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

don't do not like the 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 can afford to be, will be on private insurance. so we need to figure out ways to improve care, particularly for elderly, for veterans, for the poor in this country and medicaid. the current model is not doing that. i would ask, you know, any of the democrats who are chuckling just now, do you think all that money, the $900 billion that we're sending to medicaid every year has made americans healthy? do we think it's working for anybody? are the premiums low enough? >> we do need. >> to move on. senator warner. well, i got to. >> tell you, for. >> literally hundreds. >> of thousands. >> of virginians. >> medicaid is what.

>> prevents them. >> from health crises. >> they. >> imaginary new plan. and if. >> there was a. >> new plan. that was to be. >> the basis of what trump. >> was going. >> to do and repealing. >> obamacare, i would have thought by now we'd. >> have seen it. >> i got to tell. >> you, senator, can i reply? senator. >> mr. kennedy. >> i got questions. >> i appreciate our visit. >> i know. >> you 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. >> but i got to tell. >> you. >> i saw an email that you put out monday night. or your campaign did in a funding 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 freedom. >> then you ask. >> your donors to help pay for

your. >> campaign debt. >> did your campaign and you put out that? >> i don't think my campaign exists anymore. well, listen, i got to tell you this. somebody's out there soliciting money for it. maybe you ought to find out who is. so the fact that you celebrate this freeze, do 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 as chairman crapo pointed out, i'm not asking for i love mike crapo. i'm asking you, you're up. >> very. very important position. >> as he pointed out, senator, the let me just that we're closed. we're not closed as a result of the trump. let me just tell you i'd like you to explain. excuse me, sir, i'd. >> like you. >> to. >> explain to a domestic violence. >> center in. richmond that's saying. >> because this. >> freeze. >> they may. >> have to close down. where are. >> those. >> battered women to go? >> or a. >> rural nonprofit? i've got. >> in the shenandoah. >> valley saying. >> that freeze. >> is going. >> to potentially.

>> shut down their ability. >> to operate. so i don't 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. i'm saying that the trump you don't know. you don't know if you raise a lot of money. 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 there are medicaid freeze is affecting beyond medicare and social security. >> i would. >> hope. >> you would. >> have known that. >> to be able to answer. >> some of this. now, you've. >> said publicly you. >> want to immediately get rid of 600 nih. >> workers on job one. >> on day. >> one. >> when we had. >> our. >> meeting, you said you actually like. >> to get. >> rid of. >> 2200 people. >> from hhs. >> which offices are. >> you. >> going. >> to start. cutting and ripping. >> these. >> 2200 workers from? i said, there's 200 political appointees that are changed during every

administration. if you got rid of those 200 political appointees, you're not going to replace them with your political appointees. well, president biden this year changed 3000 employees at hhs, 3759, 8200. what departments are you going to pick them from? well, the same as president biden did when he changed 3000 out. let me just i'm down to a minute, a. >> minute 30. >> the chairman has been. >> generous with colleagues on both sides. i may. >> have to go a couple. >> minutes over. but let me just say so let's just answer. this would be this, i hope, since you're asking. >> to. >> become the. >> top health care. >> 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 on health issues. so when we're looking at this. >> purge and. >> we're looking at laying off. >> workers, when. >> we're looking. >> at potentially the president's illegal offer to. >> try to buy. >> out federal employees, which. >> i would say. >> to 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 preventing. >> things like salmonella? senator, there are 91,000 employees. so i take that as a i take it that's a simple yes or no. i'm going to take that as a no run that that's i take that as a no. will you. actually, 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 cyber attacks in their health care files? i will i will commit to not firing anybody who is doing their job based on your opinion, based upon your opinion or your political agenda, or. >> mr. trump's. >> political agenda, based upon my opinion. i guess that means a

