The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions will please come to order. Secretary Kennedy, thank you for coming before the committee. I've been traveling travel traveling my state a lot and affordability whether it's gasoline, groceries or health care is top of mind
and when patients speak to me how expensive their prescription drugs are, it resonates with them when I say, "Wait a minute, there's middlemen jacking up the price for their own profitability. My constituents patients get that and
they want help." I'll go back to my experience practicing medicine. If the patient has the power, if the patient is the reason for the care and not an excuse for the bill, then prices tend to come down. The question is how do we achieve that? I believe the president is
focused on this and Mr. Secretary, I think you believe this as well. So, I look forward to hearing how this administration's proposed budget makes the patient the one in charge. Now, there's some common sense things we can do. How can we get life-saving drugs to
patients faster and cheaper? Last week, the help committee held a hearing on increasing access to generic and biosimilar drugs, which cost less and allow patients to keep more money in their pockets while still having access to the medicines they need. Another
thing that can lower cost is getting new drugs onto market more rapidly. In February, I released a report as to how to do that. getting faster treatments which lowers R&D cost that contribute to the the research and development costs that if they're higher they contribute
to higher prices while maintaining the gold standard for safety and effectiveness. Many of the ideas discussed in my report and by our witnesses at the hearing last week for both new treatments and generics were included in policies that the administration has proposed in this year's budget. And this is something
that we can work on together. There are other ways to make health insurance and health care more affordable. Last week, I released the MVP agenda, money and value for patients, MVP. To build upon President Trump's efforts to give money to patients rather than insurance companies
to use for their out-of- pocket cost. If paired with price transparency, the patient can shop for the most affordable health care, eliminating unnecessary bureaucracy and eliminating profit that doesn't flow to patients but flows to entities that pad cost in the system for
their own benefit. And that price transparency bill is a bipartisan bill by members of this committee. While we speak of affordability, let's just recognize that if we don't come up with treatments and cures for things like Alzheimer's and dementia and
cancer, then the boomer generation could bankrupt our country for the cost of care for these conditions. And the way to address that is to invest heavily in science and to use that investment effectively. I would argue that includes
taking the resources of the NIH and making them more accessible to researchers at a wide variety of universities so that it is the collective brain power across our nation and not just the brain power at a few concentrated institutions or cities. I
credit Dr. Badachara who came before our committee and was very encouraging regarding his understanding of these issues. Lastly, standing up for patients includes standing up for the most vulnerable. Protecting women from the dangers of
chemical abortion drugs is a step we can take right now to protect life. Frankly, many pro-life Louisianans have been disappointed by the lack of action on this front. We need a willing partner to stand up for life. Mr. Secretary, you
have said that every abortion is a strategy. I would say it's time to stop stalling on the safety study for abortion drugs. It's time to reinstate the in-person safeguards protecting women from abuse and coercion.
I will note there are criminal charges against a woman against a mother in Louisiana and in other jurisdictions, I'm told boyfriends coercing or tricking a pregnant person into taking these pills. All this would be eliminated with the
restoration of the in-person requirement. By the way, this is public record. The young woman, the young victim was Rosalie Marquez. So, uh, and there is a prosecution of the person that gave. If if there was an
in-person requirement reinstated by this administration, the doctor would have said, "Do you want this pill?" And she said, "No, I want my baby." And instead, she was coerced. And that's the tragedy that has resulted. Secretary Kennedy, there's so much this committee and the
president's administration can accomplish. People in Louisiana are struggling. They expect Congress and the administration to do our part as they do their part. Let's meet the moment. Thank you again, Mr. Secretary,
uh, for coming to discuss the proposed HHS budget. And with that, I recognize Senator Sanders for his opening statement. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good to see you again, Secretary Kennedy. Um, let me just respond to the chairman.
