secretary tom price is about to begin. it's moderated by wolf blitzer and day thna bash. let's go to them now. [ applause ] tonight, a cnn exclusive, president trump's point person on repealing and replacing obamacare takes your questions. we want to welcome our viewers here in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. >> and i'm dana bash, and we want to welcome dr. tom price. he practiced as an orthopedic surgeon for 20 years and is a former member of congress from georgia. he now serves as the secretary of the department of health and human services and is at the center of the health care debate in america. >> and secretary price, our audience is obviously very, very eager to hear your answers to their questions.

but first, dana and i have a few questions we'd hike like to get. first, in your effort to repeal and replace obamacare, you talk about impving access, access health care. but president trump promised quote, insurance for everybody during the campaign, not just access to insurance for everyone. how will this plan live up to the president's promise? >> good to be with you and the wonderful folks here in the audience. i really appreciate the opportunity. serving as only the third physician to head the health and human services department it real shri really is an incredible honor. you have individuals who don't have access to care and some of them have coverage, and you have 20 million individuals who don't have any coverage at all, in spite of the fact that the plan, the former president put in l e place was supposed to get everybody covered.

we believe if you use carrots and not sticks, if you allow people to choose the kind of coverage that works for them and their family we can get more individuals covered, and our goal is to make sure every single american has coverage. >> according to the cbo report that came out, under your plan, about 24 million more people will be uninsured in 10 years than under current law, so how is that an increase in access? >> yeah, this is very interesting and an important question, because what the cbo looked at was just one third of the plan. looked at just the bill that's going through congress right now. and that's not because they're doing a bad job, that's because that's what they were asked to look at, and that's all they could look at because of the rules. the fact of the matter is, it's this bill going through congress and a portion that we can do at the department of human services, all those rules and regulations that the american people know about that happened in the previous administration, hundreds of them, literally, and hundreds of guidance letters

that have the same authority as a rule, all those were done through the department of health and human services, and we're going to look at every single one of those to see if they help patients or hurt patients. if they hurt patients they need to go away. if they drive up costs they go away. then there are things that can't be done in the reconciliation of the bill, things like malpractice restorm aform and p across state line. so what they did is looked at a portion of it the bill itself. the office does a good job with numbers and not with coverage. they said right now there would be 11 million more people insured than there are right now. >> two years ago when you were the chair of the budget committee in the house, you recommended, you wrote this letter, recommending the current head of the cbo.

>> sure. >> and now you're questioning their, his ability to do his job and the results of this, of this report. so how do you square the two no. >> well, a couple points. this isn't about who the director of the congressional budget office is. this is about how we get care and coverage for the american people. what they want is health care. they couldn't care less, no offense, to keith hall, but they couldn't care less hot director of the congressional budget office is, so we want to focus on care for the american people. second, we believe strongly, and if i put my former budget committee hat on, that there needs to be significant reform at the cbo. and we put something in here i hope somebody pecicks up becaus there are a lot of issues. >> we have our first question

from brian klein. he has stage three colon cancer. >> it saved me from medical bankruptcy. i earn $11.66 an hour at my retail job. and obviously, i cannot afford to pay for my cancer care out of pocket. my life really depends on having access to my doctors and medical care. getting a cancer diagnosis is bad fluff. but medicaid expansion gives me the economic security in knowing that funding is always going to be there for my cancer care. so my question for you, secretary price is pretty straightforward, why do you want to take away my medicaid expansi expansion in. >> as a physician, i practiced over 20 years and took care of a lot of patients with cancer, and

it was one of those challenges that when it faces you as an individual or someone in your family, you want to make sure you have access to the highest quality care that you can receive. the fact of the matter is we don't. we don't want to take care away from anybody. what we want to make certain, though, is that every single american has access to the kind of care that they want for themselves. if you look at the medicaid program right now, we have one third of the physicians in this nation, brian, who are not seeing medicaid patients. so if we want to be honest with ourselves as a society it's important to step back and say why is that? why are those doctors not seeing medicaid patients? let me suggest that it's because the medicaid program itself has real problems in it. what we want to do is one rye form t - reform the system. or move to a system that might be much more responsive to them through a series of advanceable, refundable credits, a type of