lot of the folks who've had any type. of views on vaccines will be out of work. will you freeze grant. >> funding for community. >> health centers? will you freeze federal. funds for community health centers the way the current administration, the president, the white house has made clear that no funds are going to be denied to any american for benefits in any program. do you know what happens at community health centers? those are direct. are you talking about the indian health centers? no, i'm talking about community. health centers across the country. i understand that. i mean, i strongly. so you're going to excuse indian health centers, which is good, but others are not. they're going to get their funds frozen. i strongly support community health centers, as does the president. so does that mean you're not going to freeze the funding. >> that is. >> currently frozen? the white house is clear that none of that funding is supposed to be frozen. sir, 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's lots and lots of. >> state programs that. >> are related to health care that come from the federal government. they come down to the state. then it goes to local programs. all of those 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 on a minute by minute basis based upon 945 or 10 30 or 1045, whatever time it is today, those funds are still frozen. sir, i. just honestly, i 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. >> willingness not to commit. try to recommend to the president to make. >> sure these. >> funds are unfrozen. >> and that people's lives were at. >> stake is a very disappointing answer. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> senator lankford chairman. >> thank you, mr. kennedy. it's good to see you again. we had some great visits in. my office. we've done some follow up calls to be able to go through. you and i have talked about 100 different issues and backgrounds and things. you've been able to address a lot of them today and just. >> different. >> questions to be able. >> to clear. >> up social media rumors and the things that are out there on it. so i do appreciate that. we've talked about pharmacy benefit managers. we've talked about the nursing home. rule the biden administration put down. we talked about your views on agriculture and. commercial and row crop agriculture. we've talked about food issues, and you made it very, very clear you're not going to tell americans what to eat. but you do want americans to know what they're eating. and i think that's a pretty fair perspective on that. i do want to talk to you about some areas that you and i have talked about as well. we have some disagreements, you and i, on the issue of life and when life begins on that, you've been very outspoken on that. and we've had some good opportunities to be able to talk about that. title ten is specifically in the hhs area. this has been an area that has been interpreted for a long time. and president trump in the first administration interpreted

that rule to say that his administration will prohibit the performance, referral for, or promotion of abortion as a part of the title ten program, that he made that very clear in the first administration. obviously, that's his decision to make. again, on that, on how he wants to handle that. and he's made a lot of public statements on that. the biden administration not only reversed that, not only rescinded that rule, but they went one step the other direction. in my state, in oklahoma, as you and i have talked about, the biden administration cut off funding to the state of oklahoma for aids testing, for breast cancer screening, and for other areas of poverty health care, 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 ten on that? i saw how president biden handled that in the punitive measures that came on my state. for those that are in rural health care, how are you going to handle title?

>> i'm going to support president trump's policies on title ten. i agree with president trump that every abortion is a tragedy. i agree with them that we cannot be a moral nation if we have 1.2 million abortions a year. i agree with him that the states should control abortion. president trump has told me that he wants to end late term abortions, and he wants to protect conscience exemptions, and that he wants to end federal funding for abortions here or abroad. that's title ten. i'm going to i serve at the pleasure of the president. i'm going to implement his policies. >> thank you. >> for that. president biden, when he came in, immediately closed down the office of civil rights and conscience protections within hhs. there's a statement that's come out recently that he's going to reopen that office again to be able to protect the civil rights of americans. one of the things that javier becerra did immediately when he came into hhs was conscience protections for medical professionals that

were being compelled against their conscience to perform medical procedures that violated their conscience. xavier becerra stepped in immediately into hhs and withdrew that and said, no, the federal government will tell you what you believe about these issues. you don't have conscience protections anymore and refuse to protect those folks. will you step in and say that health care individuals have the right of conscience, again, as the federal law allows? >> yeah. i mean, the first thing that occurs to me when you ask that question is what patient would want somebody doing a surgery on them that, you know, believes that the surgery is against their conscience being forced to perform, that? i don't know anybody who would want to have that, have a doctor performing a surgery that the doctor is, is morally opposed to. listen, 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. now, 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, and i wish that we could do that nationally. and if forcing somebody to participate in a 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. >> yeah. 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 ectopic pregnancy or all