A strong majority of the American people believe that it is women who have the right to control their own lives, not government. Uh, and I happen to believe uh that is where we should be going uh as a nation. That's a choice of women, not the
government. It is no secret uh that the American health care system is broken. Every place I go when I speak, I ask people to raise their hands. Conservative areas, progressive areas, people understand that there is something fundamentally
wrong when we are spending twice as much per capita on healthcare as the people of any other nation. And yet 85 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured. We pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. Our life expectancy is significantly lower than
other wealthy nations and for workingclass people it is six years shorter than for wealthy people in this country. System is broken. It is designed to make the insurance companies and the drug companies extremely wealthy
and that is what's happening and ordinary people are being left behind. I would have hoped that we would have an administration that would stand up for average people and say, you know what, let's do what every other major country on earth does.
Guarantee healthcare to all people. Think that's a radical idea. Every other country on earth does it. And they spend substantially less than we do. And yet we are moving in exactly the opposite direction. as a result of the quote unquote big beautiful bill. 15 million
Americans have been thrown off the health care that they need. But that's not the only problem that we have with what Secretary Kennedy and the president are doing. I talk to doctors, as I'm sure everybody on this committee does uh in my own state of Vermont and all over
this country, and doctors are extremely concerned by many of the actions that we're seeing from HHS and the CDC. They are concerned that Secretary Kennedy has directed the Centers for Disease Control to publish false
information on its website suggesting that childhood vaccines cause autism despite the findings of more than 40 scientific studies in seven countries that there is no link between vaccines
and autism. We have seen HHS spread misinformation about the safety and effectiveness of the measles vaccine during the largest measles outbreak in the United States in over 30 years. We have seen HHS remove
the director of the CDC because she refused to rubber stamp the very dangerous and unstantiated vaccine recommendations coming from the agency. We have seen the agency defund promising
vaccine research that will leave us wolffully unprepared. Mr. Chairman, you will remember a couple of years ago we had the leading experts in this country and we asked them we all did do you anticipate another pandemic after co and the answer was unanimously yes. There is
a fear nobody knows when another pandemic will come and we are now woefully unprepared to address that crisis if and when it comes. We have seen CDC and HHS under Secretary Kennedy's leadership.
Uh we have seen now 3,800 people in America have been infected with measles, the worst outbreak in over 30 years. Vaccination rates across the country are falling because parents I think are very confused about what they're hearing from
Washington and children are dying as a result. So right now we are looking at a health care system which is broken and we have leadership in Washington which is making it even worse. What I will chat with you
about when I have my question, Secretary Kennedy, is things that you have written which call in doubt the very existence of the germ theory which is the modern basis of modern medicine.
>> Yeah, let's let's talk about that in a minute. But bottom line is what we would like to see is a broken health care system improved. Most of us believe that health care is a human right, that all people should have healthcare, and that
we need public health policies which keep our kids and all people healthy, not moving us in the other direction. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. Um, we're joined today by the Honorable Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the 26th Secretary of Health and Human
Services. In his role as Secretary, Mr. Kennedy is responsible for overseeing the nation's civilian federal health agencies, which support direct services for over 150 million Americans and keep all Americans safe by supporting sound science and through the regulation of
medical and consumer products. I look forward to hearing from you today, sir. Thank you for joining us. >> Can you hear me? Okay. Chairman Cassidy, ranking members, senators, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be
appear before you today to talk about the president's 2027 budget for HHS. We stand at a generational turning point. Our children are the sickest generation in modern history. And decades of failed policies, captured
agencies, and profit-driven systems caused it. Parents across the country demanded change and we are delivering it. We're ending the era of federal policies that fueled this chronic disease epidemic and replacing them with policies
that put the health of Americans first. President Trump and I are challenging the status quo and the institutions that defend it as we work to make America healthy again. In just 15 months, HHS has delivered
historic wins. We negotiated most favored nation drug prices with 16 of the largest drug companies. So Americans no longer pay more than other people in wealthy countries for the same medications. We're bringing real transparency to
health care pricing so that patients know the cost of care before they receive it. I use the full convening power of the federal government to bring health insurance CEOs to the table to reform prior authorization. And I
convene the 405 biggest tech companies in our country to end information proping and allow American patients access to their health records on their cell phones for the first time in history. for cutting red tape, speeding
decisions, and demanding transparency. We're also cracking down on waste, fraud, and abuse. This year, HHS and USDA issued new dietary guidelines that put real whole food at the center of the American plate.
