ask them to start off by telling us about what has happened in the area since hobby lobby against burwell. i'll start off with christina. panelist: you may wonder why my hair is messy. greg and i already got at it in the green room. [laughter] i have been asked to talk about areas of agreement. i'm working hard on that. i am sure you hear my accent. i have not been drinking. i am cuban-american, so i feel passionate about these issues. i am the executive director at the beckett fund. one area of disagreement we have is the hobby lobby case. as you may have heard, americans united mischaracterized it as crazy evangelicals denying health care to women. that was not actually the case. i'm kidding. you never said crazy. [laughter] the greene family of hobby lobby are in -- an evangelical family. they paid their kids seven cents each for making friends. as devout christians, when they opened their stores in 46 states employing 26,000 employees, they close on sundays. their trucks only take merchandise into they don't have any lewd cards. they offer generous benefits. they pay for everything th

secretary burwell has committed to addressing the epidemic. she's driving us towards two main goals. one, reducing opioid overdoses and opioid -- and overdose-related mortality and, two, decreasing prevalence of opioid use disorder. she directed us to use the best science and to focus on the most promising levers that can make a difference for the people who struggle with opioid addiction and their families. hhs agencies have been collaborating on this problem for some time and we hope you will agree after today that the sum is -- that their hold is greater than the sum of the parts. our action informed by the evidence and discussion with states and other stakeholders fall into three general categories. one, addressing opioid prescribing practices, two, expanding the use of naloxone and, three, promoting medication-assisted treatment. let me outline the plan in a bit more detail. first, pdmps. we're increasing investments in prescription drug monitoring programs among the most promising clinical tools to curb prescription opioid abuse. we're i

the suit is called king versus burwell. a hearing just days away at the supreme court.ut at risk -- from taxpayers for health care. tell me what it would do. >> right. there are 37 states that have either federal exchanges or federal-assisted exchanges. if the supreme court holds the law says exactly what it says in english exchanges are eligible for subsidies. those 37 exchanges aren't eligible for subsidies. >> the state subsidies would go away. >> the federal subsidies would go away. >> let's look at the numbers and what that means. 8.8 million on federal exchanges. 2.85 on state exchanges. you can see how it puts so many people at risk here. how do you think -- because i've heard a lot of people -- what's the best thinking right now on how the supreme court will rule on this? >> look, i thought the supreme court back in 2012 was going to overturn the individual mandate to buy -- justice roberts convoluted himself and said it's a tax. upheld it. this is not a constitutional question. it's a plain reading of the text. it gives roberts and kennedy reason to say plane p

burwell. the republicans plan if king v.oes in the way of the plaintiffs is a shrugging of the shoulders. >> i love it. we have a guy tar because he rocked it on the senate floor. thanks for all my students tonight. class dismissed. there's some f >> that's tonight's edition of reverend al's weekly report card. and haven't for 35 years . with the hightest standard of animal care in the world, our whales are healthy. they're thriving. i wouldn't work here if they weren't. and government research shows they live just as long as whales in the wild. caring for these whales, we have a great responsibility to get that right. and we take it very seriously. because we love them. and we know you love them too. when i'm shopping for a used car, i want to be comfortable. i don't want an aggressive salesperson breathing down my neck pressuring me into a decision. when i go to the supermarket there's no one pushing me to buy the more expensive cereal. i just want to shop like i do everywhere else. ♪ ♪ as long as people drive cars carmax

burwell if it prevails are republican governors they're blamed for people losing subsidies.hey lose the subsidies? >> you raise an interesting point. it will be a very interesting chess game that the republican governors be in a position to respond to because the public rhetoric will be that you have millions of people that all of a sudden could lose their coverage, and the republican governors could easily, you know, sign up for the exchanges and mitigate that risk. there have been some proposals, though, that are an interim step for allowing the subsidies to continue until 2017 while there say longer term solution put in place to rectify the path on which the affordable care act proceeds. that may be a more pragmatic approach as opposed to the republican governor simply surrendering and signing. gerri: yet to be seen if anyone is pragmatic on it. dr. p, thanks for coming on the show. so good to see you. >> thank you. gerri: coming up we have a surprise! fox news kim berl guilgoyle is here to talk about her new book. >>> floodwaters keep rising and rain falling in texas and

