of the evidence, [1:31:50] careful evaluation of the benefits and the harms. [1:31:53] And among so many health providers, it is widely even considered the gold standard for preventive [1:31:58] care. So I hear what you're saying in terms of the different specialties of people rotating on. [1:32:02] I can promise you, Senator, we're not going to undermine any of those functions. [1:32:05] And I don't think we'll get any criticism for doing so. [1:32:10] We just want to get the best people and have a more representative group of specialties. [1:32:15] Okay. So you believe it's still the current methodology? [1:32:18] The way they do it is still the gold standard. [1:32:20] I think there are some limitations that we are trying to address. [1:32:26] And I'm happy to meet with you or consult with you to make sure we're doing it right. [1:32:31] Well, no, I'd be very happy about that. And then, you know, on vaccines, and a number of people have [1:32:35] asked vaccines. You committed when we visited in September to increasing transparency, to rebuild [1:32:41] trust in the public health guidance. And since then, there have been some changes to the [1:32:45] vaccines, vaccination schedules, specifically with children. There have been some disruptions [1:32:50] to the advisory committee on immunization practices. And I think that there's been [1:32:55] more confusion for families and for providers. And I think sometimes it's very hard to keep up with [1:33:00] some of the recommendations. So I'll ask you again, are you taking steps now to ensure vaccine guidance [1:33:05] is clear, evidence-based and trustworthy? And when, what those steps would be? [1:33:09] Yeah, absolutely. That's what we're doing. The first time we're going to be doing [1:33:13] for new vaccines that are not yet on the schedule to make sure that they have safety studies, [1:33:21] placebo-controlled trials first. And for the vaccines on the schedule, they're being reviewed. [1:33:29] There's a limitation. I can't really talk about it because it's under litigation. [1:33:34] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator Cassidy. [1:33:38] Hey, Mr. Secretary. Thanks for coming in. First, just a statement. [1:33:43] CMS is working with Louisiana to approve Medicaid provider tax preprints after passing the Working [1:33:52] Families Tax Cut Act. We have one more to be approved, the Physician 2026 preprint. [1:34:00] Louisiana's fiscal year starts in two months. And we just need to get this done ASAP, as well as [1:34:06] congressional intent. Please prioritize getting it resolved. And I'll follow up with you and Dr. Oz. [1:34:12] But critical to my state's providers and to my state's fiscal health, if you will, [1:34:16] that this we complied with. I'm happy to meet with you or, you know, I'm happy to put my staff in touch. [1:34:23] You can call me anytime to make sure it's happening. Thank you, sir. Next, affordable health care. [1:34:30] My gosh, when I'm on the campaign trail, for example, or just speaking to folks back home, it's all [1:34:35] about that. We have expanded access to health savings account. Now, I'm not clear, though, [1:34:48] particularly on the exchanges. So a bronze plan is now eligible for an HSA, as an example. [1:34:53] How is the department alerting folks, enrollees, that this HSA opportunity exists? [1:35:02] I'm aware of the opportunity. I do not know whether there's an advertising campaign or what. [1:35:09] I will check on that for you, Senator. Thank you. The Biden administration... [1:35:13] I mean, the Trump administration is absolutely committed to increasing access to HSAs and to [1:35:22] direct primary care and to the catastrophic plans. And so we, you know, we'll do everything in our [1:35:29] power to make sure that that is known, that opportunity is known. [1:35:35] Staying on the exchanges, there was a lot of fraud with zero premium policies in the ACA. [1:35:46] People paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines for doing this. [1:35:50] I'm not seeing additional funding to address that fraud in your 2027 budget. And yet, I recently had [1:35:57] an insurance broker told me she is still seeing folks fraudulently enrolled in the ACA marketplace. [1:36:03] So the problem continues, even though there's now a greater awareness. Going back to your budget, [1:36:11] there was not dollars that I saw to address ACA fraud. Any comment on that? [1:36:16] Well, the president's marketplace integrity rule eliminates the zero premium plans. Those plans [1:36:27] were particularly subject to fraud. We think there were 4.4 million people on them who, [1:36:32] many of them who didn't even know they were registered because there was broker fraud. People [1:36:39] were getting names, signing people up, and collecting the commission for signing people up who didn't [1:36:45] know they were signed up. There were, I think, only 40 percent of the people on it ever made a claim, [1:36:54] which indicates... So you accept all that. But it appears that the problem persists. And so, [1:37:02] I'm being told by folks involved, but the budget, as we see it, does not have money to go after that. [1:37:07] And so, knowing that we've already done good work, what are we doing prospectively to attempt to [1:37:16] address the continued threat and perhaps reality of fraud in the marketplace? [1:37:21] I mean, we're using now AI throughout the department to detect fraud. And we're using it [1:37:27] very aggressively. We have the best people in Silicon Valley who are now designing the systems. [1:37:33] Now, is that on the Medicare-Medicaid program? [1:37:34] That's for Medicaid. Medicare led out the door. But I think, you know, we're relying on the marketplace [1:37:39] integrity rule to eliminate a lot of the opportunities for fraud in the ACA. [1:37:46] Okay. We may follow up with you on that, just for clarity. [1:37:49] Okay. [1:37:50] Then, next, on Medicare Advantage, we know Medicare is going insolvent soon. We want to protect the [1:37:57] 72-year-old retiree in Jefferson Parish, for example. Your department has banned the use of [1:38:05] unlinked chart reviews. A little technical, but you and I know what we're talking about. [1:38:08] But in the latest MA rate notice, HHS is continuing to use 2018 diagnoses and 2019 expenditure data, [1:38:19] not 2023 diagnoses and 2024 expenditure data. Why would CMS not use the more recent numbers, [1:38:27] which gives more precision as regards what the expenditure, what the payment should actually be? [1:38:32] Well, I can't answer that question. The guy who can is behind me, Chris Klump. [1:38:38] But we're happy to talk to you about it. I mean, we know we went through a lot of effort [1:38:45] to delink to end the delinking of chart reviews with payments to end the upcoding fraud, which was [1:38:54] the biggest opportunity for fraud throughout the system. So I don't know why we got the year. [1:39:03] Why we're not doing it, you know, back to doing it to 2023 and 2024. But I will find out for you. [1:39:09] Sounds great. Without a yield. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Senator Johnson. [1:39:13] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, welcome. Thanks for your service. Thanks for putting up [1:39:20] with all this abuse. But in particular, thank you for your commitment to radical transparency. [1:39:26] I think you're aware of the fact that I, on many fronts, think our response to the pandemic was a [1:39:30] miserable failure. I'm also well aware that because the pandemic's over, so many people just want to [1:39:37] put it behind us. Let's not examine all the things that went wrong. One group of people who do not [1:39:45] want to move on, one group of people that insist on a reckoning, are those who were injured by the COVID [1:39:53] mRNA injection? I think you're aware of the fact that on VAERS today, worldwide, we have almost 1.7 [1:40:01] million reports of adverse events, almost 39,000 deaths. By the way, of those deaths, 24% occurred [1:40:10] either on the day of injection or within one or two days. I know VAERS doesn't prove causation, but man, [1:40:16] that's a correlation. The injection injured, I refuse to call it a vaccine. It's not a traditional vaccine. [1:40:22] The injection injured, at a minimum, would like to have their injuries acknowledged so they can get [1:40:27] treatment. I saw a horribly sad video of a man in Japan, the Central Line, being effectively treated [1:40:35] for his vaccine, for his injection injury. Couldn't get treatment here in the U.S. One of the things [1:40:40] preventing is we have no ICD code for those. So I know this is running through HHS. I think [1:40:47] the NHA Director Bhattacharya is looking for an ICD code. I'm just asking you if you're willing to