roughly half and half. and i think more people would rather be on medicare advantage because it offers very good services. people can't afford it. it is much more expensive. in answer to your first question, there is -- there are all kinds of exciting things that we can be doing including cooperatives, president trump has supported. including health savings accounts, which president trump has supported. all of these things to make people more accountable for their own health. >> bring the cooperative and health savings accounts into medicare and medicaid. >> exactly. try to increase those, the use of those and to direct primary care to continue to transition to -- into a value-based program

that is private. americans don't by and large do not like affordable care act. people are on it. they don't like medicaid. they like medicare. and they like private insurance. we need to listen to what people -- they would prefer to be on private insurance. most americans if they could afford to be, will be on private insurance. we need to figure out ways to improve care particularly for elderly, veterans, or poor in this country, and medicaid, the current model is not doing that. i would ask any of the democrats who are chuckling just now do you think all that money, the 900 billion that we are sending to medicaid every year has made americans healthy? do we think it's working for anybody? are the premiums low enough? [applause] >> we need to move on. senator warner. >> i have to tell you for

literally hundreds of thousands of virginians, medicaid is what prevents them from health crises on a daily and weekly basis. some imaginary new plan, if there was a new plan, that was to be the basis of what trump would do when repealing obamacare i thought we would have seen it by now. excuse me, mr. kennedy, i have questions. i appreciate our visit. i know you take your views seriously and i don't reflexively vote. i voted for four of president trump's nominees already. got a lot of grief from folks on this panel. i saw an email you put out monday night or your campaign did and a fundraising email your presidential campaign celebrated that the freeze on all new regulations guidance and announcements is a way to protect unelected bureaucrats

from further undermining our health. then you ask your donors to help pay for your campaign debt. did your campaign and -- >> i don't think my campaign exists anymore. >> somebody is out there soliciting money for it. maybe you out to find out who he is. the fact that you celebrate this freeze, you think that was a good idea to put all of this on hold for 90 days, funding and any kind of further work nih research? >> as chairman pointed out. >> i love him. i'm asking you, you are up nor a very important position. as he pointed out the portals were not taken down because of a trump -- >> this freeze they may have to close down where the battered

women go. a nonprofit saying the freeze is going to potentially shut down their ability to operate. i guess if you deny or don't know what your campaign is sending out you don't know if you raised a lot of money monday night. >> the trump administration has made clear that it does not want to freeze benefits for any americans under medicaid or medicare and i do not want to do that. >> affecting beyond medicare and social security. i would hope you would have known that to be able to answer some of this. you have said publicly you want to immediately get rid of 600 n.i.h. workers on job one, day one. when we had our meeting you said you would like to get rid of 2200 people from hhs. which offices are you going to start cutting and ripping these

2200 workers from in >> senator, there are 200 political appointees that change during every administration. >> you won't replies them with your political appointees? >> president biden this year changed 3,000 employees at hhs, 3,000, 750 at nih. >> what departments are you going to pick them from? >> the same as president biden did when he changed 3,000 out. >> i'm down to a minute 30. chairman has been generous with colleagues on both sides. i may have to go a couple minutes over. just answer this would be -- i hope since you are asking to become the top healthcare official in the united states in terms of hhs, huge ramifications and part of this job is to be the senior advisor to the president of health issues. when he look at the purge and laying off workers and looking at the president's illegal offer to try to buy out federal

employees, which i would say any federal employees, think twice. has this individual in his business world ever fulfilled his contracts or obligations to any workers in the past? but if you are in this position, will you pledge that you will not fire federal employees who work on food safety, work on trying to prevent things like salmonella. >> there are 91,000 employees. >> that's a simple yes or no. i take that as a no. i take that as a no. we talked about protecting americans from cyber criminals. something we need to do a lot more on. will you commit not to fire anyone in the health arena who currently works on protecting americans from cyberattacks in their healthcare files. >> i will commit to not firing anybody who is doing their job. >> based on your opinion or your

political agenda or mr. trump's political agenda. >> based upon my opinion. >> that means a lot of folks who have had any type of views on vaccines will be out of work. will you please grant funding for community health centers? will you freeze federal funds for community health centers? >> the white house has made clear that no funds will be denied to any american for benefits in any program. >> do you know what happens at community health centers. >> are you talking about the indian health centers? >> i'm talking about community health centers across the country. >> i understand that. i strongly support. >> you excuse indian health service but others will get that your funds frozen? >> i strongly support community health centers and so does the president. >> you will unfreeze currently frozen?