those include cases like hobby lobby against burwell. know since that is in the news, it is on everybody's mind. since we have counsel on both sides the case with us here today, we will as then to start off by telling us about what has happened in the area since hobby lobby against burwell. i'll start off with christina. kristina: you may wonder why my hair is messy. greg and i already got at it in the green room. [laughter] i have been asked to talk about areas of agreement. i'm working hard on that. i am sure you hear my accent. i have not been drinking. i am cuban-american, so i feel very passionate about these issues. i am the executive director at the beckett fund of religious liberty. one area of disagreement we have is the hobby lobby case. as you may have heard, americans united mischaracterized it as crazy evangelicals denying health care to women. that was not actually the case. i'm kidding. you never said crazy. [laughter] the greene family of hobby lobby are an evangelical family from oklahoma city. they started their busines

those include cases like the hobby lobby against burwell case. i no that sense it is been in the news it is very much on everyone's mind. both sides of the case with us here today we will ask them to start off by telling us about what has happened in this area's since hobby lobby against burwell, and i will start of with christine. >> you may wonder why my hair is a little a little messy. we already got added in the green room. i think specifically i'm working hard on it. i'm sure you hear my accent. no i have not been drinking i am cuban-american. i feel passionate about these issues. executive director. one area of disagreement we have is the hobby lobby case. as you may have heard americans united mischaracterized it as crazy evangelicals and i healthcare women. that was not actually the case. i'm kidding. i no. you never said crazy. so, the green family of hobby lobby are in evangelical family from oklahoma city. they they started their business and a garage with a $600 loan. they pay the kids $0.7 each. as devout christians as devout christi

she has been in the case of hobby lobby versus burwell.he tells me she has quite an eclectic collection of pets at home. we learned that in the green room. michael gersten is a columnist with “the washington post” and worked with the one foundation to defeat disease and poverty globally. there are two categories we are going to talk about today. the first are the more traditional types of cases with the religion field. the accommodation cases. they often involve minority religion in the place of accommodation of minority religion in a majority society. there is another category in the news, which is what i would call religious accommodation 2.0. those include hobby lobby. in the case is now growing out of -- i know since that is in the news, it is on everybody's mind. since we have counsel on both sides of the case here with us today, we will ask them to start off by telling us about what has happened in the area since hobby lobby against burwell. i'll start off with christina. ms. arriaga: you may wonder why my hair is messy. greg and i a

burwell that is we'll turn the subsidies back on, but only in exchange for letting us make obamacare better that's a two for one for president obama. he gets what he wants, he gets obamacare to be a little more bipartisan like it would have been from the start if he had simply chosen to work with many of the republicans who had their hands outstretched, who were more than happy to work with him h. i think we need to remember back many 2010 you may recall before the health summit that secretary sebelius said we want to hear republicans' ideas at the health summit but you've got to remember, this is comprehensive legislation, and all the pieces of the puzzle fit together. you can't really tweak one part, it all goes together. well let's remember that. it needs to be comprehensively repealed. and along the way, i think worst thing we can do is try to fix it. >> is there any other finish. >> yeah, i'm gregory robs. i'm a reporter for the advocate newspaper. i'm here in d.c. but the newspaper's in baton rouge and new orleans in louisiana. i asked this question of freshmen senators who gav

burwell case we should focus on getting rid of the law and say this thing is bad now we know for sure it with a plan that is actually working. neil: if the supreme court were to do just that the administration and republicans brought this case and millions of people who got insurance are now without it. blame the republicans. i see how the game is played, and i wonder how you counter that and say you have an alternative plan a backup to help folks, but in the interim the president is going to let you roast on the spigot. >> it's republicans fault because we don't want to continue obamacare? how is that logic right? neil: i'm telling you, i've seen how the game is played. >> i understand they blame it on you guys and say this is why the poor millions of folks who got coverage are without coverage. how do the republicans answer, what do they offer in the interim? >> you are right, the democrats say that we have to make the case why that plan is wrong why, it needs to go away and why our plan which empowers patients -- neil: won't change as long as barack obama is in the white house. >>

burwell case and they're trying to think of okay, if we lose, if the obama administration loses whate do at the state level? that's why they're touching base with the state run plans. how do you do it? maybe we could merge? how would it work? very complicated but certainly the talk are under way right now and a lot of the sources would not reveal the states, they don't want to get that out there. certainly there are a lot of behind the scenes discussions about what to do if the subsidies are struck down. neil: bob, you would know this certainly better than i. the administration says health care related costs are going down are they talking about health care increases the rate of increases are going down we've seen premiums as we discussed in the prior segment rocketing. we've seen to your point and this exclusive publication that exchanges have to merge to deal with these escalating costs. >> right. neil: which world is right here? >> well, it depends how you count the numbers neil. certainly there have been claims the president saying the families would save $2500. that has been deb