look [1:40:55] at that and prioritize that to get the injection injured, at least an IDC code, and acknowledge [1:41:01] these injuries. Would you make that comment? We are working on it. We are working on it. [1:41:08] We're trying to make that happen as quickly as possible. And we're also [1:41:11] doing the studies that now need to be done at NIH. The coroner's reports on the blood, [1:41:20] you know, clots and all of these. I'm glad you talked about coroner. So my next question is [1:41:26] a memo that is apparently from CBER Director Dr. Prasad in December 2015, where apparently within [1:41:34] FDA you're reviewing, I think it was 96 autopsies of child death following the COVID mRNA injection. [1:41:41] In that memo, Dr. Prasad writes, this is a profound revelation. For the first time, [1:41:47] the U.S. FDA will acknowledge that COVID-19 vaccines killed American children. Healthy young [1:41:53] children who face tremendously low risk of death were coerced at behest of the Biden administration [1:41:58] via school and work mandates to receive a vaccine that could result in death. In many cases, [1:42:03] such mandates were harmful. It is difficult to read cases where kids 7 to 16 may be dead [1:42:10] as a result of COVID vaccines. Putting these facts together, it is horrifying [1:42:15] to consider the U.S. vaccine regulation, including our actions, may have harmed [1:42:18] more children than we saved. This requires humility and introspection. It requires oversight. [1:42:25] And so I wrote a letter to you and your agency back in December 15th. Of the 10 responses, [1:42:32] I've got three out of 10. No responses, no response in terms of the documents I've requested. So I'm [1:42:40] asking you, please, will you commit to responding fully to my December oversight letter? [1:42:45] You have my 100% commitment. [1:42:48] In the letter, we also mentioned the fact that I was requesting the deliverer process on the Biden [1:42:54] administration last minute requesting or granting a four-year extension liability shield for these [1:43:00] COVID injections. So please, would you also commit to providing me that delivery of those documents? [1:43:07] If we have them, I will hand them over to you. [1:43:10] Okay. Finally, let's just put up this graph. [1:43:14] Because of your radical transparency, I've got close to 11 million pages. You know, we uncovered, [1:43:19] they hid the signal on myocarditis. We also just recently uncovered that they also hit a signal on [1:43:25] ischemic stroke for people over 65, the tail end of 2022, 2023. They hid both signals. They downplayed [1:43:31] them. But what is most alarming, and we'll be holding a hearing on this next week, I've got a draft [1:43:37] report. They were made aware, Peter Marks was made aware on March 26th of 2021, that the inventors of [1:43:46] the algorithm that analyzes the various data was going to mask adverse events. They were, he was told that [1:43:56] by using a different system, they had uncovered 49 examples of extreme masking, 25 significant [1:44:05] adverse events, including cardiac, sudden cardiac death, Bell's palsy, pulmonary infarction. So this [1:44:13] report will be issued in conjunction with that hearing. Again, I didn't need a sophisticated [1:44:18] mathematical model to tell me that we had safety signals screaming at us. This chart shows the deaths [1:44:25] associated with vaccines, all the way going back to 1990 when the VAERS started, you know, a couple [1:44:31] hundred a year, anaphylactic shock, that type of thing. 2021, over 20,000 deaths, and for five years, [1:44:40] FDA has been saying, uh, we don't see a signal. This was a signal screaming at us that to date, to this [1:44:47] very day, we are covering up. So my, there are a bunch of people involved in this cover-up that still [1:44:54] continue to work within the HHS, CDC, FDA. I want your commitment that those people be made available [1:44:59] for interviews. I'll have to subpoena others. I'm going to dig into this massive government. [1:45:05] Uh, you have my commitment. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Mr. Chair, [1:45:12] uh, a few, uh, rounds ago, there was a back and forth between Senator Daines and, uh, Secretary Kennedy [1:45:18] about Mifepristone. So Mifepristone's safety profile is well-established, 25 years of data, [1:45:25] 100 peer-reviewed studies. It's a safety profile that is better established than many everyday, [1:45:32] uh, medications. And so I'd like to submit for the record, uh, Mr. Chair, um, 40 peer-reviewed, [1:45:38] statistically significant studies on Mifepristone's safety profile. These are the same that, uh, Senator [1:45:45] Hassan submitted during, um, Secretary Kennedy's, um, confirmation hearings. Mr. Chairman, just very [1:45:51] quickly, I'd like to associate myself with your important remarks. Without objection. Thank you [1:45:55] very much. Uh, good morning, Mr. Kennedy. Um, I'd like to talk about prevention and where we should [1:46:01] be able to agree not only to how prevention can help to keep Americans healthier, but also save, um, [1:46:08] health care dollars. And I'd like to start by associating myself with Senator Barrasso's [1:46:12] questions and concerns about what's happening with a preventative services task force. But, um, let's, [1:46:18] let's get into it. Um, last week you said that screening for prevention is absolutely critical. [1:46:24] So I want to dig into that. I, I agree with that. Um, let's start with mammograms. Would you agree that [1:46:29] mammograms are important preventative health care? Yes. Absolutely. I agree with that too. So, [1:46:34] it makes me wonder why, uh, your agency cut the programs that fund breast cancer screenings. Hospitals [1:46:42] in my neighboring states of South Dakota and North Dakota actually had to pause breast cancer screenings, [1:46:48] because your agency announced cuts to the national breast and cervical cancer early detection programs. [1:46:54] Doesn't make any sense to me. Let's try another one. Um, is depression screening, um, preventative care [1:47:01] in your, in your mind? Depression. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. I agree with that too. Um, however, the Trump [1:47:09] administration and congressional Republicans pushed through the biggest cuts to Medicaid in the history [1:47:15] of that program. And Medicaid is the largest payer of behavioral health care. So that's cutting access [1:47:22] to care for millions of Americans to get mental health care. Um, how about smoking? Is smoking cessation, [1:47:29] cessation, pardon me, preventative care? Yes. Okay. So again, your latest budget eliminates the CDC's office for [1:47:39] smoking, um, on smoking, um, on smoking and health. And 200 CDC employees who were working on smoking [1:47:45] cessation, cessation are gone now. The flu shot. Is the flu shot preventative care? Yes. Okay. So you [1:47:54] said that it would be better if fewer kids got the flu shot. You've rescinded recommendations for [1:48:00] scientifically and, you know, medically sound flu vaccines. You've canceled public awareness campaigns [1:48:06] about the importance of getting the flu vaccine. I mean, this is not a record that matches with saying [1:48:13] that preventative care is important. I do not understand the, the, the, the, the contrast here [1:48:21] between what you say you want to do and what is actually happening in this administration. Now, [1:48:26] let me go to this. Um, are you familiar with Title X? Yes. Okay. Great. Title X is a highly successful [1:48:36] comprehensive strategy to provide birth control and preventative care to low-income women. And we [1:48:41] know that every dollar that's invested in Title X, um, Mr. Chair, saves somewhere between three and seven [1:48:47] dollars in Medicaid costs, um, preventing unintended pregnancies. So, Secretary Kennedy, [1:48:52] can you explain why you were recommending zeroing out funding for Title X, which would eliminate [1:48:59] screenings for cervical cancer, um, and would, um, almost certainly result in higher unintended [1:49:06] pregnancies? Uh, can I respond to some of your earlier statements? Please. First of all, there are no [1:49:13] cuts in Medicaid. I keep saying this. Here's what the CBO said. Fiscal year 2025, 668 billion dollars. [1:49:23] Fiscal year 2036, 981 billion. That's not a cut. Mr. Secretary Kennedy, a trillion dollars in cuts, [1:49:31] according to the CBO, seven million people losing their health insurance because of the Trump [1:49:37] administration actions. That's not debatable. There's nobody who is legally enrolled in Medicaid [1:49:43] who is losing coverage. That is just not true. That is just not true. It is so. How can this be cut? [1:49:50] How else would you like to respond to my questions about why the administration is cutting preventative [1:49:55] care? Uh, we're putting, a lot of it is being returned to the states. We're doing a [1:50:01] 667 billion dollar block grant to the states for mental health. My counties are asking why the cost [1:50:09] shift to their taxpayers is happening at the same time that rural hospitals are going out of business. [1:50:17] The states administer the programs better than we do. So we're giving the same money to the states to [1:50:23] administer the program. That is not the way it is working. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, [1:50:28] Senator Liu Han. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask unanimous consent to submit into the [1:50:35] record a CBO report from July 2025 on H.R.1. Unanimous consent. Appreciate that. Mr. Kennedy, [1:50:50] that report found that there was a $990 billion cut to Medicaid CBO report. That's not my question. [1:50:57] How can there be a cut? Mr. Secretary, it's in the record. I'd be happy to share it with you. Your team [1:51:04] has it as well. CBO report. It's a cut from the growth rate. Only in Washington is that considered [1:51:09] a cut. There you go, Mr. Check. In the same way, the gas prices are not high today. It doubled in [1:51:14] the last four years. Mr. Secretary, let's talk about vaccines. You've been asked quite a few questions [1:51:20] today about vaccines. Your hearings this last week in the House as well, you've been asked a lot of [1:51:26] questions about vaccines. You've been responding quite a bit about vaccines. I went back to look at [1:51:33] statements you've made, I don't know, over the last 10 years or so on vaccines as well. I appreciate [1:51:43] that you say today that you support people getting vaccine. Is that accurate? Yes. I was reminded, [1:51:52] though, that, you know, July 6, 2023, Samoa 2019, August 2018, February 23rd, 2021, and the dates go on, [1:52:01] and I have a list of them, where there was a lot of misinformation predating this. Tell me a piece [1:52:07] of information that I ever promoted about vaccines. Tell me one piece of information. Mr. Secretary, [1:52:15] again, if I could continue. Tell me one piece of misinformation. You said I've promoted misinformation. [1:52:22] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I'll get there. So, Mr. Secretary, the history shows that [1:52:29] you were pushing vaccine misinformation, predating your tenure. Tell me one instance. [1:52:34] Mr. Secretary. Tell me one statement. I just heard about it, Mr. Secretary. One statement. [1:52:38] So now, during your leadership at HHS, measles, a disease once eliminated in the United States, [1:52:44] is on the rise in over 1,700 Americans, as you're aware. You've been asked by colleagues as well where, [1:52:53] you know, kids died last year as a result. Can I answer the question? I don't have a question yet, [1:53:01] Mr. Secretary. You're making misstatements. At a previous hearing, you seemed to almost brag [1:53:06] about how well the United States has fared in response to measles outbreaks compared to Mexico [1:53:09] and Canada. I think here again today. And Europe and all the other countries. The United States has [1:53:14] always been a leader, and we demand that it's a leader. That should not be a question. We're still [1:53:18] the leader. Can you please tell us here today what you're going to do to reduce the number of measles [1:53:23] cases and improve the MMR vaccination rate? Improve the MMR. We promote the MMR. We advise [1:53:33] every child to get the MMR. That's what we do. Mr. Secretary, I'd be happy to just ask for that [1:53:38] to be in the record, and I'd be happy to get a question in the record. You can respond to it. [1:53:43] I'm real curious if you're going to include funding a coordinated vaccine education and [1:53:47] distribution campaign, for example, countering misinformation about measles and the MMR vaccine. [1:53:51] Tell me one piece of misinformation I've ever said. One statement. Just one. [1:53:56] If I could continue, Mr. Secretary. You say you have a list of them. Read one. [1:54:00] Tailoring outreach to communities with declining vaccination rates as well. [1:54:04] Measuring whether those campaigns are working. You're just making things up, Senator. [1:54:08] You're just inventing stuff. Tell me one piece of it. You say you have a whole list there. Read [1:54:12] me one thing I've ever said. Mr. Secretary, if you want to run for the United States Senate and get on [1:54:17] the dais here, you're happy to do it. You should resign from the HHS today and run for office. And [1:54:21] you can be in here. You can ask anyone all the questions you want, Mr. Secretary. I'm asking [1:54:25] you some questions. What I just gave you wasn't... You're not asking questions. You're just making [1:54:29] statements that are incorrect. Let me ask you a question about someone that you know very well, [1:54:34] David Geyer. So, Mr. Secretary, does David Geyer work for you? He is a contract... So, Mr. Secretary, [1:54:46] last time you were here, I asked you, why was it that David Geyer was listed on the HHS [1:54:52] director is a senior data analyst? He still is. He's a contractor. He's a contract employee. [1:54:59] Mr. Secretary, you were asked by one of my colleagues about getting their hands on some [1:55:04] documents that you may have. Do you have Mr. Geyer's contract? I imagine we do. Would you [1:55:11] share that with the committee by Friday? I don't think there's any legal problem with it. [1:55:17] Not a legal problem. It's subject to Information of Public Records Act, which we could go about. [1:55:22] Well then, yeah, I'm happy to. I appreciate that. And including in the contract, would you share... [1:55:27] Can we expect you to share with the committee by Friday the scope of David Geyer's contract? [1:55:33] Uh, I don't see any reason why not. I appreciate that. Does David Geyer report to the HHS office [1:55:39] here in DC? He reports to CDC. So, what I asked for in the last time we had a conversation, Mr. Secretary, [1:55:50] was about the protocols that go into David Geyer's work. You responded to me by saying that those [1:55:55] protocols are public. They are not. I asked the committee chair... I said they will be public when [1:56:01] he does the work, when he develops the protocols. Will you commit to share the protocols to David [1:56:07] Geyer's work with this committee by Friday? No, I won't because they don't exist. Okay, so Mr. Secretary, [1:56:13] I appreciate that honest response. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Wyden, you'll remember, and I can [1:56:19] get you the the information from this. Last time I asked this question to the Secretary, he said it [1:56:24] was all public, it was all available. He just said it's not. So, I don't know if it's going to take [1:56:28] us... I said it's going. I said we won't make it available when it's done. I certainly hope that [1:56:34] we can get our hands on the protocol information and David Geyer's work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:56:38] Thank you. Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Secretary, [1:56:43] thank you for being with us today. We appreciate it. I really want to applaud your leadership on [1:56:50] the CMS strategy to crush fraud. This is getting longer and longer. This is something that Tennesseans [1:56:56] are welcoming seeing and the fact that you have already found, I think it's 5.7 billion in fraudulent [1:57:06] Medicare payments. And when you look at that as a recurring expense, you see how much that's costing [1:57:14] the taxpayer. Pardon me. I also want to highlight the remarkable success we have seen with the rural [1:57:24] health care transformation program. And Republicans on this committee really worked hard to make that [1:57:32] happen. We're looking forward to good results. I do want to go to your question, your comments about [1:57:41] fraud and fighting fraud. And you mentioned the work that was being done to beef up your systems. [1:57:52] Pardon me. Too much pollen in the air. Talk for a minute about what you're doing [1:57:59] there with the data transfer, with aggregating data from the states and what you plan to do [1:58:11] to make certain that the audit is now a mandatory component to weed out some of this fraud like we've [1:58:19] seen in Minneapolis and in L.A. I mean, let me just talk about what happened in the Biden administration [1:58:28] that opened the door to all this fraud. The Biden administration took many steps, but three major [1:58:33] steps. One implemented what they call a pay and chase system, where when we get invoices that we [1:58:41] know to be fraudulent, we have to pay them. And