>> none of that funding is supposed to be frozen. >> the direct payments are different than how the government operates. we fund the federal government down to community health centers, as a former governor there are lots and lots of state programs that are related to healthcare that come from the federal government. come down to the state. it goes to local programs. all of thieves don't directly pay out a dollar at a time but they come from federal funding. they are all, you know, even though they keep changing the guidance minute-by-minute basis, based upon 945 or 1045 or whatever time it is today those funds are still frozen. sir, i just honestly want to give you a fair shot but i don't feel like -- i don't feel like you approach this job with the knowledge and candidly your willingness not to commit try to recommend to the president to make sure these funds are

unfrozen and that people east lives are at stake is a very disappointing answer. thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. langford. >> good to see you again. great visits in my office and done follow up calls. you and i have talked about a hundred different issues and backgrounds of things and been able to address a lot today and different questions to clear up social media rumors and the things out there. i do appreciate that. we've talked about pharmacy benefit managers, nursing home rule. biden administration, views on agriculture and we've talked about food issues and made it very clear you won't tell americans what to eat but you do want americans to know what they are eating and i think that's a pretty fair perspective on that. i do want to talk to you about some areas we've talked about as well. we have disagreements on the issue of life and when life begins on that. you have been very outspoken on that and we have had good opportunities to talk about that. title ten is the hhs area.

it has been interpreted to say trump's administration will prohibit the promotion of abortion as a part of the title 10 program. you made that clear in the first administration. that's his decision to make again on that and made a lot of public statements on that. the biden administration not only reversed that and rescinded that rule but they went one step the other direction. in my state in oklahoma as we've talked about the biden administration cut off funding to the state of oklahoma for aids testing, for breast cancer screening and other areas of poverty healthcare because my state didn't promote abortion. it wouldn't provide if my state wouldn't promote abortion in the state, we got cut off for federal funds for aids testing and for other things. my simple question to you is how are you going to handle title 10 on that?

i saw how president biden handled that and the measures on my state in rural healthcare. how will you handle it? >> i will support president trump's policies on title 10. i agree that every abortion is a tragedy. i agree with him that we cannot be a moral nation if we have 1.2 million abortions a year and states should control abortion. president trump has told me he wants to end late-term abortions and he wants to protect conscious exceptions and wants to end federal funding for abortions here or abroad. as title 10 i serve at the pleasure of the president and implement his policies. >> thank you for that. president biden closed down the office of civil rights and congressous protections twin hhs. he will reopen that office again to be able to protect the civil rights of americans. one of the things that becerra

did was conscious protections for medical professionals being compelled against their conscience to perform medical procedures that violated their conscience. he stepped in and hhs and withdrew that and said the federal government will tell you what you believe about these issues, you don't have conscience protections anymore and refused to protect those folks. will you step in as they have conscience again? >> the first thing that occurs to me what patient would want somebody doing a surgery on them that believes that surgery is against their conscience being forced to perform that? i don't know anybody who would want to have a doctor performing a surgery that the doctor is morally opposed to. i came from a family that was split on life and choice.

i have cousins today who believe that abortion at any stage is equivalent to homicide. there are other people who believe the opposite. but the good thing in my family that i really loved is that we were able to have those conversations and respect each other. i wish that we could do that nationally. and if forcing somebody to participate in a medical procedure as a provider that they believe is murder, does not make any sense to me. we need to welcome diversity in this country. we need to respect diversity. and we need to respect each other when we have different opinions and not, you know, not force our opinions on other people. >> thank you for that. the fda under the biden administration changed the rules for the chemical abortion drug

and said you no longer need to see a physician so if you have an app top pregnancy don't see a physician. they changed this, transparency. changed the motion and said don't tell us if there is a side effect on this drug unless she dies. other than that, don't tell us anymore . don't give transparent information to the american people or to the women who take this drug anymore. we don't want that reported. my question to you is will fda move to be able to give transparency to the american people and say this drug no different than any other drug. we won't protect it because it's political. people should know side effects on this drug and there should be reporting. >> i mean, it's against everything we believe in this country that patients or doctors should not be reporting adverse events. we need to know what adverse