coverage that they choose for their family, not that the government forces on them. thanks, it's wonderful that you've received the care that you've received and because of the innovations and great doctors across this land, but that's not true for everybody. >> mr. -- >> i want to get specific on the medicaid issue, and this is so important to brian and so many other people out there. let me ask you first of all, do you think the secretary answered your question? >> unfortunately, no, i don't believe he did answer my question, wolf, because according to my knowledge, the american health care act under the republican leadership bill is going to sunset medicaid i believe in 2020. you have the conservative republicans who want to sunset it even sooner, so theis is not going to help me. >> again, brian, it's important to appreciate that the program itself may have worked extremely well for you and we need to keep

those aspects in place, but the program is having extreme difficulty providing the care for all of the individuals on it. so what we want to do is strengthen that program to make it more responsive for individuals and those providing care for patients to make sense as opposed to one that may make it difficult forndividuals to receive the care they need. i know folks don't want to hear this, one out of every three physicians in this nation aren't seeing medicaid patients, and they should. if we want to be honest, we ought to ask the question to ourselves, why, and fix those challenges that exist in the program. >> now we want to get to a doctor. this one is mitch jakes, a family physician in the southern coal feels of west virginia. >> many people in west virginia are suffering right now. almost every day i sigh someone

in the clinic who's out of a job. most can get care from the medicaid expansion. but the estimate is that the current bill before congress, as many as one in five could lose their health insurance. i ask respectfully, because you and i are physicians, do you think the members of congress really understand the hardship patients will have, particularly those on the edge if they lose their health insurance, and how can we help those patients. >> we're not interested in having anybody lose health insurance. we bri we believe strongly that the current system is failing people. there are 20 million individuals who have told the federal government inspi spite of the mandate, nonsense, don't throw me into that thing. i'm not interested. 20 million americans. that's a system that's not working for everybody. so what we want to make certain

that we put a system in place that will work for everybody. we're mott interest we're not interested in having anybody lose coverage that they want for their family, not that the government forces them to buy. it's important to appreciate that much of what many folks have heard in this nation simply isn't true about the plan. the plan itself, as we've taclkd about is three different phases, it includes the bill that we're talking about which most individuals are referring to. >> you've had two questions. about medicaid expansion > these are people concerned about those who did get health care because of obamacare. and you're talking about sta choice and other issues, but in your plan, spending on medicaid would be about 25% less in ten years than under current law. so the question that was wrapped in both of these audience

members' queries were how are you going to keep the money coming from the federal government or from anywhere, so that these people can ten to get the care that they got under obamacare. >> dana, this is a really important question, because the premise of that question is that the way you measure the success of medicaid is by how much money goes into it. we believe you measure the success of a program by whether or not it takes care of the individuals, the ben fisheries that are actually needing that program. and let me suggest to you, that there are many areas where the patients aren't receivering the kind of care from this gentleman or that this gentleman needs. if we allow the states, not washington, d.c. but the states to decide what they need. it's elderly, it's disabled.

by and large, healthy moms and kids. the and we in the federal government tell them, the states, you've got to treat every one of them exactly the same from assurance program. that doesn't make any sense ysense. you're going to treat healthy kids the same as an elderly individual? we want to care for those individuals in a way that's most responsive to them. when you do that, you're able to save money, that's the good news. if we measure the success of the program by how we're caring for those individuals shall not , n much money we're throwing at it, we'll get to the right answer. >> this question comes from patty peach in georgia. >> good evening. as a self-employed person, under obamacare, i saw my previous, very reasonably-priced plan

completely disappear, my premium tripled in cost while my deductible remained sky high at almost $10,000. i was forced to carry coverage for things i didn't want or need. the words pediatric dental were in the name of my plan, and i have no children. so my question is, how will the republican plan help alleviate my exorbitant cost and actually ibuprof provide me with insurance i can use. >> their is is a remarkably important question. everybody is treated exactly the same under the current law. and we know every certain patient's unique. when i treated a patient with one diagnosis and another patient with the same diagnosis, the treatment may have been completely fferen because those patients are unique, and that's what we want is a system that recognizes the uniqueness of patients. and you can't recognize the uniqueness of patients by providing health coverage that's