kinds of other. don't even go anymore to see a physician. but they also changed an area that has been something that's been very particular. you've talked about a lot and that's transparency. they changed the position and said, don't tell us if there's a side effect on this drug unless she dies. but other than that, don't tell us anymore. literally 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 actually give transparency to the american people and to say this drug is no different than any other drug? we don't protect it just because it's political for some folks, people should know side effects on this drug. and there should be reporting. >> yeah, i mean, it's against everything we believe in in this country that 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, mifepristone and

every other drug. and president trump has made it clear to me that one of the things he has not taken a position yet on mifepristone, a detailed position, but he's made it clear to me that he wants me to look at safety issues, and i'll ask nih and fda to do that. >> thank you. >> senator whitehouse. >> thank you. chairman. mr. kennedy, i only have five minutes. >> with you. >> so and i've got a lot of experience with cms. so you're just going to 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're in that hole. >> pretty deep. >> we've just had a measles case in rhode island, the first since 2013. and frankly, you frighten. >> people. >> two i want to harms that rhode island has experienced from a remorseless, senseless cms bureaucracy. cms has 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 differential of. 23 and 26% in our regional health care 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 health care 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 5000 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's what families see. granny is home dying. she needs to transfer to a nursing home, and medicare insists on putting her three days and two nights in

a hospital. expensive. frightening to granny and the family and stupid granny home dying and can't get palliative and curative care together. inhumane and stupid grannies 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 narragansett beach, say one more time to recall childhood memories before she dies. inhumane and stupid grannies home dying and the families exhausted. and the respite care benefit is not to send a nurse or a 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 insensate cms

bureaucracy takes a court order to be awakened to the harm they cause. i have had enough. cms should let rhode island try humane end of life care through cme. let's see if it works at 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 health care everywhere. i've said a lot, my time is out. you're welcome to respond. in writing. i ask unanimous consent that the order declaring cms actions to constitute irreparable and likely illegal harm be put into the record. >> without objection, let me let me just respond very briefly, senator whitehouse. i'm an implacable enemy of tyrannical.

insensate bureaucracies and 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 the template for what we ought to be doing is a value based plan. and i look forward to you to making sure that we create pilot programs like this. unfortunately, mr. chairman, around the country. >> unfortunately, mr. chairman, one of the things i've learned in my tenure in the senate is that a nominee saying that they're 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 will. >> move on to senator daines. >> mr. chairman. thank you. >> mr. kennedy. i'm 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. >> both behind closed doors in my office, as well as listening to you. >> publicly to. >> be very thoughtful and science based. i applaud that, and i thank you for that. and i realize this will likely be a very partizan vote on this committee and on the senate floor. but let the record state there are three medical doctors on this side of the dais. i'm a chemical engineer. we believe in science, and i'm thankful that you do, too. and you made that comment in your opening remarks. i want to talk about agriculture for a moment. we talked about our common love for montana. you've been to montana many times. it's a wonderful state. a lot of folks have discovered it. they watch a show, yellowstone, and people are coming and moving into our state. but it's 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, in. the world. >> our farmers and ranchers are. >> truly some of the most effective environmental stewards and ensuring we have a safe food supply chain in the world. i share your 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 agricultural practices. you mentioned you were a4h kid growing up. i think our four age kids and our ffa kids are some of the best kids in america. my question for you, mr. kennedy, is, if confirmed, as i'm listening 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? >> i absolutely will make that commitment i have. as i shared with you, a personal commitment and a long career working with farmers. i want to make sure i understand the very, very narrow margins, the slim margins at american farmers and ranchers are dealing with and i don't want under my watch, a single farmer to have to leave his farm for economic reasons or for regulatory or bureaucratic reasons while i serve, if i'm privileged to serve and 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 of farm income spiked for the first time in decades under his last administration. he got solid support from farmers across the country. farm country has trumped country. farmers across the country supported him during this election. he has specifically instructed me that he wants farmers involved in every polic, and that he wants me to work with brooke rollins at usda to make sure that we preserve american farmers, that all of our policies support them. >> mr. kenny, thank you. and if confirmed, i look forward to having you and brooke rollins out to montana to spend some. >> time with you. you have my commitment to come there any time, particularly during ski season or hunting season. >> deal. >> i want. >> to shift. >> gears for a moment. >> as we discussed in the