then they had a clawback strategy that then you would go [1:58:49] after them. And of course, nothing ever got clawed back. And it opened the door wide. Two, they stopped, [1:58:57] they told the states that they could not, that they could only check for valid, for enrollment validity [1:59:06] once a year. They can find them. They told people in my, in my agency, we had 80 people assigned to do [1:59:17] program integrity and fraud detection over 50 states and six territories. It wasn't enough. The Biden [1:59:23] administration came in and fired all but six of them. So now I, when I came in, I have six people in my [1:59:31] office. My predecessor, Mr. Becerra, told his staff, we don't do program integrity. We should focus on [1:59:41] enrollments. And that's what happens. And so now you've got all of these problems. And I'll give you [1:59:46] one example, the hospices in Los Angeles. We've shut down 500 of them. We have not gotten one call [1:59:54] from a congressperson or one call from a patient. Why? Because those hospices did not exist. [2:00:01] Right. They were signing up patients. They were getting patient IDs, signing them up and charging [2:00:07] us $6,000 a month for that patient. How did we detect them all? Because the patients never died. [2:00:14] And then you are, I would assume that you all are sharing this information with the states and working [2:00:23] with the states when it comes to Medicaid fraud. Some of them refused to work with us. Minnesota refused [2:00:30] to work. Florida, where there was terrible, terrible fraud in the durable medical equipment space, is [2:00:38] working very aggressively side by side with us, with the Governor DeSantis and with the Attorney General. [2:00:44] Certain states have refused to produce an audit. In those states, we are withholding their reimbursements. [2:00:51] I want to move to the area wage index. This is something Senator Warner and I are working on, [2:00:58] because you've got hospitals in urban areas, and they are receiving higher payments than the hospitals [2:01:06] in the rural or the low-wage communities. But of course, we know that so much health care now is [2:01:12] technology, and technology costs the same regardless of where you are. And last week, I know that at the [2:01:21] Ways and Means hearing, they discussed this issue with you. And I would like to know that you are [2:01:29] confirming your support for the approach of bringing into parity this area wage index so that we can level [2:01:39] the playing field with these rural and disadvantaged hospitals with hospitals in urban areas. [2:01:45] Yeah, absolutely. And I've worked on it with Senator Whitehouse, because he has the same [2:01:53] problem with Rhode Island. Unfortunately, there is no way that we can fix it. In HHS, we need [2:01:59] congressional help, and we will work with you on a- Well, we have the bill and we are pushing it forward. [2:02:04] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator Young. Welcome, Mr. Secretary. It's good to [2:02:11] have you here. Thank you to you and your team for your hard work and for your focus on preventative [2:02:18] measures. I think that point of emphasis of the Make American Healthy Again movement is important. [2:02:25] Focusing more broadly on wellness as opposed to just health care and health delivery is important. I also [2:02:32] appreciate the attention and interest you've shown in with respect to long COVID, this collection of [2:02:41] symptoms that remain after people get COVID and has an economic cost globally of conservatively at a [2:02:49] trillion dollars per year. It's adversely impacting millions of Americans. No doubt is having some impact [2:02:58] on our long-term unemployment rate and people need some hope. And I think you offered some hope [2:03:06] for starters during your confirmation hearings when you told me you were going to prioritize this issue. [2:03:13] Secondarily, when you held a roundtable session bringing in some of our nationally renowned doctors [2:03:20] who have expertise in this area. I'd like an update, sir. How are you working with [2:03:24] your FDA commissioner, McCary, and our NIH director, Bhattachari, to advance treatment for long COVID? [2:03:36] Yes, we are, Senator, and a lot of the reforms came out of that long table. I want to, [2:03:42] I mean, that roundtable, I want to thank you for your leadership. And we're working with many of the [2:03:48] doctors that we brought in, with Bruce Patterson from California, with Jordan Vaughan [2:03:52] from Florida and the leading doctors who are, who become experts in this area, who are under, [2:04:00] and we are working to develop biomarkers. As you know, there are many, many different presentations [2:04:06] of this disease. They have to be identified and diagnosed differently. They have to be treated [2:04:12] differently. We are identifying the biomarkers for those. We're putting everything up on a website [2:04:18] so that patients will have access to the best care and the best doctors who have had the most success [2:04:25] in treating their particular form of the illness. Well, there's urgency to this. Thank you for [2:04:30] prioritizing this. I will ask again for your commitment to continue to work together on this. [2:04:38] Do I have it? Oh, yes. Okay. And I'll see Dr. [2:04:42] Alicia Jackson later today. Of course, our director of ARPA-H. This seems to lend itself to the ARPA-H model [2:04:52] in light of the fact that once we come up with treatments, diagnostics, et cetera, it typically [2:04:58] takes two decades to find their way out in the clinical practice. We can't wait for that. So, [2:05:05] moving on to biotechnology more generally. For the last couple of years, I've chaired a national [2:05:09] security commission on emerging biotechnology. Bottom line up front, we have assessed that unless we [2:05:18] optimize our nation's biotech research, development, production, and innovation ecosystem, we are at [2:05:26] risk of falling behind the Chinese Communist Party, our primary adversaries by my lights in biotechnology, [2:05:37] which has direct national security, economic security implications. In 2022, Chinese pharmaceutical [2:05:44] companies accounted for just 5% of licensing deals. By 2025, that figure jumped to 42%. [2:05:53] I've been encouraged to see the FDA under your leadership speed up approval times for drugs, [2:05:59] but I think more needs to be done. We outlined some of this in our report, which can be found at [2:06:04] biotech.senate.gov. How, Mr. Secretary, can we work together to spur further domestic development [2:06:12] and investment in the U.S. biotech industry? Yeah, and, you know, last year, 50% of the new drugs [2:06:21] approved came out of China, and that rate is increasing exponentially, and they're stealing our IP, [2:06:30] they're stealing our researchers, they're stealing our best scientists, they're operating duplicate labs [2:06:35] in other countries, and it's a crisis. They're threatening our biosecurity and our public health, [2:06:44] and our dominance in the area. As you pointed out, we have speeded the length of time from concept [2:06:54] to commercialization dramatically. We just approved, in record time, two oncology drugs, one in 54 days, [2:07:03] one in 45 days. The average for that part of the process was, before that, was 310 days, and both of [2:07:12] those are drugs that bring people out of hospice. Literally, they're so effective. We are now doing [2:07:20] inspections in China, so we're dramatically ramping up our inspection of Chinese sites. A lot of them [2:07:29] are violating ethics, the clinical trial sites. They're using minorities against their will, [2:07:34] and doing all these kind of mischief that needs to be exposed. We are investing hundreds of billions, [2:07:46] hundreds of billions of dollars, in reshoring KSM's and APIs in this country, so that we can end that [2:07:54] that chain. And we have a pre-check program that encourages pharmaceutical companies to build in [2:08:01] this country. The ones that produce the drugs here, if they research them here, they will be given [2:08:07] preference and be able to move up in the line. Thank you so much for your leadership as it relates to [2:08:13] this issue. Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Kennedy, [2:08:19] thank you for being here. You mentioned China. I was just chairing a committee for the last two hours [2:08:24] on China's rampant theft of intellectual property and all the other malign activities they're involved [2:08:29] in, which actually takes me back to a statement I think you made a while back about China is eating [2:08:38] our lunch on pharmaceutical innovation. I think there's an argument to be made that we're handing [2:08:45] China our lunch. And I've talked about this in the committee for several years. By simultaneously cutting [2:08:54] NIH funding for basic research and imposing MFN price controls that slash private R&D by 30 to 50%, [2:09:04] 50%. HHS is squeezing both sides of a balloon and expecting it not to pop. And I'm not just, [2:09:12] I'm not picking on this administration. It's exactly what the Biden administration did with the Build [2:09:17] Back Better bill. Within six months of passing that bill, trying to impose price controls, [2:09:22] we saw a 40 to 60% drop in small molecule research. It's inescapable, the connection between the two. [2:09:29] So I think that these steps that this administration is taking, similar to the steps of the Biden [2:09:36] administration, China gets the IP, China gets the manufacturing, America gets the lower prices on [2:09:43] drugs we didn't invent, produced in facilities that we don't own, and you've already alluded to the [2:09:51] unacceptable circumstances in China for the workers and those there. We're aiding and abetting that, [2:09:56] I think, through this policy. So MFN tells the world that America will no longer invent in the future, [2:10:02] in my opinion. Now I want to get to a question, give you a chance to answer that. For years I've been [2:10:10] saying that we've got to drive down health care prices, we've got to drive down the cost of [2:10:16] pharmaceutical drugs, but we have a simplistic approach that we use here. We never have everybody [2:10:21] in the barber shop at the same time. We just try to scalp whoever we can as a matter of public policy. [2:10:27] MFN is the most recent example of that. MFN is the most aggressive single link intervention in a [2:10:34] complex value chain attempted at the federal level. It doesn't address supply chain concentration or IP [2:10:40] theft. It just hammers the end price in hopes that the rest of the system magically adjusts. So, [2:10:47] well-intentioned, single link interventions have failed for a decade. What, other than political [2:10:54] branding, makes this one different? In other words, the Democrats had embraced this for years, [2:11:00] this sort of socialized approach or socialized approach to controlling prices. What's different [2:11:06] about now the Republican approach to do almost fundamentally the same thing? [2:11:10] Senator Tillis, when President Trump charged us with lowering prices to the same as Europe, [2:11:21] he also made two separate provisos. He said he did not want to end the research domination in U.S. [2:11:29] companies. And he said he wanted them to reassure pharmaceuticals, which seemed like an impossible task. [2:11:35] We managed to do all three things. And the truth of that, our success of that, is reflected in the [2:11:46] share prices of those pharmaceutical companies that went up about $1.3 trillion after we signed the [2:11:53] agreement. And the way the magic, you know, part of the magic- And are you certain that we will see [2:11:59] an equal or greater amount of R&D coming out of these companies that have taken price cuts? [2:12:03] Yeah, absolutely. Because we've seen the empirical data from Build Back and Better, [2:12:07] it didn't prove to be true. Look at the investments they're making in our country. [2:12:10] I think Eli Lilly is building six new plans, Pfizer is building plans, Merck is building plans, [2:12:17] everybody is building plans here in this country. And- So why not, if the policy is working so well, [2:12:24] why not apply the MFN to everything versus the select number that you've chosen to negotiate [2:12:30] agreements with? And I think they've recommended that we codify those agreements. [2:12:34] We chose the top 17 companies that produce 99% of our drugs, our brand drugs. And we have agreements [2:12:41] with- But if it's working well, why not this just be a universal- If it's working well and [2:12:45] sustainable, why not this just be a universal program for any drug that makes it through FDA [2:12:50] approval? Each one of those companies had separate needs and separate circumstances. And there's [2:12:56] separate agreements with each one of them. A lot of it, you know, the magic behind it was that we use [2:13:01] tariffs force the Europeans to raise their prices. With that in mind, how could you possibly codify [2:13:05] that if it represents a different- I know that there's a discussion about codifying it. How do you [2:13:10] codify something that is unique to each one of those entities? Yeah, you know what, that's- [2:13:15] that is a long discussion, and I agree it's complicated, but I think that we can do it. [2:13:20] I'm the man who- who is- the genius behind this is Chris Klomp, and he's working on legislative [2:13:27] language now, but you're happy- I'm happy to make him available to you. Thank you. We'll submit other [2:13:33] related questions for the record. Appreciate you being here today. Thank you. Senator Whitehouse. [2:13:41] Thanks very much. Secretary Kennedy, I'm going to talk about some Rhode Island stuff with you. [2:13:48] I think as you know, and as CMS has long agreed, New England is a regional, and there is literally zero [2:13:58] justification for having Rhode Island suffer a 20% payment hold compared to its neighboring states [2:14:06] of Connecticut and Massachusetts. You have said that that requires legislation to change, [2:14:15] and that is what CMS constantly says, but as somebody who has tried to work this problem for [2:14:21] well over a decade, what I have seen has been CMS has not even tried. They give no indication that they [2:14:30] could care less about the disruption to health care services that this causes in Rhode Island. In the past, [2:14:38] they have even gone out of their way to make the problem worse for Rhode Island, and I had to fight [2:14:44] back and fix that worsening, but the underlying problem remains. And I just want to flag for you again [2:14:55] that Rhode Island has been a leader in the move to value-based care. When accountable care organizations [2:15:04] were set up, there were times when the two best in the country were coastal medical and primary care [2:15:10] physicians of Rhode Island. So we've got a record of doing value-based care right. The move to value [2:15:18] value-based care could be the vehicle for correcting the payment hold. And I just want to flag that for you, [2:15:25] because I want to make darn sure we get there. We cannot be in a situation where Rhode Island's costs [2:15:30] have been depressed because CMS kept Rhode Island's revenues down, and now we're supposed to compare [2:15:38] with Connecticut and Massachusetts, which had higher spend because they had higher revenues. [2:15:42] It's obvious mathematics. I appreciate that you've taken an interest in this. I'm raising it again [2:15:48] because I ain't going away on this subject. It is likely to cause real damage to healthcare services [2:15:55] in Rhode Island if it is not fixed. The second irritation that I've had with CMS for a long time [2:16:03] has been a similar disinterest with respect to how families with a loved one facing the end of their [2:16:15] life get dealt with. It is not uncommon for someone to wish to die at home. It is not uncommon for the [2:16:24] family to wish that they stay at home through this very delicate period, and yet there are times when [2:16:32] the family just can't take it any longer, and they're frightened, and they would like to get their loved [2:16:36] one to a nursing home. And what CMS has required is that that dying mom has to go and spend three days [2:16:44] and two nights in a hospital, check in, go through all that rigmarole, all that nonsense, all that expense, [2:16:50] before Medicare would let them into a nursing home. We are fixing that with your help. I'm looking forward [2:16:57] to getting that actually landed. But I just have to point out how long CMS was willing to stand idly by [2:17:05] and look at that kind of effective cruelty in the system. Thank you for changing that. Similarly, if [2:17:12] your loved one is dying at home and you want them to stay at home, you're not ready to go to a nursing [2:17:18] home, but you need some help. Respite care for years was sending your loved one to the hospital. [2:17:29] Again, all the anxiety, all the nervousness, the whole neighborhood worried about the ambulance in [2:17:34] the yard, all of that completely unnecessary when you could send respite care to the home where the [2:17:40] patient was less expensively. CMS was just obstinate about that. Ditto home care. If you're a dying [2:17:47] patient, you still can get outside. You should still be able to get home care to support the family [2:17:53] through that period. You shouldn't have to wait until you're