events are, we need to understand the safety of every drug, and every other drug. president trump has made it clear to me that one of the things he is not taking a position yet on is this abortion drug but made it clear to me he wants me to look at the safety issues. i will ask nih and fda to do that. >> thank you. >> senator whitehouse. >> thank you, chairman. mr. kennedy i only have five minutes with you so -- i have a lot of experience with cms. so you will have to listen. two things. one, if you want to move from advocacy to public responsibility, americans are going to need to hear a clear

and trustworthy recantation of what you have said on vaccinations, including a promise from you never to say vaccines aren't medically safe when they in fact are. and making indisputably clear that you support mandatory vaccinations against diseases where that will keep people safe. you are in that hole pretty deep. we have just had a measles case in rhode island, the first since 2013. and frankly, you frighten people. two, i want to air harms that rhode island experienced from a remorseless, senseless, cms bureaucracy. they have for years maintained a

reimbursement system that the bureaucracy could never explain, never justify. that persistently pays rhode island providers less than neighboring massachusetts and connecticut providers. a difference of 23 and 26% in our regional healthcare market. the pending ahead program can begin to remedy this at least for value-based care and it must. there has to be payment parity in the region, rhode island's healthcare system is bleeding out because we aren't paid what neighboring hospitals and doctors are paid and the one act cms took on this years ago was to make it worse. the cms bureaucracy has also attacked one of the best accountable care organizations in the country.

rhode island's integra family doctors tried to throw them off the shared savings program because they said integra years ago briefly fell 137 patients short of the 5,000 patients that acos need. cms wouldn't listen until a court found that to be unjustified, likely illegal, irreparable harm to this high-performing aco and its patients and contrary to the public interest. that must stop. last, cms has refused to approve waivers granted elsewhere for rhode island from rules that are stupid for medicare patients who are nearing the end of their days. here is what families see. granny is home dying needing to

transfer to a nursing home and medicare insists putting her three days in a hospital. frighteninging, expensive and stupid. she is home dying and can't get care together, inhumane and stupid. granny's home dying and can't get home care. if she can still get out into the yard or be driven to see the shore to see the beach, say, one more time to recall childhood memories before she dies, inhumane and stupid. granny is home dying and the family is exhausted and the respite care benefit is not to send a nurse or caregiver, but to stuff granny in an ambulance and haul her off to a hospital. some respite. it's all expensive, frightening,

inhumane and stupid. but the cms bureaucracy takes a court order to be awakened to the harm that they cause. i have had enough. cms should let rhode island try humane end of life care through cmmi. let's see if it works in a state. i bet it will save money. serve families better at a very, very delicate time, and perhaps even make a model for better healthcare everywhere. i've said a lot. my time is out. you are welcome to respond in write. . ask that the order declaring cms's action to constitute harm be put into the record. >> let me just respond very briefly, senator whitehouse.

i am inplaqueable enemy of stupid rules and i will work with you to make cms responsive to the needs of rhode island and to remedy those disparities that you talk about. i am familiar with the integra health plan and it is a template for what we ought to be doing. a value-based plan and i look forward to making sure that we create pilot programs like this around the country. >> one of the things i've learned in my tenure in the senate is a nominee saying they are willing to work with me amounts to exactly zero. we need to get this fixed. thank you. >> well, i guess at that point then we'll move on to senator dade. >> thank you.

mr. kennedy glad to see you here this morning. i listened to your opening remarks and you mentioned you want to make hhs the gold standard of science. i have found my engagements with you behind closed doors in my office as well as listening to your publicly to be very thoughtful and science-based and applaud that and thank you for that and realize this will likely be a very partisan vote on this committee and on this senate floor. let the record state there are three medical doctors on this side of the days. i'm a chemical engineer. we believe in science and thankful you do too and you may i had that comment in your opening remarks. i want to talk about agriculture for a moment. we talked about our common love for montana. you have been there many times. it is a wonderful state. a lot of folks discovered it and watched the show yellow stone and people are moving into our state. it is an amazing place.