We flipped the food pyramid upside down and sent a clear message to Americans, eat real food. AHS has also opened the door to partnerships with industry, trade associations, nonprofits, and advocacy
groups. More than 50 medical schools have committed to expand nutrition education from an average of just two hours to 40 hours. Food manufacturers are stepping up to more than 40% of the food industry has committed to phase out
petroleumbased dyes by year end. and many have already eliminated them. In conjunction with these efforts, FDA approved six natural food colorings from fruits and vegetables. Through President Trump's Great American
Recovery Initiative, HHS is matching compassion with action to help Americans break the cycle of addiction. At HHS, we are prioritizing patients with ultra rare diseases and their families and driving faster
access to life-saving treatments. We're restoring gold standard science and integrity across the agency. We're protecting children from sex rejecting procedures that expose them to irreversible harm. We're eliminating
outdated and misleading warning labels on hormone therapies used to treat woman women during menopause. We're strengthening oversight of organ procurement. We're imple implementing operations stork speed to ensure the
safety and quality of infant formula. We're applying that same focus and urgency to rural America. The Rural Health Transformation Fund delivers the largest investment in rural health in our nation's history. $50 billion over
five years to strengthen rural hospitals and ensure Americans can access the care they need no matter where they live. AHS announced more than $135 million investment this month to expand rural residency programs and nutrition
services. The data is clear. When physic physicians train in rural communities, they are far more likely to stay and serve there. The president's budget puts all these priorities in action. It invests in prevention because preventing
disease costs less, delivers better outcomes than treating it. As my uncle, President John F. Kennedy said, progress is a nice word, but change is its motivator and change has its enemies. We see those forces clearly entrenched
interests, defenders of a failing status quo and institutions that put profits ahead of the American people. At resistance underscores the urgency of this moment. We can reverse chronic disease, improve public health, and
lower costs. I stand ready to work with this committee and Congress to seize this opportunity to implement and codify lasting and generational reform in American healthcare for our country, for our children, and for the health of the American people.
Together, we can make America healthy again. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I think you've given a couple of these recently. You hit it right on time. >> I shall begin. Mr. Secretary, as I mentioned in my
opening statements, I'm concerned that one of the Biden administration's pro-abortion policy, which is the removal of the inperson dispensing requirement for chemical abortion drugs, is still in place. And by the way, Senator Sanders objected to
me objecting to that. We're speaking about people ordering drugs and then tricking a woman into taking them or coercing them into taking it. And these are subject to criminal charges in courts right now. We should all be
opposed to that. Secretary Kennedy, why has the department not acted with greater urgency on reinstating the in-person dispensing requirement? >> Uh, Senator Cassidy, I appreciate your comments. I
unfortunately will not be able to talk about that. I I thought that might be the answer, which is frustrating because this has been litigated for years. At some point, we'll need to, but but I thought that might happen. So, moving off the litigation, last month, my colleagues and I asked you to address
unapproved and misbranded chemical abortion drugs coming from international providers bypassing FDA. The first Trump administration worked on the issue, but the problem continues. Why hasn't the department taken steps to stop the
illegal importation and sale of counterfeit and unapproved abortion drugs? We take our responsibility seriously to uh to prosecute people who are selling misbranded drugs.