meeting we had in my office, mifepristone was approved in 2000. the fda has been under scrutiny and brought to court for failure to properly. assess this drug. >> as well. >> as subsequent deregulations, senator lankford described that occurred over the past 25 years. >> some of these. >> deregulations included ending the requirement that these drugs be prescribed by a doctor, ending reporting requirements for adverse events, and allowing these pills to be obtained through the mail. in fact, the fda's own prescribing label mentioned that 3 to 5% 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 fda commissioner to review these deregulatory actions that are threatening the safety of women? i.

>> i sorry, senator, as i said to senator lankford, i think it's 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 mifepristone. he has not yet taken a stand on on how to regulate it. whatever he does, i will implement those policies and i will work with this committee to make those policies make sense. >> thank you, mr. kennedy. >> senator hassan. >> thank you. mr. chair and ranking. >> member wyden, and 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 health care and therefore couldn't work because they were too sick, got health care through medicaid expansion, then went back to work, and now they're on private insurance. so 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, hhs would put american families lives at risk. vaccines are one of our greatest public health triumphs. and you don't need i'm not talking about abstract medical science. one of the people who helped raise me was my grandfather, who was a pediatrician. he practiced medicine in this country from 1921 until the mid 1980s, and i heard details about the difference those vaccines made in saving 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 to exploit parents natural worries 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. about 500 american children 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. for example, you have previously falsely suggested that the polio vaccine killed many, 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 freedom. in your own words, it's not the government's place to tell people what to do with their bodies. you said that, correct? yes, 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. so you said that, right? >> yes, 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 really 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've 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 moral authority in this country. >> right? so but. >> 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. >> so what. you're telling. >> us, just to be clear, because my time is limited, is that regardless of what you believe, regardless of what values you have, if president trump tells you to do something, you're going to do it. you said just now the discussion about mifepristone. oh, he's asked me to study the safety of it. here

are the safety studies that tell us mifepristone is safe and effective. and i asked, mr. chair, that these 40, about 40 studies be admitted to the record by unanimous consent. >> without objection. >> so the studies are there, the safety is proved, the science is there. but what you're telling us is, if president trump orders you to take action to make it harder for women to get direly needed health care, you'll 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 all around this country, you're going to 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 american. the problem. >> is the white. >> house issued that statement only after we pointed out the damage it would do, and it became politically uncomfortable for them. you know what else that that is a 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're going to stop that, too. that's enough. >> thank you. 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's a. >> 40 year old law that requires hospital ers. >> 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 er. >> as a lawyer, you. >> would agree that that. federal law. >> protects her right. >> to emergency. >> care, correct? >> yes. >> so now. >> a pregnant. >> woman with life. >> threatening bleeding from an incomplete miscarriage. >> goes to the er. >> let me rephrase. >> that. >> so you can hear a. >> pregnant woman. >> with a life threatening bleeding. >> bleeding from an. incomplete miscarriage. >> goes to the er. >> and her doctor also determines. >> that. >> she needs. >> an emergency abortion. but she's. >> 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, i mean, the answer to that is i don't know if the state. >> let me. >> ask you this. as an. >> attorney. >> doesn't federal. >> law preempt state law? >> the federal constitution does sometimes. not every federal law preempt state laws. it could be unconstitutional. i'm not trying to be evasive, senator. i'm just telling you i don't. >> i appreciate. >> that, but. >> what authority. >> do you have over this? >> as the director. >> of hhs? >> what authority do i have. >> to. >> enforce the law. >> in what regards. >> to make. >> sure that. >> a hospital that receives. >> payment from. medicare is. >> ensuring that. >> they're providing. >> the necessary. >> emergency care. >> to patients. >> when they present? >> it's actually. >> the law. so what authority, as. >> hhs director. >> do you have with respect to antifa? >> my understanding is that i have budgetary power, and that