but as you know, agriculture is our top economic driver in montana. we produce some of the highest quality crops, the best livestock in the country and the world. our farmers and our ranchers are truly some of the most effective environmental stewards insuring we have a safe food supply chain in the world. i share u view that protecting the integrity and safety of our food supply is utmost importance. i appreciate the research happening in places like montana state university to help farmers produce resilient, healthy and safe crops as well as their agriculture practices. you mentioned you were a 4h kid growing up. the 4h kid and ffa kids are some of the best kids in america. my question to you is im confirmed as i listen to my farmers and ranchers talk about the future, will you commit to

working collaboratively with partners at usda, at the relevant federal agencies as well as our montana farmers and ranchers before implementing any policy that might affect or impact food supply? >> absolutely will make that commitment. i have a personal commitment and a long career working with farmers. i want to make sure -- i understand the very narrow margins and the slim margins that american farmers and ranchers are dealing with. and i don't want to under my watch a single farmer to have to leave his farm for economic reasons or regulatory or bureaucratic reason if i served if i am privileged to be confirmed as hhs secretary. even more important, president trump has a very, very strong

commitment to farmers. president trump was -- is probably historically in modern history the best farm president in our history. farm income spiked for the first time in decades under his last administration. he got solid support from farmers across the country, farm country is trump country. farmers across the country supported him during this election. he is specifically instructed me that he wants farmers involved in every policy and that he wants me to work with the usda to make sure that we preserve american farmers, that all of our policies support them. >> thank you, if confirmed i look forward to having you and brooke raw lynns to montana. >> i will come there any time especially during skiing and

hunting season. >> deal. want to shift gears for a moment. as we discussed in the meeting we had in my office, the drug has been brought to court for fairly to properly assess this drug as well as subsequent dereg deregulations that occurred. some of the deregulations included ending the requirement to these drugs be prescribed bay doctor, ending reporting requirements for adverse events, and allowing these pills to be obtained through the mail. the fda's own prescribing label mentions that three to five percent of women taking this drug end up in the emergency room. my question is if confirmed as secretary of hhs, will you commit to working with the fda commission and review these

deregulatory actions that are threatening the safety of women? >> sorry, senator. as i said to senator langford, i think it is immoral to have a policy where patients are not allowed to report adverse events and where doctors are discouraged from doing that. president trump has asked me to study the safety of this abortion drug. he has not yet taken a stand on how to regulate it. whatever he does, i will implement those policies. i will work with this committee to make those policies make sense. >> thank you, mr. kennedy. >> senator hasen. >> thank you, welcome mr. kennedy and to your family as well. i want to start with a couple of concerns i have and just briefly on medicaid. states share in the funding of

medicaid. millions of disabled children in this country are alive because of medicaid. millions of people with addiction in this country are in recovery because of the services provided to them by medicaid. and millions of chronically ill people who until medicaid expansion was enacted who couldn't get healthcare and therefore couldn't work because they were too sick got healthcare through medicaid expansion, then went back to work and now on private insurance. those are some facts about medicaid that you might want to brush up on. now, i'm also extremely concerned about your endorsement of radical fringe conspiracies that if implemented at hhs would put american families' lives at risk. vaccines are one of our greatest public health triumphs and you don't -- i'm not talking about abstract medical science. one of the people who helped raise me was my grandfather, a pediatrician and practicesed medicine from 1921 until the mid

1980s and i heard details about the difference those vaccines made in savings lives in the children who were under his care. vaccination has helped to eradicate many deadly diseases in the united states including polio and smallpox. something we should be proud of as americans. i am extremely concerned that as secretary you would be able to halt critical vaccine research and exploit parents' natural wore eaves by advising them not to vaccinate their children. this will lead to more children getting sick and some will even die. before the measles vaccine 500 american died a year from measles. this is too much of a risk for our country and there is no reason that any of us should believe that you have reversed the anti-vaccine views that you have promoted for 25 years. you were previously falsely suggested the polio vaccine killed many, many, many more

people than polio ever did. by causing fatal cancers, while rigorous safety studies show that to be completely false. now, let's go to something we agree upon. i am really heartened to see that one area where we agree on is on women's reproductive freedoms. it is not the government's place to tell people what to do with their bodies in your own words. you said that, correct? >> yes. >> mr. kennedy, in 2023 you came to new hampshire and said quote i'm pro-choice. i don't think the government has any business telling people what they can or cannot do with their body. you said that, right? >> yes. >> but you also said we need to trust the women to make that choice because i don't trust government to make any choices. you said that too, right? >> yes. >> it is remarkable that you have such a long record of fighting for women's reproductive freedom and great that my republican colleagues are so open to voting for a

pro-choice hhs secretary. so mr. kennedy, i'm confused. you have clearly stated in the past that bodily autonomy is one of your core values. the question is do you stand for that value or not? when was it that you decided to sell out the values you have had your whole life in order to be given power by president trump? >> senator, i agree with president trump that every abortion is a tragedy, that we can't be a morale authority in this country. >> that isn't what you said back in new hampshire in 2023. my question is exactly when did you decide to sell out your life's work and values to get this position? >> senator, i agree with president trump that every abortion is a tragedy. >> what you are telling us is that regardless of what you believe, regardless of what values you have, if president trump tells you to do something, you are going to do it.