homebound. So we're fixing those three [2:17:59] things and others, but it's really important that we get this right. And I think Rhode Island, when we [2:18:06] get this right, can provide a model for the rest of the country. And I just want to flag the vast [2:18:11] bureaucratic disinterest of CMS over decades about these problems. And we just need to change the [2:18:18] culture there so that they listen and think a little bit about the actual human harm that some [2:18:25] of their policies are causing. Last thing I'll mention to you is prior authorizations. I'd love to get [2:18:31] rid of even more of them. Prior authorizations make some sense in a fee-for-service model, but they've been [2:18:37] abused by the insurance industry for cash flow advantage. In a value-based care model, the logical [2:18:46] underpinnings for a prior authorization evaporate. Evaporate. So I would urge that you continue to work [2:18:57] with us to get rid of prior authorizations for doctors who are working in a value-based care model. [2:19:04] Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. Thank you for your leadership, Senator, and I agree with you. [2:19:10] Thank you. Senator Welch. Thank you. My view, Mr. Secretary, is the health care system [2:19:18] is absolutely broken. It's too expensive. And one of the areas that your administration is focused on, [2:19:25] the president specifically, is the cost of pharmaceuticals, TrumpRx. And I just want to go [2:19:32] through that to determine what actually has happened. The front page of TrumpRx says it has, quote, [2:19:40] the world's lowest prices on prescription drugs. So I want to do a comparison about our prices versus [2:19:49] prices, say, in Germany. And we have a chart here. This one drug, this is for infertility, [2:19:56] 10 bucks cheaper in Germany than here. Another one for diabetes and heart problems, 88 dollars cheaper [2:20:04] in Germany. Diabetes, 116 dollars. Another diabetes drug, 122 dollars. Autoimmune conditions, [2:20:16] 1,653 dollars cheaper in Germany. Another drug, really important for stunted growth in children, [2:20:24] 2,723 dollars cheaper. I mean, do you dispute any of these figures? We currency adjust the prices. [2:20:34] So we currency adjust the prices. So we're getting the lowest prices in the world. [2:20:43] So you're saying my chart is wrong? Yeah, I'm saying it's apples and oranges, yeah. [2:20:47] I really don't get that. We check what the price is. I mean, it's 2,700 dollars in apples [2:20:58] more if you buy that autoimmune, that prescription drug here than there. I mean, the point here is [2:21:04] TrumpRx was sold as the cheapest prices. Our research shows it challenges that, unfortunately. [2:21:14] Another thing, TrumpRx isn't even the cheapest prices in the United States. [2:21:24] Only a small fraction of available drugs are included. You know, there's 24,000 FDA-approved drugs, [2:21:31] 80 drugs are on TrumpRx, literally 80 drugs. And that obviously means that for the vast majority of [2:21:40] drugs are not even in TrumpRx. The other thing that is important is that the everyday Americans cannot [2:21:49] access TrumpRx. You get a coupon if you go on the website, and it tells a very different story. [2:21:59] A patient is not eligible if he or she is enrolled in any federal or state health care program with [2:22:06] prescription drug coverage, such as Medicaid or Medicare, or any similar federal health program, [2:22:11] TRICARE. Do you dispute that? This is the terms of TrumpRx. The vast majority of people aren't even [2:22:23] eligible. You know, the other point is that who's really benefiting? You know, you mentioned that there [2:22:30] was 1.3 trillion dollars in market increase for the drug companies. But I'm not seeing any reduction [2:22:38] in cost to everyday Americans who want to get prescription drugs. You know, drug companies who [2:22:44] made these deals were given exemption from Trump tariffs, right? They got a quick pro quo. [2:22:51] Only if they move their production to this country. [2:22:54] Well, so they got a tariff reduction arbitrarily. [2:22:56] They got a tariff reduction only if they produce here. And if they make a commitment to produce here, [2:23:03] they can get it a year in advance. [2:23:05] All right. Thank you for that clarification. But what I understand is that all but [2:23:09] one of the 16 TrumpRx companies have increased prescription drug prices since making their deals. [2:23:19] The prices are going up. Companies that signed deals made even more money. You mentioned 1.3 trillion [2:23:26] dollars in market value increase. But those companies have made 177 billion dollars in profits [2:23:34] up from 107 billion dollars. You know, here's my concern. I met with President Trump in his first term. [2:23:42] He said very directly, and he has on the campaign, that people are getting ripped off with pharma [2:23:47] pricing. He gets it, but he's not solving it. TrumpRx doesn't work. So I have a bill co-sponsored by [2:23:57] Senator Hawley, the Fair Prescription Drug Prices for Americans Act, which would prohibit [2:24:03] pharmaceutical companies for selling drugs in the United States at higher prices than at the [2:24:10] international average, which is something I thought the President said he supported. [2:24:14] Does your administration support that legislation? Senator, we would love to work with you on the [2:24:21] codification. You know, we, this does not, TrumpRx does not yet cover every drug. It covers the most [2:24:29] common drugs. It's dropped the price of GLPs by 89 percent. Let's just level out. It's 80 drugs out [2:24:37] of 24,000. It's the most common drugs. You can't be eligible if you're in any other health care. It's [2:24:42] the most commonly used drugs. The companies that have agreed to this have had an increase in profits [2:24:47] by 170 billion dollars. It's GLPs. It's all the most. TrumpRx is a fraud. We need to move on. Senator Sanders. [2:25:01] Secretary Kennedy, how are you? Um, you know, in public life, we all make misstatements, [2:25:10] all right? A couple of hours ago, I think you said to Senator Wyden that we now pay [2:25:16] the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs. That is an absurd statement. Nobody in the [2:25:22] world believes that. Do you want to correct that statement? It's for the drugs that are on TrumpRx. [2:25:27] I'm not talking about drugs. You said we pay the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs. [2:25:31] Those drugs we do. I'm sorry? For those drugs we do, Senator. Well, for certain drugs. But in [2:25:37] general, would you agree with the RAND Corporation and every other independent survey that we continue [2:25:42] to pay the highest prices in the world? Do you agree with that? Many drugs are not covered by [2:25:47] the agreements yet. On average, do we pay the highest prices in the world? As we always have, [2:25:54] except for the most common drugs. That's right. I'm not saying this is a new development, [2:25:57] but you said a moment ago that we pay the lowest prices in the world. For the most common drugs we [2:26:02] do, or GLPs, or IVF drugs, or COPD drugs, or asthma drugs for insulin. Well, for, let me give you an [2:26:12] example. For the cancer drug Opdivo, it costs $260,000 in the United States, costs $56,000 in Japan. [2:26:22] We pay on the lowest prices? Et cetera, et cetera. Senator Welch made the same point. All right, [2:26:27] the bottom line is, look, there are thousands of drugs out there. There may be a drug here or a [2:26:33] drug there. We pay lower prices. In general, according to the RAND Corporation, we now pay [2:26:38] nearly three times as much for prescription drugs than 33 other countries in the OECD. You agree with [2:26:45] that? For the most common drugs, we have the lowest prices. All right. I am working on legislation which [2:26:54] is not inconsistent with what Trump has talked about, and that is we should not be paying higher [2:26:59] prices for prescription drugs than people in Europe or in Canada. Is that something, [2:27:06] is that a concept that you can support? Yes, President Trump wants this codified, [2:27:11] and you have a lot more power than we do. You're right. You're exactly right, and that is why I am [2:27:17] going to be offering an amendment to the budget process right now, which would in fact codify what [2:27:25] Trump is talking about, that the United States should not be paying higher prices than other [2:27:30] countries around the world. Is that an amendment that you can support and get Republicans to come [2:27:34] on board? We will work with you, but in theory, that's exactly what we want. All right. Let me ask [2:27:40] you another question. We're on the HELP Committee. Casey Means, who