exactly the same for everybody. that doesn't respond to the patients' needs. for you, i suspect you had a coverage plan before that worked for you, was more responsive to the needs that you had. >> it was lower priced. it was still a high deductible but a much lower premium. >> it was providing the kind of care that you desired at a much better price. isn't that something that we ought to allow the american people to have the option to choose? that's what we're saying. it's not that everybody wants the coverage that you would have or you would select, but you ought to be able to select the coverage that you need for yourself and your family, no t e the federal government. we can return these kinds of decisions to people so the decisions are made between families and doctors, not the federal government, we'll be in a butmuch better spot. [ applause ] >> we've been talking about the cost of coverage. i want to turn to theresa

caliari. and she has a question about those not eligible for medicare. >> it hikes the cost for the biggest increase for older adults. premiums and out of pocket costs will rise because the bill allows insurance companies to charge much higher premiums, five times higher, for people in my age group. how can you justify that change? >> well, we justify it by insurers are leaving obamacare in droves. there are five states that have one insurer. if you only have one choice, you don't have any choice at all. so the fact of the matter is, if we're going to have any insurers, and the ones that are remaining are saying, if you don't change this, if you don't stabilize this market.

we're not going to be able to stay here at all. it's very possible that under current law, which is one of the rea reasons that the cbo has gotten this wrong, they don't take into account anything that's happening in the real world. we had 232 insurers last year. 167 this year. 232 last year, 167 this year. patients are losing access to care. that's not responsive. so you are going to have to figure out how we're going to make it as a society, possible, for you to purchase the kind of coverage that you want, and we believe strongly, strongly, that the plan we've put forward is so much better than what's there now. we believe as i havndividuals i

their insurance needs are more. >> you believe nobody will be worse off. you just heard theresa's story. can you look at her and promise she won't be worse off in. >> what i can say is i don't believe you'll be worse off from a health care standpoint. it's important to take that into the context of what we're talking about, which is health care. there's no way i can know what a person's status is and situation in life. but i can say that our goal and our plan, we believe, will make it so that individuals are not, that every single american is able to financially afford and have access to the kind of coverage that they want. that's the intention. >> but do you acknowledge that theresa could pay more because a lot of people in that age group

could pay more. >> a lot of times what is left out is the deductible. for those that are greater there are individuals across the land for whom it's less. if you are an individual out there, regardless of your age, you're making $40,000, $50,000, $60,000 a year, your premium is in the $500 a month range, and your deductible is $6,000, $8,000, you've got to spend $12,000, $14,000 a year before you even get insurance to kick in at all. so this is an incredibly important question, and we're attempting to address it in a way that makes it so that every american kluincluding those in age of 50-64 can access it. >> did you want to say something? >> i don't have a deductible. >> are you happy with your insurance in. >> i love my insurance. >> what kind of insurance do you have in. >> through the government.

i'm a retired teacher. >> so you have coverage through your employer. >> yes. >> the employer-sponsored insurance, which is where the majority of americans get their insurance, 175 million, isn't touched a bit by our plan. >> but you have your ten essential things that need to be covered. and they have to be covered. you can't have people pick and choose what they want to be covered. they have to be covered. those are ten things that need to be covered. and you're getting better coverage for more the more that you're paying. [ applause ] >> and there's nothing in that first bill, there's nothing in that first bill that affects the essential health benefits, nothing at all. >> let me press you on one thing, dr. price. you said there were four critically important categories of people in medicaid. according to the congressional bj et office, $880 billion is

going to be cut if your phase one goes into effect. how are you going to deal with all those people who are desperately in need of medicaid coverage. >> wolf, you're falling into the same old trap of individuals measuring the success of medicaid by how much we put into it. our goal is to make sure that individuals in medicaid are getting care, that they are receiving the kind of care tt they need and the outcomes of the care they're receiving is making them better, that they're becoming more well, that they're utilizing preventive services. we don't have any desire to have anybody lose health status. and we believe there's a better way to do that. and that's the key. we ought knnot be measuring programs by how much we put into them but whether they work. when the rules and dictates are coming out of washington, d.c., it's not as responsive to them as it is if it's made in their own state. >> stand by. we have a lot more questions to come from our audience.