you said just now that the discussion of the abortion drug. he asked me to study the safety of it. here are the safety studies that tell us that this drug is safe and effective. i ask mr. chair that these 40 studies be admitted to the record by unanimous consent. >> without objection. >> the studies is there, the safety is proofshgd and the science is there. if president trump orders you to take action to make it harder for women to get needed healthcare you will follow his order. if mr. trump as he did yesterday orders a halt on medicaid payments that are essential for taking care of people with disabilities around this country, you will follow that order because you are willing to sacrifice your values, your knowledge, if president trump tells you to do that. that to me is unacceptable in a secretary of health and human services. >> as i explained before, the

white house has issued a statement saying that there -- that that policy will not deprive any americans. >> p t problem is the white house issued that statement after we pointed out the damage it would do and it became politically uncomfortable for them. you have know what else that freeze on federal funding did? it halted funds for critical research that could cure pediatric cancer. so if the president tells you to do that you will stop that, too. that's enough. >> senator cortez masto is next. >> thank you. mr. kennedy, thank you for coming into my office and having the conversation that we did. i appreciate your passion and your belief and you've spent years really talking about the issues that matter to you and i

appreciate that. let me ask you a couple of questions, though i just need some clarification. right now there is the 40 year old law that requires hospital e.r.s accepting payment from medicare to actually provide emergency care to patients. so let's say a woman experiencing a life-threatening condition like a heart attack goes to the e.r. as a lawyer you would agree that federal law protects her right to emergency care, correct? >> yes. >> so now a pregnant woman with life/threateninging bleeding from an incomplete miscarriage goes to the e.r. let me rephrase so you can hear. a pregnant woman with a life/threatening bleeding from an incomplete miscarriages goes to the e.r. and her doctor determines she needs an emergency abortion but she is in a state where abortion is banned. you would agree also as an

attorney that federal law protects her right to that emergency care, correct? >> i don't know. the answer to that is i don't know. if the state bans it. the federal constitution -- not any federal law present emends state laws. i am not trying to be evasive, senator, i'm telling you i don't know the answer to that question. >> i appreciate that. what authority do you have over this as the director of hhs? >> what authority do i have? >> to enforce the law. >>? what regards? >> to make sure that a hospital that receives payment from medicare is insuring that they are providing the necessary emergency care to patients who they present. it's the law. what authority as hhs director

do you have with respect to that? >> my understanding is that i have budgetary power and that it is pretty much limited to that. if you tell me i have another authority, i don't even think that -- >> let me tell you you do. >> we don't -- >> cms investigates complaints of violations as well as the health and human services inspector general who, by the way, was just recently fired by donald trump. so you will be enforcing the laws and it is important you awned stand their impacts and don't play politics with the patient presenting at the e.r. based on a position this administration has taken. let me ask you another question. when we met in my office you said about lowering drug prices that when big pharma price gouges, the american people suffer. we both agree on that. i think you are insincere in

your belief you want to reduce prices for americans, correct? you are sincere. the inflation reduction act empowered medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices, penalizes drug companies for prices above inflation and caps seniors out-of-pocket drug costs along with reducing insulin prices to $35 per month. but your future boss, donald trump, on his first day in office, revoked president biden's executive order that actually directed the health secretary to examine ways to reduce drug prices and improve access to innovative therapies for the american people and unfortunately republicans in congress want to repeal the inflation reduction act which means reversing all of those things that we worked on to lower prices for americans. so my question to you is, what

do you do? why are you there? are you there to be a rubber stamp to this administration and cave into all of these positions that they are taking even though you know they are in disagreement with your positions on lowering drug prices and that they could harm americans? how do you handle that as hhs director? >> well, senator, my understanding is that that the white house issued an executive order today supporting the drug negotiations under the i.r.a. president trump was very aggressive during his first term about negotiating drug prices. he has instructed me and i've met with him repeatedly as that we need lower prices for seniors in this country and others are -- >> let me ask you this. i only have so much time. we've already negotiated lowering prices for ten drugs with big pharma. they oppose this.