this was announced earlier today by secretary burwell in boston at a white house conference on aging. want to describe it in a little bit more detail. i have two kids. we watch "american idol." bachelor," too. -- we actually watch "the bachelor," too. there is method to this madness. why is it that show fails to produce durable marriages long term? that is the long-term end point you are supposedly incentivizing. the answer is simple. what is strongly incentivized is having a lot of viewers. they do not actually care if you like each other or if you have a sustainable relationship. we pay for medical care the same way. we want you to be free of a heart attack long-term, but we incentivize everything around the generation of volume early on. in a sense, we are all in an episode of "the bachelor," and we want to focus people on looking at the end point. today, we announced them one million parts cardio reduction model. this gives you a view of taking the rhetoric that we care about prevention and value it and had -- how do we make it granular and real. it is this. when you currently go

. >> if burwell is decided, the decided the supreme court case we will have a mess. .. >> okay thankou very much. >> that is a good thing. >> next question for laura flanagan. >> since improving the employment picture, do you have a plan that would admit only improve this? >> please read my first book about mortgages. [laughter] >> and you know how to start it? can you give me your view? >> i know what happened. [laughter] >> a politician said you can get a mortgage as well regardless of your income you need to achieve your down payment. when these mortgages were part of this, they said we cancel these and so what happened then? one of the worst recessions that the country has ever seen. i was on the house banking committee. >> the community reinvestment act became the subject of such abuse and the advocates said if you want a good rating, you are going to great these mortgages. so fast forward and the banks like them, the economy goes down what happens on the backside, the obama administration says because he wrote these mortgages you're going to pay fines. and i am not just blaming

and -- in 2013, the supreme court upheld the opinion ruling in burwell vs. hobby lobby that employers have the right to operate their business according to their religious beliefs and principles. most importantly, hour ho -- however, the freedom of belief is enshrined in the first amendment of the bill of rights of our constitution. freedom of belief is the cornerstone of america's founding principles. it was the promise of religious free throw dom that spurred the first generation of immigrants to come here an it's the practice of religious freedom that's brought people from all over the world from all races and creeds, to our shores ever since. religious free dm may be one of our oldest tenets and principles but it's one we must constantly strive to work and defend. this is not about one city or one piece of legislation. other cities or states may be considering similar measures and doing nothing will only embolden those who would violate religious liberty. we need to make clear, madam speaker, where the house stands on this important issue. i urge my coll

ehrlich: if burwell is decided the way that i think it is going to be decided, which is a supreme court case, we will have a mess because the subsidies are going to go away. my alternative is this. if you like obamacare, keep it. if you want more freedom to secure a health insurance policy that meets your circumstances, not a one-size-fits-all from washington, that meets your health care needs, you should be able to secure that policy by having policies written across state lines. this is going to be a huge issue in american politics. if the supreme court comes out the way i think they're going to, people are going to lose their subsidies. concerning medicaid, if the issue was just expanding medicaid, the president should have just said, all right, let's expand medicaid. it would have been a much more honest way to do this. the way this was brought about was negligent, sloppy. a lot of people have less choice. deductibles have increased. it has helped some people, it has hurt others. for those on medicaid, it has helped. if that was the grand plan to get more people covered, the preside

fixing the electronic medical records system, and you are on the point for that according to secretary burwell. we look forward to that. the other two witnesses are here about every other day, it seems like, and we are grateful or that. dr. collins, director of the national institutes for health who oversees the largest department of medical research in the world. he has been director since 2009. he is known among other things for his leadership of the international human genome project, completely sequencing the human genome in 2003. dr. jeffrey shuren was here last week. he's been director of the center for devices and radiological health at the road and drug administration or more than five years -- the fda for more than five years. they are responsible for sharing the safety of radiation-admitting products. he has had a lot of experience. one year of that has been detailed to this committee. we welcome him back. if the witnesses would summarize their remarks in about five minutes, we would appreciate it. we have senators here who want to have a conversation with you so let's start with dr.