And I can in talk to my enforcement unit at FDA to uh to figure out why that's not happening to your satisfaction, but as far as I know, we're doing that to the utmost possible. >> That is not the case. uh put it this
way, maybe as much as possible, but that would be no effort whatsoever. And so I say that because however you feel about these issues, illegal and counterfeit drugs being sold and imported should be a common concern. Next, Mr. Secretary, you have talked about restoring trust in
the agency around the issue of immunization and people lost trust during the pandemic, but I think it's safe to say the trust gap has worsened over the last year due to false statements about safety and efficacy of vaccines for
preventable diseases like measles. Now, I am a guy who has seen people die from vaccinereventable diseases. >> I didn't hear you. I am a doctor who has seen people die from vaccinereventable diseases. And when I see outbreaks numbering in the thousands and people
dying once more from vaccinereventable diseases, particularly children, it it seems more than tragic. Now, the CDC director I applaud. You have said in a previous hearing that you did were not involved in her selection, but you agree with President Trump's selection. I've
not met with her yet formally, but I agree as well. She seems to be a qualified person. I did not say that I was not involved in her election. >> I didn't follow. But but but so my question here with the new CDC director,
whomever whoever she or he is, there are currently political appointees at CDC who have worked to undermine trust in immunizations. Will the new director, whoever she is, have the right to make decisions independently of those of
those political appointees andor replace them uh or otherwise reassign them so they cannot continue to actively undermine trust in immunizations. >> Your characterization of the political appointees is wrong
and uh the CDC director has that power. Now, so she will have if she wishes to if she wishes to make a decision independently of them, she shall be allowed to make that decision independently. That's correct. Yes. Okay, that's
pertinent. This summer, we're hosting the World Cup and celebrating America's 250th birthday. Tourists from all over the world will come to the United States. Unfortunately, some of them will bring vaccine preventable diseases like measles and unfortunately our measles
immunization rates have fallen, which means that this increases the risk risk of a measles outbreak in the US. What steps is HHS taking to address the outbreaks that may arise from the World Cup and the folks coming here? >> Uh Mr. Chairman, we've done better at
controlling the measles outbreak than any country in the world. We This is a global outbreak. Uh it started before I came to office. Most of 80% of the children affected are over five years old which means their decision not to
back vaccinate predated my appointment. We have limited that last year to 2200 cases. Mexico had three times that much with onethird of our population. Canada had double that much with 1/8 of our
population. Europe had 127,000 cases the year before. We have a global pandemic. It has nothing to do with me. I wasn't in any of those countries. >> We should not be comparing ourselves. >> We've done a better job at limiting it
than any country in the world. And you can talk to Governor McMaster about that and Governor Abbott about the help that we've given them in Texas. We know how to control the outbreaks. The question was, what steps has the administration taken to track the diseases that would come in potentially through these? You
were pointing out that other countries have outbreaks which increases the likelihood they will bring that here and our immunization rates have fallen below 95%. Unfortunately, I'm out of time on this question. I will yield to Senator Sanders, but I may come back because that question wasn't answered.
>> I tell you, we are now we are laser focused on that. We have booths and testing booths and institutions all over the games. >> Okay, Senator Sanders. >> Thank you, [clears throat] Secretary Kenny. Thanks for being with
us. Um, in your book, The Real Anthony Fouchy. You wrote and I quote, "A doctrinal cannon of the germ theory credits vaccines for the dramatic
declines of infectious diseases disease mortalities in North America and Europe during the 20th century. Most Americans accept this claim as dogma. It will therefore come as a surprise to learn that it is simply untrue.
But despite your assertion in your book, according to a peer-reviewed study in the Lancet led by the World Health Organizations, vaccine has have vaccines have saved the lives of more than 150 million people and reduced infant deaths
by 40% over the past 50 years. So my question is a simple one. Do you still believe that one of the central tenets of the germ theory that vaccines sharply reduce infant mortality is quote unquote simply untrue?