we'll be right back with more of cnn's town hall with secretary tom price. [ applause ] . an unlimited data plan is only as good as the network it's on. and verizon has been ranked number one for the 7th time in a row by rootmetrics. (man) hey, uh, what's rootmetrics? it's the nation's largest independent study and it ranked verizon #1 in call, text, data, speed and reliability. (woman) do they get a trophy? not that i know of. but you get unlimited done right. (man 2) why don't they get a trophy? (man 3) they should get something. (woman 2) how about a plaque? i have to drop this. my arm's getting really tired.

unlimited on verizon. 4 lines, just $45 per line. i'll have that goat cheese garden salad. that gentleman got the last one. sir, you give me that salad and i will pay for your movie and one snack box. can i keep the walnuts? sold. but i get to pick your movie. can i pick the genre? yes, but it has to be a comedy. a little cash back on the side. with the blue cash everyday card from american express, you get cash back on purchases with no annual fee. throw. it's more than cash back. it's backed by the service and security of american express. it's more than cash back.

[ applause ] welcome back to the cnn town hall with health and human services secretary tom price. thanks again for being here. we want to go right to another audience question to talk about the opioid epidemic in this country. i want to bring in john broguen, a recovering addict who now works at a treatment service. >> thank you for your service. as far as a recovering addict, i'm a united states marine. today i'm the chief recovery specialist. had it not been for these men and governor christie, there would be 100 more people on top of the 1600 that we lost last year for this epidemic.

what is your administration's land to attack this epidemic, without putting them on another pill or prescription. when you repeal obamacare, what is going to behe plan f so many that don't have insurance, out of that over 100 people that we've helped just this year alone, almost none of them had smur insurance to begin with. so how do we help these indigent people who have nothing find a new way of life. >> yeah, thanks for your service and congratulations on your recovery. the opioid crisis is a scourge across the land, and it knows no bounds, it knows no racial barrier. it knows no economic barrier at all. it's destroying lives, families, it's destroying communities, and it has to be addressed in a very aggressive way. when i first got to the department of health and human services just a little over five weeks ago i laid out three priorities from a health care standpoint for us to address, and we're going to do all we can

to put resources and research to make certain that we're doing all we can. first is mental illness, childhood obesity and the third is the opioid crisis. we all know individuals who have had challenges in our family or our community who have had problems, and what we immediate -- need to do is make certain to identify those at risk, those who have fallen into that trap and put the resources into place to show them a better way. once somebody falls into that trap, weaver' got to make sure we've got treatment facilities, and not jails. jails aren't treatment facilities for individuals who fall into this crisis and trap. we need treatment facilities that make certain that we bring folks out of this scourge of the opioid crisis. we're going to make it a high priority at the department of health and human services. >> if i may follow up on that, the plan that is before the house that you have endorsed would end the requirement that

medicaid cover substance abuse treatment, and that would start, it would end starting in 2020. so how will you do that help that you just described if not through medicaid? >> yeah, well, it doesn't necessarily have to one, be through medicaid, but even if it is through medicaid, the congress at the end of last year passed acts that brings better resources for this crisis. the fact of the matter isn't how much resources you're going to put into, but how are you going to care for the individuals that have this challenge. this is an absolute priority. i've been meeting with the governors over the past couple weeks to talk about the plan but yes, about other challenges that they have. and every single one of them knows the challenge and the scourge that the opioid crisis is in their state, and they have wonderful ideas. amazingly, a lot of them have been hamstrung by the federal government. there are wonderful ways i believe to address this in a positive way if we keep our

focus on the patient, not on above the but on the patie. >> i want to bring in shari isley who voted for president trump in large part because of his promise to repeal obamacare. you have a question, shari? >> yes, and the reason for that is i now don't have health insurance anymore because it went from $1081 last year to $2,132 a month for a family of three. because as you get older it is more expensive in pennsylvania already under obamacare. in 2017, not one plan in pennsylvania offered on the health care.gov website qualified to open a health care savings account, under the new plan, what will the parameters be to be able to save money tax free to help with medical expenses. >> i'm sorry that you've had that challenge, but it's one that we predicted when the law was passed, and you probably