they have not only asking for a pause, they have filed lawsuits. but we've already negotiated the first ten drugs. we want to expand it to the next ten to 15 that the biden administration has put forward. would you agree and continue that path of really mandating that big pharma come to the table and negotiate drug prices for medicare so we can lower those prices for americans? >> my understanding is the executive order issued today, which i haven't seen but read a summary of. >> you keep citing the trump administration and you will follow what they say. is that what you are doing, a rubber stamp in this position? doesn't matter that you are the force, it could be anybody coming before us as long as they are a rubber stamp? my question to you if it is fundamental to what you believe, how do you live with that? how do you aggress those issues as you are moving forward? >> do you want me to answer the question, senator? >> yes.

>> i'm asking you. >> okay. president trump has asked me to ntas the chronic disease epidemic and make america healthy again. >> is that the only reason why you are at hhs to address that one issue? >> president trump has asked me because i am in a unique position to end that. and that is what i'm doing. and if we don't solve that problem, senator, all of the other disputes we have about who is paying and whether it's insurance companies, whether it's providers, whether it's hmos or there are patients or families all of them are moving deck chairs around on the titanic. our ship is sinking. 60% increase in medicaid over the past four years is the the biggest budget line now and it is growing faster than any other.

no other nation in the world has what we have here. no other nation has the chronic disease. we have the highest chronic disease burden of any country in the world. during covid, we had 16% of the covid deaths in a country, we only have 4.6% of the world population. a higher death count than any other country in the world. cdc said americans are the sickest people on earth. the average person who died from covid american had 3.8 chronic diseases. this is an threat economically, to our military, to our health, to our sense of well-being and it is a priority for president trump and that's why he asked me to run the agency and if i'm privileged to be confirmed that's exactly what i will do. [applause] >> thank you so much. mr. chairman. mr. kennedy, thank you for taking time to visit with me in

my office to talk about a lot of the important issues affecting healthcare in my home state of wyoming as well as the nation and appreciate your willingness to serve our country. during our meeting we discussed the challenges that healthcare providers and patients are facing in rural america. financial obstacles facing rural hospitals, workforce shortages, issues of ob/gyn and new regulations painful that came out of the biden administration hurting our ability to provide nursing home staffing. so let me start if i could with rural hospitals and the closures of hospitals like that. there are a lot of challenges facing hospitals in rural communities in frontier areas. we have 33 hospitals in wyoming. 26 are located in various locations hard to get to, weather impacts them. six hospitals are at risk of closing, two are at immediate risk of closing in the next two years. ten have had to cut available services. this is a concern of rural hospitals both republican and

democrat states either way. bipartisan. critical that the workforce challenges, financial challenges that we're facing are addressed. can you commit to working with us on a plan to address the critical nationwide issue of rural healthcare? >> yes, senator. and i would say that during my visits, i visited almost 60 senators and the most common unifying i would say issue on both democrats and republicans, there were two. one was pbm reform and the other is rural hospitals. and our nation made a commitment over 100 years ago to put a hospital within 30 miles of every american. we generally succeeded in doing that. it is absolutely critical. it is lifesaving. and rural hospitals are closing at an extraordinary rate right now. they not only provide important

healthcare for the localities and drivers across the country. president trump wants to end the hemorrhage of rural hospitals and asked me to do that through the use of a.i., through telemedicine, these are innovations that i saw the other day. cleveland clinic has developed an a.i. nurse that you can't distinguish from a human being that has diagnostics as good as any doctor. we can provide that kind of care to every american in this country, even in the most remote parts of wyoming, montana, alaska, etc. we also have opportunities at hrsa and at the gme to finally

live up to gma's mission of providing personnel to rural hospitals and i intend to use all my power, because i've seen the priority that it is given by both democrats and republicans on this committee intend to make that a priority if i'm privileged to be confirmed. >> i appreciate it. often with financial strains on the local hospital one of the common services to be cut in rural hospitals is maternity services and women in wyoming having to drive over 100 miles to access care. 13 counties in wyoming don't have access to ob. counties larger than the states of vermont, new hampshire, rhode island, new jersey, delaware. counties charger than those states. will you commit working with my office to find solutions to address these maternal health challenges in rural america? >> i look forward to it. another issue we spoke about was this harmful biden administration rule that really