>> What I was saying in that book that first of all the the study you cited is a modeling study sorry a modeling study CDC has actually done a real study that answers that question. And it's called Guyire Gyer
20 are 2000. And it says that the 80% mortality in chronic disease that took place in mortalities from chronic disease that took place in the 20th century that almost none of it was attributable vaccination. It was
attributable to hygiene to uh sewer plants to better water supplies to engineering. I've got oranges. >> A sec. I have to interrupt you because I have other questions. You're entitled to your view. >> That's my view. That's CDC's view.
>> Well, you're entitled to CDC's view. But according to the World Health Organization and scientists all over the world, vaccine have played vaccines have played an enormous role in saving lives. >> I don't contest that. I'm just saying if
you want to talk about what why disease mortalities disappeared in the 20th century, it was not vaccines. >> Well, you are in a minority of >> I'm just talking. >> All right. I got other questions. One second. Science is >> Secretary Kennedy, you have talked
about, I think correctly, the fact that a lot of our kids are eating ultrarocessed food, foods high in sugar. Uh we have as you know uh an epidemic in obesity in this country. We spent zillions of dollars dealing with
diabetes caused by obesity. Uh I believe that we should follow countries like Chile, Mexico, and put strong warning labels on products that will tell show parents uh about the nature of the food
uh their kids are uh eating. Uh so my question to you is how long will it take before uh your agency puts strong warning labels on unhealthy food and beverages? Early in April,
we did our final u regulations of finally having a definition for what ultrarocessed food is. That is now in the inter agency process. We have no control over what happens there with the other agencies. As soon as it comes back to us, we're going to do the labeling.
>> All right. Let me ask you this. Uh, President Trump's nominee for surgeon general Casey Means told this committee that she agreed with me that junk food ads in the United States should be banned from TV. What do you think? Do
you agree with her? >> I would support that. Good. In other words, what we are seeing now is these big food industry companies spending huge amounts of money telling kids to eat crap. And I think it would make a lot of
sense if we banned those ads from TV. I'm hearing you saying that you agree with me on that. >> The only hesitation I was was we um we tried to do a smoking ban on TV and the tobacco companies voluntarily came to the table. So, which was a good
thing. And I think the same uh [clears throat] the same arguments apply for junk food or probably even worse for Americans than smoking. >> Good. Well, Art, I would hope you take a leadership role in making it clear that we should get these ads which you know just entice kids dick kids to really bad
food off the air. All right. Good. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Senator Paul, >> Senator Kenny, thanks for appearing. I think uh Senator Sanders makes a great point on obesity and type two diabetes and you know replacing ads or warning
people that food is bad would be one thing, but one thing we could do immediately would be having the taxpayer quit subsidizing bad food. So soda infused with sugar, uh chips, dips, Twinkies, dingdongs, donuts, bags of
candy, we should agree. And I can't understand, I've had this bill for a couple years. We need to get somebody across the aisle that cares about nutrition enough to say we shouldn't subsidize bad things. And one thing I think you have done is actually directed the states and given states waiverss to try to do this. Uh but we need to codify
that. And I won't ask your question on this. I just hope that the administration will think about supporting the bill and let letting other Republicans know that you will support it if it comes through. My question is this though, because I think there's there's agreement to a lot of problems, but we disagree on solutions.