knew it yourself because you saw what was going to happen. if you dictate out of washington what every american must purchase in terms of health insurance and health coverage you get no competition, so costs of necessity rise. because your costs went up because of the law. they went up because of the law. so we believe strongly if you increase competition and increase choices for folks to make it so you can select something that's right for you then we'll drive down costs. the other important thing you mentioned is the health savings account. this is a wonderful vehicle that millions of americans across this land are using to wonderful effect, to be able to save money for their health challenges, to make certain that they can pass it on if needed to a relative or spouse or child, and these are the kinds of creative ways to be able to provide coverage for folks so that they're able to afford coverage and so they're able to address their health challenges. in the bill itself, there are

significant expansion of health savings accounts, and we believe the more we can provide options and choices for i havendividual believe that's the best way because it works for patients, not for government. >> i want to bring in another audience member, katie needle from brooklyn. >> planned parenthood provides a variety of servicing for women. i'm a medicaid enrollee and a client of planned parenthood and i would be devastated if it were cut. we've already seen cutting planned parenthood means less access for women to health care. and i just want to call back, this wasn't part of my question, but i want to call back, because you earlier brought up medicaid specifically and complained about how one of the biggest problems under obamacare is that

only a third of doctors see medicaid patients. this plan cuts 1 million medicaid patients every year, if that is your big problem with obamacare, how does that make any sense? that's not my question. [ applause ] my actual question is how do you expect the untimillions of low-income women nationwide who depend on planned parenthood for these basic needs to access health care if this is not available. >> this addresses a question that for decades, people have said they didn't want their federal tax dollars to be used for the provision of abortion services. and so what we have tried to do, when i was in congress and now with the administration is to respond to the desires of the american people in a way that answers their concerns. the fact of the matter is that what the bill does that is

before congress right now actually increases, increases money for women's health services, and we do so by providing those moneys through community health centers. there are over 13,000, if my number's correct, over 13,000 community health centers across the country and in the hundreds of planned parenthood what we're tryingo do is respond to themerican people and their concerns of their federal tax dollars used for abortion services and make certain that women not only have more ability to get to a health center but more resources to be able to do so. >> i want to throw out a number, and that is 105 counties, 105 counties across the country have planned parenthood, and that is the only clinic offering a full range of contraceptive methods for women. so how are the women in those 105 counties going to access all of that? >> i would be interested in the list that you have.

over 13,000 community health centers, a i'd be interested in the counties that don't have them. and the fact of the matter is, if the resources are available, then what will happen is community health centers will spring up to provide services for individuals. in the meantime, there are other avenues to be able to get services for women. there are community health centers, county health centers and the like. but what we want to make certain is that we are ponding to trespe concerns of the majority of american people. >> i have to ask you a follow up on that in a second, but how are these community health clinics going to pop up in all of these places that currently -- [ applause ] -- the people are relying on planned parenthood. are you confident that's going to happen? >> i'd be interested in the counties that you have. i haven't seen that. so i'd be interested in looking at that. if that is indeed the case, then we would be happy to take a look

at it and see how to best provide those services. what we want to make certain, again, is that we're not looking at the amount of resources going in but what kind of care people are receiving, and the fact of the matter is we believe that the women of this land are able to receive the kind of services that they need, can receive the services that they need through the community health centers, we're providing resources for them. >> you mentioned the abortion issue a couple times. is it not true that since 1977, when the hyde amendment went into effect, it is not legal to spend federal tax dollars on abortion already? [ applause ] so describe how it's an issue. because even planned parenthood isn't allowed to use federal funding for abortions as all the people in the audience know, money is fungible. if you move money to another place you are indeed using that money. the majority of american people feel strongly about this.

>> thank you so much. we do have a lot more. wolf? everybody stand by. we're going to be right back with more of cnn's town hall with secretary tom price right after this. [ applause ] ( ♪ ) i moved upstate because i was interested in building a career. i came to ibm to manage global clients and big data. but i found so much more. ( ♪ ) it's really a melting pot of activities and people. (applause, cheering) new york state is filled with bright minds like victoria's. to find the companies and talent of tomorrow, search for our page, jobsinnewyorkstate on linkedin.

energy is amazing.ge, how we use it is only limited by our imagination. and at southern company we're building the future of energy, for you.

but they didn't know they were all tobacco products.e... ooh, this is cool. it smells like gum. yummy! this smells like strawberry. are these mints? given that 80% of kids who ever used tobacco started with a flavored product, who do you think tobacco companies are targeting? do we get to keep any?