is pretty much limited to that. but if you tell me i have another authority, i don't even think that. >> well, let. >> me tell you, we have a law enforcement branch at hhs. >> you do. >> and that's cms. >> the cms actually investigate. >> 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 all the laws. >> and it's important that you understand. >> their impact. >> and don't play politics with the patient presenting at the er. based on a position that 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 gouging the american. >> people suffer. i think we both. >> agree on that. and i think. >> you're in sincere in your belief that you want to reduce prices. >> for americans, correct? >> yes. >> yeah. >> the inflation. reduction act

empowered. >> medicare to. >> negotiate prescription drug prices. >> it penalizes. >> drug companies for price hikes above inflation, and. >> it 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 in. >> to all of these powerful positions. >> that they're. >> taking, even though. >> you. >> know. >> they're in. >> disagreement with your. >> positions on. lowering drug prices and that they could. >> harm americans. >> how do you handle that? >> as hhs director? >> senator, my understanding is that the white house issued an executive order, i believe, today, supporting the drug negotiations under the ira. president trump was very aggressive during his first term about negotiating drug prices. he has instructed me, and i've met with him repeatedly on as though we need lower prices as seniors in this country. and so let me ask you are. >> let. me let. >> me ask you this because i only have. >> so much time. so we've already. negotiated lowering. >> prices for ten drugs. >> with big pharma. >> and big. >> pharma, by the way, opposes this. >> they have not. >> only are asking for a pause, they have filed lawsuits, but. >> we've already. >> negotiated the first ten.

>> drugs and we want to. >> expand it to. >> the. >> next 10. >> 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 that the executive order that was issued today, which i haven't seen, but i've read a summary of. >> well. >> let me ask. >> you this then, because. >> you keep. citing the trump. >> administration and you're just going to follow what they say. is that what you're doing? you're just. >> a rubber stamp. >> for them. >> in this position. >> so anybody. >> so it doesn't. matter that you're before us. it could be. >> anybody coming before us, as long as they're a. >> rubber stamp for this administration and disregarding your beliefs and what you think. >> i guess my. >> question to you is. >> if it really. >> is fundamental to what you believe, how. >> do you. >> live. with that? >> how do you. >> how do. >> you address those issues as. >> you're moving forward. >> knowing that it's on americans? yeah. do you want me to answer the question? >> no, i'm. >> asking you. >> okay. president trump has asked me to end the chronic

disease epidemic and make america healthy again. and i'm the only reason. >> why you're at hhs. >> is that the only reason why? then you're. >> at the hhs to. >> address that one issue. president trump has asked me, because i'm in a unique position to end, that i'll end, 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's paying and whether it's insurance companies, whether it's providers, whether it's hmos, whether it's patients or families, all of those are moving deckchairs around on the titanic. our ship is sinking. our 60% increase in medicaid over the past four years is the biggest budget line now, and it's growing faster than any other. and no other nation in the world has what we have here. no other nation has a chronic disease. we have the highest chronic disease burden of any

country in the world. we had during covid, we had 16% of the covid deaths. in a country, we only have 4.2% of the world's population. we had a higher death count than any country in the world. and when cdc was asked why, they said it's because americans are the sickest people on earth. the average person who died from covid american had 3.8 chronic diseases. this is an existential 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'll do. >> senator barrasso. >> thanks so much, mr. chairman. >> mr. kennedy, thank you. >> for taking time to visit with me in. >> my office prior to today's hearing. >> to talk about a lot of the. important issues affecting health. >> care in my. >> home state of wyoming, as