is the Trump nominee for Surgeon General, [2:27:47] was before us a while back. She agreed with me that TV ads, prescription drug TV ads in America should be [2:27:58] banned. As you may know, we're one of two countries in the world. Do you agree with that? Yes, I agree [2:28:06] with it in theory. Constitutionally, you can't ban it, but we are now regulating it for the first time, [2:28:16] and you'll see that the ads have changed on TV recently because we've sent out a thousand disciplinary [2:28:22] letters. You may be right, but I think, you know, the people who determine the constitutionality of [2:28:27] laws of the Supreme Court. Oh, we worked a lot on it because I wanted to regulate it. Okay, but bottom [2:28:33] line is, am I hearing you correctly to say that you would like to see a ban on prescription drug TV ads? [2:28:40] Yes. Okay, good. There are a lot of seniors in this country who right now cannot afford dental [2:28:53] care. Many seniors have no teeth in their own, in their mouths, can't afford hearing aids. [2:29:03] I am introducing an amendment to the budget process which would expand Medicare to cover dental, [2:29:11] hearing and vision. Is that something you can support? I'm happy to talk to you about it. I'm happy [2:29:18] to work with you on it. Other question. Right now, we have a diabetes epidemic in this country, an [2:29:32] obesity epidemic. Many parents who would like to buy healthy food for their kids really can't make [2:29:40] sense of the labeling on food products. All right. Other countries in the world are quite clear in [2:29:47] their labeling about the amount of sugar, et cetera, that's in a product. Are you guys making any product, [2:29:53] any progress in coming up with simple, strong labeling on food products? Yes, we are. When will [2:30:01] we see something? Well, the delay in it has been that one of the big enemies, as you pointed out, [2:30:07] obesity is costing 80 percent of Medicaid and Medicare dollars. One of the big problems is [2:30:13] ultra-processed food and there has been no federal definition or any useful definition. We've now [2:30:20] worked on a definition. There are other, and here at HHS, we are now, we're in the process of going [2:30:28] through the interagency process. There's other agencies that are equity, USDA, Department of Commerce, [2:30:34] OMB, and they are reviewing our regulations. As soon as we promulgate those, we already have the [2:30:40] labeling ready to go. Do you have any sense when that will be? Excuse me? Any sense when that you'll [2:30:46] be promulgating? It has to go, Senator, through the other agencies that I don't have any control, [2:30:51] but we want it to happen quickly. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, before he leaves, let me agree with [2:30:59] Senator Sanders and ask unanimous consent that an article in the New York Times which shows that there's a [2:31:05] higher price for Wegove on Trump-Rx. This is the fact in terms of America, and Senator Sanders has [2:31:12] been correct. Without objection. Senator Warnock. Thank you, Brother Chair. Secretary Kennedy, [2:31:20] you're here today to defend the President's budget request. In September, you said that the CDC, [2:31:26] quote, will again become the world authority on infectious disease policy. Do you still stand by [2:31:34] that statement? Yes or no? We already are. Secretary Kennedy, do you know what rabies is? Rabies? [2:31:42] Yeah. Do you know what it is? I know what it is. Okay. So rabies, people contract rabies, as we know, [2:31:50] through bites from infected animals like skunks, foxes, like raccoons. Yeah. And it can devastate a family. [2:32:01] When a pet is infected, it is very serious. It's 100% fatal in humans. Yes. If left untreated. And [2:32:12] generally, it's a horrific experience. Staff at the CDC rabies division in Atlanta, Georgia, [2:32:19] have historically been able to field emergency calls 24-7 from providers about complex rabies cases, [2:32:29] using CDC expertise to determine appropriate care. Secretary Kennedy, since you and President [2:32:37] Trump took office, do you know how many people are left to staff this 24-7 line? [2:32:46] I do not know, Senator. Okay. So the answer is one. So I want you to know that. There's one person [2:32:55] left to staff a 24-7 line to respond to rabies, a disease which left untreated. [2:33:05] You know how many rabies cases there are every year in the United States? [2:33:10] So I'm asking the question. The CDC's infectious disease work has been so decimated under your [2:33:16] leadership that there's only one person left to staff the line and respond to families about this very [2:33:21] deadly and terrifying infectious disease. Let me ask about another disease. Secretary Kennedy, [2:33:27] do you know what prion diseases are? Yes, I do. Okay, thanks. And when you think of prion diseases, [2:33:35] one of them would be mad cow disease. Mad cow disease. So, and diseases like mad cow disease can be [2:33:41] transmitted from animal meat to humans, and it can cause a rapid onset of dementia, challenges with walking, [2:33:52] personality changes, and severe insomnia. It's also 100 percent fatal, and there is no cure, [2:34:03] with people's brain tissue essentially turning into a sponge before death. Do you know which office [2:34:10] at CDC monitors prion disease? So, it's the prion and public health office. Do you know what population [2:34:22] is most at risk of contracting the disease? I would say it's people who eat meat from CAFOs. [2:34:32] So, so hunters, hunters. The prion and public health office is critical in a state like Georgia. [2:34:40] In Georgia, we have a lot of hunters. There are more than 600,000 hunters in my state, but your budget [2:34:47] proposes to eliminate this office. Respectfully, you seem distracted by the secretary. Why does your budget [2:34:57] propose to eliminate the CDC office that focuses on monitoring this deadly infectious disease [2:35:05] that's especially a risk to rural communities? Why are you proposing to eliminate the office? [2:35:10] You know, there's a lot of cuts at the agency that nobody wants. We have a 39 trillion dollar debt. [2:35:18] We've been asked to cut across the agency 12 percent. I assure you that the 600,000 hunters [2:35:24] in Georgia would want this office. They would want the protection. I assure you that families [2:35:30] that are dealing with rabies or the prospects of that would want to know that somebody's going to [2:35:36] answer the phone when they call. You've come to Congress and justified destroying the CDC [2:35:42] by saying you want to just restore the CDC's mission to focusing on infectious diseases. [2:35:50] Senator, there's one to three rabies cases a year in the United States. Oh, I think one person manning [2:36:10] that office full-time probably can handle that traffic. In terms of prion disease, it's very, [2:36:17] very rare. I beg to differ. Here is the issue. And we see this across the board with CDC. [2:36:24] The incredible folks at the CDC in Atlanta, Georgia, they protect us every day from the threats [2:36:34] that we don't see. And they don't get much credit for it because of the stuff that does not happen. [2:36:40] And it's okay for the general public not to wake up thinking about that. But we expect you to keep [2:36:47] Americans alive. And the cutting that we're seeing, these draconian cuts for an agency that you said [2:36:55] you wanted to restore to be the leader in infectious disease, yet you're cutting the coverage of [2:36:59] infectious disease. Personally, sir, even as you seem distracted while I talk to you about deadly [2:37:05] diseases, I think you're dangerous to the American public. And you ought to be fired. And if you're not [2:37:12] fired, you ought to have the decency to resign. You're way above, way in over your head. Thank you. [2:37:19] Senator Marshall. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. And welcome, Secretary Kennedy. [2:37:26] Mr. Chairman, it breaks my heart, I want to cry, when I see the weaponization of healthcare [2:37:34] used by my colleagues across the aisle. I've never seen so many disingenuous statements, [2:37:41] misleading statements, the outright manipulation of data to meet their political narrative. I've never [2:37:48] seen this before. And again, at stake is people's health, Mr. Secretary. Measles. Two-thirds of the [2:38:00] people that had measles last year were over the age of five. Were you secretary of HHS for people that [2:38:08] over the age of five that decided not to get a vaccine years ago? [2:38:11] Dr. That decision by those people predated my appointment. And I think it's 80% or over five. [2:38:21] And the epidemic, the outbreak started before I came into office. [2:38:27] Yeah. Yeah. So thank you for helping clean up that mess. And I think about the flu vaccine. Again, [2:38:32] the total mismanipulation of data, probably the biggest challenge with flu vaccines is it's not very [2:38:38] efficacious. And I don't know whether it's 20 or 40% good. You get a shot. There's so many different [2:38:46] brands and flavors of flu. Are you working on trying to make a more efficacious flu vaccination? [2:38:51] Yes, we are. We're trying to make a universal flu vaccine that can protect against all strains of flu. [2:38:58] Many years, the vaccine is 20% effective. We're in that range. So we need something that actually [2:39:08] works and that doesn't have to be given every year. Yeah. And I'm so glad though today that my [2:39:14] colleagues across the aisle recognized the failure of Obamacare. Pointed out both sides here, [2:39:20] hundreds of hospitals closing. But there's no policies that this Congress has passed that are [2:39:26] implemented yet. Our Medicaid policies, which will increase spending by 50% over the next five years or [2:39:34] so, have not even taken effect until 20, 27 for the most part. So I think it's an admission that [2:39:42] the ACA didn't work, that Medicaid expansion didn't work. Why do we have failing hospitals now? Well, [2:39:49] number one is overregulation, especially in smaller hospitals. The ACA led to so much overregulation, [2:39:55] which leads to consolidation of industry. The next issue is the depopulation of rural America. We built [2:40:01] hospitals with 50, 100 beds, and now the average census in these rural critical access hospitals [2:40:07] is 1.6 patients per night. So it's just really hard to make a business plan that works like that. [2:40:14] But I want to point out and say thanks to President Trump that our Medicaid provider tax, because that [2:40:23] Medicaid provider tax, Kansas is going to get an extra billion dollars this year, an extra billion with [2:40:30] the B dollars. Rural Health Transformation Fund, $222 million. Doc pay is increased by 2.5% as well. [2:40:41] So I think that you have done some great things. I mean, I would assume that you've done as much [2:40:46] financially for rural hospitals as any president in American history, any HHS has done. [2:40:53] I would agree with that. I think the Rural Health Transformation Fund is an inflection of money, [2:40:59] or that increases the annual federal dollars to rural hospitals by 50% for the next five years. [2:41:10] Yeah. I mean, significant funding out of that billion dollars I was talking about from the [2:41:14] Medicaid provider tax, increased new dollars to Kansas, of course, will be going to the critical [2:41:18] access hospitals, making them eligible for it as well. And I want to talk about the Rural Emergency [2:41:25] Hospital Model for a second. This is something that we worked on really hard in Kansas, saying, [2:41:29] what is the alternative? Here's three hospitals in the same county, two hospitals in the same county, [2:41:36] three or four hospitals within a 20-mile radius. They're each seeing 1.6 inpatients per day. There's [2:41:41] just no model that works. So what does work? What type of health care model works in rural America? [2:41:47] What's really important to our rural American health care? Well, it's access to primary care, [2:41:51] addressing our chronic diseases, but a darn good emergency room connected with telemedicine to a [2:41:56] tertiary care center. That's what's important. And Mr. Secretary, I want to submit for the record [2:42:03] some suggestions that would make it easier for hospitals to make those transitions to [2:42:08] a rural emergency hospital model. And there's some that you can do, but there's also things that, [2:42:13] guess what, Congress needs to do. Can you just briefly speak about rural emergency hospitals for [2:42:18] a second? Can I submit this for the record, please? Without objection, and please be brief in your [2:42:24] response, Mr. Secretary. I think you're right. If there's one or two patients a day, you can't [2:42:32] sustain that, that are going to stay overnight. But what those hospitals do need is really top-rate [2:42:40] emergency care. And as you say, you can now use telehealth to talk to specialists at a centralized [2:42:47] hospital who can make sure that you're getting the best procedures possible. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:42:53] Thank you. And that concludes the Senator's questions, except Senator Wyden has asked to make [2:43:00] one more brief question, and then we will wrap it up. Yeah, I saw in the news a little bit ago, [2:43:08] Secretary Kennedy, that a three-year-old girl was sexually abused in a foster home at an agency [2:43:16] that you oversee. Are you familiar with this? No, I am not. You're the Secretary of Health and Human [2:43:25] Services, and it's in a national publication. And you didn't know that a three-year-old girl was being [2:43:31] sexually abused on your watch? I can tell you there were tens of thousands of [2:43:36] girls and boys who were sexually abused. The Biden administration lost 425,000 children, [2:43:45] and you never complained. Whose job is it to inform you of something like this? Because this, to me, [2:43:51] is an unconscionable case. Yeah, but why weren't you worried when he lost 425,000 children? [2:43:57] Mr. Secretary, I read this in the newspaper. Why are you suddenly worried about sexual abuse of [2:44:03] children now and trafficking when it was mass promoted under the Biden administration, [2:44:09] where they gave 425,000 children to adults without identification? Mr. Secretary, I'm asking the questions [2:44:15] here, and this was in a national publication seen by millions of people, an unconscionable example of [2:44:23] mistreatment of a three-year-old, and you don't know anything about it. This is a selective indignation. [2:44:28] Mr. Secretary, I'm just going to say. It's very dishonest, Senator. We have been working on this [2:44:32] for you. Why don't you help us find those children who are lost, still lost. We found 138,000. [2:44:37] Mr. Secretary, we're working on this right now, and we'll have additional opportunities to talk to you. [2:44:42] The reality is that this has been a long hearing, but a particularly important one, [2:44:48] because the view on so many of these issues where you basically bob, weave, and deny, for example, [2:44:56] your views on vaccines are toxic. You know, people are suffering as a result of your discouraging [2:45:03] vaccination, and American families suffer. And I've asked you repeatedly to give specifics. We had all [2:45:11] these members who are on our legislation, all these members say that they're concerned about Trump Rx, [2:45:17] and people not getting fair prices. You could settle this by giving me tomorrow all the details. [2:45:24] Now, if you want to talk about redactions or things like that, you can do it, [2:45:29] but hand it over now so we can get going. And I think- [2:45:32] Why don't you do an agreement yourself? You've had power to do that for 20 years [2:45:36] and haven't done it, and that's why I was forced to do it. [2:45:39] For years, I put- [2:45:41] Why are you complaining about what I did instead of doing it yourself? [2:45:44] I'm speaking out today because I think this is a sweetheart deal for Big Pharma, [2:45:50] and the last exchange proves it when you kept saying that drugs were cheaper. [2:45:54] It is selective indignation, Senator. It's all tribalism that's just destroying our country. [2:46:02] It's about public service. [2:46:04] It's not honest. It is not honest. [2:46:06] I yield the floor. [2:46:07] Thank you, Senator Wyden, and Mr. Secretary, thank you for coming. [2:46:12] Chairman, you spent nearly three hours here with us, and we appreciate you coming to have this [2:46:18] discussion with us. Obviously, we have disagreements up here on the dais, and I think that you have [2:46:26] handled yourself very well and you've answered the questions very well. I also think you're doing [2:46:30] an outstanding job as the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and I commend you for the results [2:46:38] that we are seeing, as I said in my opening remarks. Before we conclude, I ask unanimous consent that [2:46:45] Senator Grassley's questions be entered into the record without objection. Be so ordered. [2:46:51] Again, Mr. Secretary, thank you for coming before the committee today. Members are informed that [2:46:56] the questions for the record should be submitted by next Wednesday, April 29th at 5 p.m., and before I [2:47:04] adjourn the committee, I would like to ask the public to remain seated while the Secretary departs, [2:47:10] and with that, the committee is adjourned.