[ applause ] welcome back to our cnn town hall with the health and human services secretary dr. tom price. we have another question from karen gottlieb from connecticut, a registered nurse. >> the proposed plan allows insurers to charge 30% more to those who have a lapse in health insurance coverage. working with the amerisured we've seen countless patients go on and off insurance because of their unsteady employment. many of our patients can't afford premiums due to circumstance beyond their control. and often have to make hard choices. how do you land plan to help ou

patients in this situation. >> and thank you for your work you've done as an orthopec surgeon. i now how important nurses were to me in my practice. so i appreciate your service there. this is an important question, because it gets to the issue of how are you going to price insurance and whether or not coverage is going to be available. and we recommend what's called continuous coverage, which means if anybody keeps coverage and goes to a different plan, that they have to be able to be covered by that plan. but the fact of the matter is, if you allow individuals to come onto a plan after it they've gotten ill, then that changes the price point for what that cost is for everybody, not just that individual. and so what we, what the plan recommended, and there's an ongoing discussion rate now as to whether it ought to remain, but what the plan recommended is that we use something similar to what medicare uses. if you don't sign up for medicare, there's a surcharge

for signing up at a later date. so it's the kind of incentive to try to make sure that individuals have an incentive to maintain the coverage that three have. it's purely for the insurance cost and drives done the cost for other individuals. >> but there's a problem, dr. price, that your bill says there would be a 30% surcharge for anyone who lets his or her coverage lapse for 60 days or more. senator rand paul says this is a mandate for insurance companies, which is part of the reason he is calling your plan obamacare-lite. people are penalized for not having coverage, isn't that a form of a mandate by another name? >> no, not at all. a mandate is when you dictate to somebody what they must buy, which is what we have right now. the federal government is telling every single american, what kind of health care coverage they must buy. you have basically three plans available to you. that's what a mandate is, this is an attempt to try to

incentivize individuals from a financial stand point to maintain their coverage. when they maintain their coverage they're able to drive down costs for everybody and able to select the coverage their our plan that they desire, not that the government dictates to them. >> the 30% surcharge goes to the insurance companies, not the government. >> that's right, because they're the ones providing the coverage. it's a similar type of construct that the medicare program has itself. and the reason for that is cause the individuals who are, the third party administrators understand and appreciate that if you don't have folks in the plan initially, then it costs more for everybody. and so there's an incentive, a financial incentive for seniors to sign up the day that they turn 65. >> we have another question from the audience. will owen, who is a stay-at-home dad from georgia. he is also a navy veteran. will? >> my question for the secretary is why are we talking about

repeal and replace? why shouldn't we just be tacklkg about repeal? because it's my belief that the federal government has no business in the business of delivering health care. [ applause ] . >> will, thanks for the question and thanks for your service. weigh could ju we could just be repealing it but it would pull the rug out from americans and that's not what we want, what we want to do is make sure every american has access to coverage of the highest quality, provides choices for patients and incentivizes innovation. and if you just simply repeal it, that doesn't get to that goal. and the individuals who talked about their insurance going away either on medicaid or through the private sector, they would lose out. they'd have the rug pulled out from undertheund under them and

what we want to do. repeal and replace is whathe marijuana peop american people desired. >> can i follow up on the sentimt fm some of the people in the house, mel brooks said your plan is the largest welfare plan sponsored by republicans in history. and what he and other republicans object to, mostly. is the refundable tax credits that you have in the plan to help people pay for insurance. is this a new entitlement? >> no, not at all. it's important for people to review where they get their health care in this nation. the vast majority get it through their employers, 175 million. about 50 million through medicare, 60 million through medicaid. and a number of individuals receive it through the v. average. b -- v.a. about 18 million people receive

it from the individual markets. there are a number of folks who make more than what makes them eligible for medicate but less than they're able to utilize their disposable income for coverage, they need this refundable credit that allows them to purchase the kind of credit they want. that's the key, making it so every single american has the financial feasibility and wherewithal to purchase the kind of coverage they want. >> we have another question from denise edwards from michigan. she voted for president trump. >> thank you secretary price and thank you for having me. government health care invokes the assembly line. will the bill allow americans to manage their health care as they