well as the nation. and i appreciate your willingness to serve our country. >> during our meeting, we discussed. >> the challenges. >> that health care. >> providers and patients are facing in rural america. financial obstacles facing. rural hospitals. >> workforce shortages, issues. >> of ob. >> gyn. >> and then new regulations that are painful that have come out of. >> the biden. >> administration are. >> hurting our ability to provide nursing home staffing. so. so let me start, if i could, with rural hospitals and the closures of hospitals like that, the there are a lot of challenges facing hospitals. >> in rural communities. >> and frontier areas. we have 33 hospitals. >> in. >> wyoming, 26 are really located in areas, locations often hard to get to. >> weather impacts them. >> six of the. >> hospitals are at risk of closing. closing two are. >> at. >> immediate risk of closing. in the next two years, ten have had to cut available services. >> and 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 health care? >> yes, i yes, senator, and i would say that during my visits, i visited almost 60 senators so far, and the most common unifying, i would say, issue among both democrats and republicans, there were two. one was pbm reform and the others were hospitals. and, you know, 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's absolutely critical. it's life saving. and rural hospitals are are closing at an extraordinary rate right now, they not only provide important health care for the localities, but also their economic drivers. for

localities all over this country. why president trump is determined to end the hemorrhage of rural hospitals. and he's asked me to do that through through use of ai, through telemedicine, which these are innovations that i saw the other day, a cleveland clinic has developed, an ai nurse that you cannot distinguish from a human being that has diagnostics as good as any doctor. and we can develop, we can provide concierge care to every american in this country, even those the remote parts of wyoming, montana, alaska, etc. we also have opportunities at hrsa and at the gmi to finally live up to gma's mission of serving of providing personnel to rural hospitals. and i intend to use

all of my power because i've seen the priority that is given by both democrats and republicans on this committee. i intend to make that a priority of my of if i'm privileged to be confirmed. >> well. >> i appreciate it, because often if. >> with financial. >> strains on the local hospital. >> one of. >> the. >> common services to be cut. >> in rural. hospitals and. >> maternity services. >> so now. >> we have women in wyoming having to drive. >> over 100. miles to access care. >> 13 counties in wyoming don't have. >> access to. >> to ob. and we're talking counties. >> larger than the. >> states of. >> vermont. >> new hampshire, rhode island. >> connecticut, new jersey. >> delaware, counties. >> larger than those whole states. >> so will you commit to working. >> with my office. to find. >> solutions to. help address. >> these specific. >> maternal health. >> challenges in rural america? >> yes, senator. i look forward to it. >> another issue we specifically spoke. about with. this harmful. >> biden administration. >> rule that have really been bad. >> for our. >> rural nursing homes, and it's a rule that would triple. >> the registered nurse.

requirements in nursing homes. this is going. >> to lead. >> there just aren't enough registered nurses in. >> our state to be able to comply. >> with this. this would lead. >> to. >> nursing home closures across our state. will you commit to working with me. to fix this serious problem? that it was a result. >> of a. rule that. >> came out by the biden administration. >> who clearly doesn'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 all across our country, which means the parents, the elderly parent will be moved a great distance from the local community and their family. and we know that the

single greatest driver of high quality nursing home care is the involvement, the proximity of family members. when you move that nursing facility away from the community where the kids live, you're going to get much worse care. so the intention, although it was noble, was in reality, for rural areas, at least it is going to be a disaster. >> thank you. 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 health. i can't say as 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. sending your. >> political differences aside, joining forces with president trump on 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. >> because we've got. >> enormous challenges facing. >> this nation. >> but i thought, wow, here's. >> 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? >> miss kennedy, i. >> know, i think. >> i've. >> come to. >> know what's in your heart. >> i think i know. >> the personal and political price you've paid for this decision. and i just i want to say publicly, i thank. >> you for that. i truly appreciate. >> what you're doing here. >> can't we. >> come together as a nation and do this? can we do? aren't you. aren't you getting tired of this? >> i'm getting tired. >> of this. >> so again, mr. kennedy, i need to enter in the record. these. >> this is just. these are. >> just 11. >> letters of support signed. >> by 63,000 people. thousands of doctors from the american association. >> association of american. >> physicians and surgeons, independent medical alliance, the north carolina physicians. >> and freedom.