bad for our rural nursing homes and it is a rule that would triple the registered nurse requirements in nursing homes. this is going to lead -- there aren't enough registered nurses in our state to be able to comply with this and lead the nursing home closures across the state. will you work with me to fix this serious problem that was a result of a rule that came out by the biden administration who clearly don't understand rural america? >> yes, senator, i think the rule was well intentioned but as you've said and i've heard from many rural senators, it will be a disaster for their states. some of the nursing homes, these are staffing rules that require 24 hour staffing by medical professionals. some of the nursing homes in rural areas simply do not have the available personnel or the economics to be able to do that. it will mean the closure of nursing homes in rural areas across our country, which means the parents, elderly parent will

be moved a great distance from the local community and their family. and we know that a single greatest driver of high-quality nursing home care is the the involvement, proximity of family members. when you move that nursing facility away from the community where the kids live, you are going to get much worse care. the intention, although it was nobel, was in reall for rural areas, at least. it will be a disaster. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator johnson. >> mr. kennedy, welcome. thank you for being here. thank you for your decades-long advocacy for a clean environment, for children's he health. i can't say i'm surprised by the hostility on the other side. i'm highly disappointed in it.

i don't know if you remember when you called me up and you were contemplating setting your political differences aside, joining forces with president trump in an area of agreement addressing chronic illness, trying to find the root cause of all these problems facing this nation. my first response was bobby, this is an answer to my prayers. we need to get to the answers of this but even more, we need to heal and unify this divided nation. i'm not necessarily the most optimistic guy. we have enormous challenges facing this nation but i thought wow, here is somebody from the left, somebody i don't agree with on many issues politically, coming together with president trump and focusing on an area of agreement. something that the american people desperately want.

finding out the answers, what has caused autism? what is causing chronic illness? mr. kennedy, i know -- i think i've come to know what is in your heart. i think i know the personal and political price you have paid for this decision. i want to say publicly i thank you for that. i truly appreciate what you are doing here. [applause] >> can't we come together as a nation and do this? can we do this? aren't you getting tired of this? i'm getting tired of this. so again mr. kennedy, i need to enter into the record this is just -- these are 11 letters of support signed by 63,000 people. thousands of doctors from the

american association physicians and surgeons, independent medical alliance. north carolina freedom group. governor jeff landri from louisiana. these are americans, nonpartisan. a lot of these people i know because i've advocated with you. a lot of them are democrats. they put their political differences aside. mr. chairman, i want to enter this into the record. i also do want to, mr. kennedy as long as i have you here, i have read over 70 oversight letters under the biden administration and gotten squat out of them, okay? what i get is we get for example 50 pages of anthony fauci's emails redacted. by the way, the latest one was 17 pages instead of issuing a health alert on the myo carditis they neu was impacting young men

early in 2021, instead of issuing an alert on the health alert network, they developed 17 pages of talking points. that was -- this was given to the public under a fara request. they have a new way of redacting. they don't black things out they give you white pages so you don't know what they have redacted. so again, i have issued a subpoena now to cover the information i've requested in 70 oversight letters. my question to you is as secretary of hhs, will you honor these requests from congress and will you make hhs transparent? >> my approach to hhs as i said before, senator, is radical transparency. democrats, republicans ought to be able to come in and get information that was generated at taxpayer expense that is owned by the american taxpayer.

they shouldn't get redacted documents. public health agencies should be transparent. and if we want americans to restore trust, we have to have transparency. i want to say something about what you first said. when i launched my campaign it was about uniting americans, democrats and republicans. there is no issue that should unite us more than this chronic health epidemic. no such thing as republican or democrat children. these are our kids. 66% of them are damaged. i know what a healthy kid looks like because i had so many of them in my family. i didn't know anybody with a food allergy growing up. why do five of my kids have allergies? why are we seeing these explosions in diabetes, rheumatoid arthritic,,

neurological diseases, depression. why can't we just agree with each other to put differences about so many issues intrackable issues aside and say we are going to end this? i don't think anybody is going to be able to do this like i am. because of my peculiar experience. when you litigate against agencies you get a phd in corporate capture and how to unravel it. i've written six books about these agencies. i know a lot about them and i know how to fix it. there is nobody who will fix it the way that i do because i'm not scared of vested interests. i don't care. i'm not here because i want a position or a job, i have a very good life and a happy family. this is something i don't need. i want to do this because we are going to fix it. the other thing is we are