see fit in. >> it's the key to what wre talking about. if all we two is say thdo is sa federal government is going to tell you what you must purchase, it tells you and you and you and you and everybody across this land, that this is the plan that you have to purchase. that doesn't make a lot of sense when you think about how you, denise, how unique you are. you ought to be able to select the kind of coverage that you want, that works best for you and potentially works best for you and your family. and that's what our flan's -- plan's all about. so that you are able to select something that works for you and everybody else is able to select something that works for you. >> lasering it a little bit more. i'm thinking, say for ethical or religious reasons, say, somebody

doesn't want to take chemo. say somebody doesn't want to have a blood transfusion, how would that work under that plan? would you be penalized more or less if you say i want to go for a different form of therapy to get rid of a disease? how would that work? >> their is is key, because it to the uniqueness of every individual and how they view their health care. you may want a plan that allows one thing and not another, you may want a plan that allows this type of facility to care for you or this doctor to be on the plan or another doctor to be on the plan or another provider, alternative provider, you ought to be able to select a plan that matches your needs. instead of the federal government telling you, this is what you got to buy. this is who you're going to see. this is where you're going to see them. >> dr. price, you're a physician. you believe in immunization, that all children should get a shot for polio and different diseases.

>> different question. the question is should denise be able to buy the kind of coverage plan she believes is most important for her. the answer to her is an emphatic yes. the question you asked is what kind of health care should be provided to individuals. there are certain things we ought to do as a society, and we encourage, that's the kind of education that is so important for folks so they know what's best for them and their families. >> but should it be required. mumps, measles. >> i believe it's a perfectly appropriate role for government, this happens by and large at the state level because they have the public health responsibility, to determine whether or not immunizations are required for a community population, whether it's growing kids or the like or if there's an outbreak of a particular infectious disease, whether or not anunization ought to be required or be able to be utilized. >> i want to bring in another member of our audience. sharon carbine, a semi-retired

tax attorney from pennsylvania. sharon? >> secretary price, millionaires will receive about $157 billion of tax cuts within ten years if the aca is repealed. are you willing to replace the aca with a health care plan that will benefit all americans, not just the wealthy? millions believe repealing obamacare will harm us financially and medically. >> yeah, sharon, thanks. [ applause ] >> thanks for the question. and clearly that's not our goal, and clearly our goal is to make certain every american has the financial feasibility to purchase the kind of plan they want. and we believe that's the plan that's in place. contrasted with what we have right now, we have a plan that many individuals purchase coverage, they pay the premiums, they've got a deductible that won't allow them to obtain the kind of care they need, and yet you have 20 million americans

who said that the rules of this fame a game are ones i don't want to play. nonsense, i'll even pay a penalty. the government's forcing me to buy something. and if i don't buy, i'd pay a penalty. i'd rather pay a penalty than buy what the government wants me to buy. shouldn't we have a system that works for everybody in. >> that's one tax issue. another i have to ask you about is in your bill, there's a tax break for health care company executives who make over $500,000 a year. why do ceos need a tax break? >> i think it's the level of income. if it's health care executives i'll take a peek at it. it doesn't make any sense. >> it is, i have it right here. >> i think the previous administration singled out health care executives. you're absolutely right. what they said is health care executives ought to be punished.

>> obamacare had a limitation for certain health care providers that exceeds $500,000 paid to an officer, director or employee. that limitation in your bill goes away and effectively means a >> think about what this is dana. this is the federal government saying to a certain sector of society. an individual, you can't make what the company is willing to pay you for your services. doesn't sound like america to me. we're saying ought out in single out certain individuals and have the federal government have the power you can't make the same amount as that individual even though you make the same money. if we want to tax the same, i think that's what the american system is about. >> the current tax system doesn't tax everybody the same.