secretary burwell is bound to address the epidemic she is driving us toward two main goals. one, reducing opioid overdose is and overdose related mortality and two decreasing the prevalence of opioid use disorder. she directed us to use the best science and to focus on the most promising lovers that can make a difference for the people who struggle with opioid addiction and their families. hhs agencies have been collaborate on this problem for some time and we hope you will agree after today that the whole is greater than the sum of the park. our actions in from by the evidence in discussions with safe and other stakeholders fall into three general categories. one, addressing opioid prescribing practices. two, expand the use of passionate and three promoting medication assisted treatment of let me outline the plans in a bit more detail. first, pmp's ever-increasing investment for prescription drug marketing programs which are among the most promising clinical tools to curb prescription opioid abuse. we are investing through state grants and technical assistance in supporting

ehrlich: if burwell is decided the way that i think it is going to be decided, which is a supreme courte, we will have a mess because the subsidies are going to go away. mild target of is this -- if you like obamacare, keep it. if you want more freedom to secure a health insurance policy that meets your circumstances not a one-size-fits-all from washington, that meets your health care needs, you should be able to secure that policy by having policies written across state lines. this is going to be a huge issue in american politics. if the supreme court comes out the wayy i think they're going to, people are going to lose their subsidies. concerning medicaid, if the issue was just expanding medicaid, the president should have just said, all right, let's expand medicaid. it would have been a much more honest way to do this. the way this was brought about was negligent, sloppy. a lot of people have less choice. deductibles have increased. it has helped some people, it has hurt others. for those on medicaid, it has helped. if that was the grand plan to get more people covered, the president

and you're on the point for that according to secretary burwell. we look guard to that. our other two witnesses, dr. collins, the director of the national institutes of health who oversees the work of the largest supporter of biomedical research in the world. he's been the director since 2009. and of course he's known among other things for his leadership of the international human genome project. completely sequencing the human genome in 2003. dr. jeff shuren was here last week. he's at the food and drug administration for more than five years. they're responsible for sharing the safety, effectiveness and quality of medical devices, and fostering device innovation. we welcome him back. if the witnesses would summarize their remarks in about five minutes, we would appreciate it. we have senators here who want to have a conversation with you. so let's start with dr. collins. >> well, good afternoon, chairman alexander, ranking member murray and distinguished committee members. it's an honor to appear before you to discuss how we can advanced americans' health. earlier thi

and you're on the point for that according to secretary burwell. we look guard to that. our other two witnesses, dr. collins, the director of the national institutes of health who oversees the work of the largest supporter of biomedical research in the world. he's been the director since 2009. and of course he's known among other things for his leadership of the international human genome project. completely sequencing the human genome in 2003. dr. jeff shuren was here last week. he's at the food and drug administration for more than five years. they're responsible for sharing the safety effectiveness and quality of medical devices, and fostering device innovation. we welcome him back. if the witnesses would summarize their remarks in about five minutes, we would appreciate it. we have senators here who want to have a conversation with you. so let's start with dr. collins. >> well, good afternoon, chairman alexander ranking member murray and distinguished committee members. it's an honor to appear before you to discuss how we can advanced americans' health. earlier this

burwell. this is the case that has been brought on before of millions of americans who have been harmed by the president's unlawful expansion of his unworkable and unaffordable health care law. sometime before the end of june, the court is going to announce if the law passed by congress means what it says or if it means what the president wishes it has said. the law written by democrats in congress written behind closed doors, only authorized insurance subsidies for one group and the president had the i.r.s. pay subsidies to another group. the president gave bureaucrats much more power to control the health care choices and decisions of people who never should have been caught under the law. the supreme court should strike down this alarming overreach by the president. if it does, that will give congress an opportunity to address some of the devastating problems that the health care law has caused. it seems like every week, mr. president, we see another headline about another damaging side eff

burwell skills but this is a nonstarter. and and everyone inside this building and outside this building 14 understand that. i don't think it's a convince department all 30-something cosponsors of the johnson bill also support repealing the affordable care act. but you can't deny that it's working from "the new york times" to "the washington post" to "the wall street journal," people understand that the affordable care act is changing people's lives. 16 million people with insurance. health care costs stabilize for of our lifetimes, quality getting better. the affordable care act works and i hope that our colleagues will come together and no matter the decision in the king v. burwell case to make sure that it continues to work for americans all over this country. thank you mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. flake: i ask unanimous consent that morning business extend until 5:00 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. flake: mr. president?