attracting a caliber of people to hhs like never before in history. they are entrepreneurs, they are disruptors, innovators of immense talent walking away from growing concerns. they aren't coming there for position. they are coming there because they want to save our country across the political spectrum. all these democrats are opposed to me for partisan issues. they used my friends. agreed with me on all the environmental issues i've been working on my whole career. now they are against me. anything that president trump does, any decision he makes has to be lampooned, derided, discredited, marginalized and vilified. >> we need to move on. senator warren. >> mr. kennedy, i want to start with something that i think you and i agree on and that is that big pharma has too much power in

washington. you've said that president trump asked you to quote clean up corruption and conflicts. sounds great. you've said that you will quote slam shut the revolving door between government agencies and the companies they regulate. that also sounds great. so here is an easy question. will you commit that when you leave this job you will not accept compensation from a drug company, a medical device company, a hospital system or a health insurer for at least four years including as a lobbyist or board member? >> can you repeat the last part of the question? >> you won't take money from drug companies in any way, shape or form. >> who, me? >> yes, you. >> i'm happy to commit to that. >> that's what i figured. i said it is an easy question to start with. i think you are right on this -- >> i don't think i want to get any money, by the way.

>> let's keep going. you are right because to say yes because every american has the right to know that every decision you make as our number one health officer is to help them and not to make money for yourself in the future. so i want to talk more about money. i'm looking at your paperwork right now. in the past two years you have raked in 2 1/2 million dollars from a law firm called which isner bomb. you go online, do commercials to encourage people to sign up with them and join lawsuits against vaccine makers. and for everyone who signs up you personally get paid and if they win their case, you get 10% of what they win. so if you bring in somebody who gets $10 million, you walk away with a million dollars. now you just said that you want the american people to know you can't be bought, your decisions won't depend how much money you

can make in the future, you won't go to work for a drug company after you leave hhs. but you and i both know there is another way to make money. so mr. kennedy, will you also agree that you won't take any compensation from any lawsuits against drug companies while you are secretary and for four years afterwards? >> well, i'll certainly commit to that while i'm secretary. i do want to clarify something. you are making me sound like a shill. i put together that case. i did the science presentation to the judge on that case to get it into court. for the hearing. >> it is just a really simple question. you have taken in 2 1/2 million dollars. i want to know if you will commit right now that not only will you not go to work for drug companies, you won't go to work suing the drug companies and

taking your rake out of that while you are secretary and for four years after. it is just -- >> i will commit not taking any fees from drug companies while i'm secretary. >> i'm asking about fees from suing drug companies. will you agree not to do that? >> you are asking me to not sue drug companies and i am not going to agree to that, senator. i am not going to agree to not sue anybody. >> let's do a quick count here of how rick as secretary of hhs if you get confirmed you could influence every one of those lawsuits. well, let me start the list. you could publish your anti-vaccine conspiracies but this time on u.s. government letterhead. something a jury might be impressed by. you could appoint people who see vaccine panel who share your anti-vax views and let them do

your dirty work. tell the cdc vaccine panel to remove a particular vaccine from the vaccine schedule. you could remove vaccines from special compensation programs which would open up manufacturers to mass torts. you could make more injuries eligible for compensation even if there is no causal evidence. you could change vaccine court processes to make it easier to bring junk lawsuits. you could turn over fda data to your friends at the law firm and use it however it benefited them. you could change vaccine labeling. you could change vaccine information rules, you could change which claims are compensated in the vaccine injury compensation program. there is a lot of ways that you can influence those future lawsuits and pending lawsuits while you are secretary of hhs. i'm asking you to commit right now you will not take a financial stake in every one of

those lawsuits so that what you do as secretary will also benefit you financially down the line. >> i will comply with all of the ethical guidelines. >> that's not the question. you have said -- >> you are asking more -- senator, you are asking me not to sue vaccine pharmaceutical companies. >> i am not. >> that's exactly what you are doing. >> look, no one should be fooled here. as secretary of hhs robert kennedy will have the power to under cut vaccines and vaccine manufacturing across our country. and for all of his talk about follow the science and his promise that he won't interfere with those of us who want to vaccinate his kids the bottom line is the same. kids might die, but robert kennn