>> group, governor. >> jeff landrieu. >> from louisiana. >> these are. >> americans, nonpartisan. a lot a lot of these people. >> i know because i've. >> you know, advocated with you. a lot of them are democrats. they put their political differences aside. >> so, mr. chairman, i'd like to enter this in the record. >> without objection. >> i also do want to miss mr. kennedy, as. >> long as i have. >> you here. i've written over 70 oversight letters. >> to the federal. >> health agencies under the biden administration. i've virtually gotten squat out of them. okay. what i get is. we get, for example, 50 pages. >> of anthony fauci's emails. >> redacted. oh, by. >> the way, the latest one. >> was 17 pages. >> instead of issuing a health alert. >> on the. >> myocarditis. >> myocarditis they. >> knew was. >> in 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 foia request. they had. >> to go to court. they got. >> a new way of redacting. they don't block things out. they just give you white pages so you don't even know what they have redacted. >> so again. >> i've issued. >> a subpoena. >> now to. >> cover the information. i've requested in 70 oversight letters. my question to you. >> is as as. >> secretary of hhs, will you honor these requests from congress? and will you. make hhs. >> transparent? >> yeah, my approach hhs, as i said before, senator, is radical transparency. democrats and 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 we if we want americans to restore trust in the public health agencies, we need transparency. the you know, the 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. there's no such thing as republican children or democratic 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. peanut allergy. why do five of my kids have allergies? why are we seeing these explosions in diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, neurological diseases, depression, all of these things that are related to toxic to the environment. why can't we just

agree with each other to put differences about so many issues? intractable issues aside, and say, we're going to end this. i don't think anybody is going to be able to do this like i have because of my peculiar experience, because i've litigated against these agencies. when you litigate against them, 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. and there's 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're going to fix it. and the other thing is, we are attracting now a caliber of people to hhs like never before in history. and they're

entrepreneurs. they're they're disruptors. they're innovators of immense talent that are walking away, many of them from growing concerns. they're not coming. they're for position. they're coming there because they want to save our country. and they're from across the political spectrum. and all these democrats are opposed to me for partizan issues. they used to be my friends agreed with me on all the environmental issues that i've been working on for my whole career. now they're against me because anything that president trump does, any decision he makes has to be lampooned, derided, discredited, marginalized, vilified. >> we need to move on. senator warren. >> thank you, mr. chairman. so, 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's 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 a board member. >> can you just repeat the last part of the question? can i commit? >> you're not going to take money from drug companies in any way, shape. >> or form. >> me? >> yes, you. >> oh, yeah. i'm happy to commit to that. >> good. that's what i figured. i said it's an easy question to start with, and i think you're right on this. >> i don't think any of them want to give me money, by the way. >> let's let's keep going. you're 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've raked in $2.5 million from a law firm called wisner baum. you go online, you do commercials to encourage people to sign up with wisner baum, to 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 $1 million. now, you just said that you want the american people to know you can't be bought. your decisions won't depend on how much money you could 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's 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. but i do want to clarify something, because you're making me sound like a shill. i, i put together that case. i did the science day presentation to the judge on that case to get it into court. mr. kennedy. >> mr. kennedy, it's just a really simple question. >> yeah. >> you've taken in $2.5 million. 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're a secretary. and for four years after.

>> it's just i'll commit to not taking any fees from drug companies while i'm secretary. i, i. >> i'm asking about fees from suing drug companies. will you agree not to do that? >> you're asking me to not sue drug companies. and i'm not going to agree to that drugs companies. as much. >> you want. >> i'm not going to agree to not drug companies or anybody. >> so let's do a quick count here of how, 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 us government letterhead, something a jury might be impressed by. you could appoint. >> i don't understand. >> that vaccine panel who share your anti-vax views and let them do your dirty work. you could 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 they could 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's a lot of ways that you can influence those future lawsuits and pending lawsuits while you are secretary of hhs, and i'm asking you to commit right now that 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 the ethical guidelines. >> that's not the question you and i you have said. >> you're asking me, senator. you're asking me not to sue a vaccine of pharmaceutical companies. yeah. you are. that's exactly what you're doing. >> look. >> no one should be fooled here. >> i. >> as secretary. >> of hhs, robert kennedy, will have the power to undercut 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 kennedy can kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it. kids might die, but robert kennedy can keep cash. >> in. >> senator, i support vaccines. i support the childhood