>> at same income level. previous administration identified individuals in certa certain certain sector of our society, you have to make more than the guy down the street making the exact same as you. that sounds dangerous to me. >> another question. from brooklyn, age of 30 diagnosed with breast cancer and now cancer-free and we're happy about that. >> proposed health care legislation requires that people with preexisting conditions are still covered, however if the mandate is removed, how will insurance companies be able to afford to pay for people with preexisting conditions like me? >> wonderful news that you're now cured. that's great. we used to celebrate that in our

medical office when folks got that wonderful news. fact of the factor is preexisting conditions ought to be covered. we believe strongly, president believes strongly that nobody who gets a bad diagnosis shouldn't be priced out. may work for government, insurance companies but not people. that's the key. doesn't work for patients. so when we drive down the cost of health coverage, makes it possible for every single american to purchase the coverage that they want. that's the key. continue down the road where we are right now where costs are increased -- do you remember the line, if you want your doctor, you can keep it, if you want your line you can keep it, costs will go down. fact of the matter is have gone up about $3,000 for every single american family. we believe you have to nut place a system that innocent vises and

drives down cost. >> but if the mandate is removed, what is incentive. paul ryan says everybody should be free to buy or not, but young healthy people don't have incentive to buy, how will it work out for preexisting conditions and rely on healthy people to do this? how are insurance companies going to be able to take care of the people with preexisting conditions if young healthy people don't have incentive to buy health insurance. >> i think you just said you want to force young individuals to purchase coverage to participate in government program. fact of the matter is, way that you -- >> lot of young people will leave the business if not forced to buy it with incentive like mandate. >> interesting perspective i

disagree with. fact of the matter is way you incentivize individuals, young, middle aged or old to purchase, provide a product they actually want. reason young people by and large saying phooey, that's not what i want, doesn't suit their purposes, work for them. if we as society give you array of options, tailor a system that will be able to provide you kind of health coverage that you want, not that the government forces you to buy. >> you wanted to respond. >> i was diagnosed at 30 in prime of my life with 9-month-old son. never thought i would be diagnosed with this especially at young age. i know people in 20s diagnosed with severe diseases. >> and we want them all to have health coverage. >> they should.

they need to. >> want to make certain they have the financial feasibility to purchase the coverage they want, not what the government forces them to buy. >> quick break and we'll be back more with of cnn's town hall. announcer: get on your feet for the nastiest bull in the state of texas. ♪ ♪ an unlimited data plan is only as good as the network it's on. and verizon has been ranked number one for the 7th time in a row by rootmetrics. (man) hey, uh, what's rootmetrics? it's the nation's largest independent study and it ranked verizon #1 in call, text,

data, speed and reliability. (woman) do they get a trophy? not that i know of. but you get unlimited done right. (man 2) why don't they get a trophy? (man 3) they should get something. (woman 2) how about a plaque? i have to drop this. my arm's getting really tired. unlimited on verizon. 4 lines, just $45 per line. on your phone and online.s a modern way to pay. so you don't miss his first birthday. tickets, i need to see your tickets sir. i masterpassed it. feeling like father of the year: priceless masterpass, the secure way to pay from your bank don't just buy it. masterpass it.

welcome back to cnn's town hall with secretary tom price. want to give you a chance for concluding remarks but as you do ask you about something the chairman of the house freedom caucus said tonight. your former colleague. he says he believes they have the votes, republicans, to block your republican bill. how will you get your plan through congress when you can't get members of your own party to support it? >> thanks dana. this is been wonderful, appreciate the opportunity to be with you and questions from the audience were excellence and

address concerns. way to get it through, pay attention to the american people. people want the same thing in health care. affordable for everyone, accessible for everybody. highe highe highest quality and incentivizes everybody to do that and choices. as we -- those of us privileged to implement the policy, try to listen to the principles that american people have told us are dear to health care. that's what the president said. in the joint session of congress a couple of weeks ago, said he wanted a system that made certain we addresses preexisting conditions and everyone could afford question and medicaid work for patients. purchase across state lines, driving down drug costs and making sure the system had a

transition to the new system that's going to work i believe so much better than where we are currently. want to respond to the needs of the american people and when we do that, convinced the individuals charged with voting on the legislation will be supportive. >> thanks for joining us. i suspect the debate just beginning not only with fellow republicans but democrats as well. we'll continue this conversation down the road. thanks very much. be sure to watch "the messy truth" with van jones, other special town hall tomorrow night at 9:00 p.m. eastern featuring chris collins and karim abdul-jabbar. >> and thanks also to the studio audience. "cnn tonight" with don lemon starts right now.