we agree with the problem of drug high drug prices. It's a problem. Um some people really on both sides say, "Well, if we just publish the price, the problem will go away." I'm one who doesn't believe that at all because I think most prices are fixed and most consumers really don't care about the
prices. Why the prices are high. Now, why don't they care about the price? Because they don't pay it. You know, it's either fixed through their insurance company, it's fixed through Medicare, it's fixed through Medicaid. Almost all the prices are fixed. The only people who actually pay the price of the drugs and care about the price of drugs are people who have a high
deductible and have an HSA. So, there are a couple things we could do that would transform the drug pricing world and the insurance world um that cost nothing. Cost nothing to the taxpayer. Only about 10% of people have an HSA. Why? Because the government rules say
your insurance product doesn't is not eligible for an HSA. I'd make everybody eligible for an HSA. I'd let your health savings account pay for your premium and your deductible. I'd let your HSA pay for healthy things, gym membership, diet program, all kinds of stuff that could
be for better health. Let everybody have an HSA, raise the limits. I would also let people negotiate. What happens is if I go to the store and want to negotiate over the price, nobody cares. But if I joined a co-op like Costco or Amazon
through an association health plan, they could bid for my insurance. Costco has 44 million members. You think they're going to have more leverage than me and my five employees? So, in the first Trump administration, uh, Senator, uh, President Trump did an executive order on this. We have legislation to do this,
and we're talking to people in the administration, but we'd appreciate help on letting people join a co-op or an association plan regardless of their employment. Right now, it has to be you have to all be carpenters, you have to all be farmers or cattlemen. We think anybody that, you know, belongs to
Costco or Amazon, let them be a purchaser of insurance by loosening up the laws and that would work. So, I'd appreciate your idea on legalizing increasing HSAs and then legalizing the concept of letting people buy insurance or drugs through like a large co-op
across state lines. And wouldn't it be great if we took the billions of dollars that we're giving to the insurance industry, which increased its share value by a,000% after the passage of
Obamacare. Wouldn't it be better if we took that money and gave it to people to buy their own HSAs and let which gives them valuebased care and then let them actually participate in a market that will drive down prices.
The only reason I would differ on that because I'm not sure how you're talking about taking the money from the insurance companies, but I'd be for the idea that the insurance companies would get less of the take if we expanded HSAs and you were negotiating directly. >> Another way to put it, Senator. Well, and then the money would be more
directed towards the individual and the individual would be able to use it. The other thing about it that people don't think through is they say only rich people have HSAs. Well, let's say only 10 or 20% of the people had HSAs because they bid on the prices. It brings down the price for everybody. And when you have innovations in the marketplace,
rich people do get them before the rest of us get them. But it always drives the price down as it spreads to the rest of the marketplace. But I think there are things we could do and would be open to. and the the thing on restricting bad foods from being subsidized and then the idea of negotiating as a cop neither one
of these costs money or even saves money but ultimately would give a lot more power to the consumer. I would just add that uh 50% of the states have now at our request applied for waiverss uh so that they can
get Sandies soda and candies off of SNAP. We're paying for the poorest kids, 63 million poorest kids in this country to get diabetes and then we're treating 78% of them with Medicaid afterwards. So we're paying at both ends. It makes no sense. And once we finalize the
ultrarocessed food definition, we can ask the states to to start adding that to their SNAP waiverss. >> I agree completely. And if I think if you did that and if we did that across the United States, it could be the most important thing we do for the health of Americans and particularly for poor kids
that we've ever done in our history. We have to get beyond this. Oh, everybody has a right to a bag of candy. No, we need to have healthy foods. There's lots of other food that you can buy, but we should restrict it from the unhealthy things. And I appreciate your efforts on this. >> Senator Kaine,
>> thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Secretary. Secretary Kennedy, who at HHS is responsible for monitoring whether health facilities like hospitals are closing as a result of changes that were included in the reconciliation bill
last summer. >> The same the same guy who was responsible for monitoring the closers of hospitals due to the ACA regulations. >> Yeah. Who who is it and what department is that?
>> That would be Dr. Oz. So that that right now Dr. Oz is responsible for monitoring those closures. >> He's ultimately responsible, right? Yeah. So, but I mean do you have anybody in HHS like in the secretary's office that is monitoring to see what's
happening with the closures of facilities since the reconciliation? >> We have a CMS council but that would be within CMS. >> Okay. Because I want to bring to the attention of my colleagues and to the secretary's office closures in Virginia
because of the reconciliation bill. The bill was passed um right at the beginning of July 2025. Less than two months later on September 4th, Augusta Medical Group, which is located in Fischersville, Virginia, rural Shannidora County, announced the
closure of three clinics, two rural primary care clinics and one urgent care clinic. And in their announcement, Augusta Health said the consolidation is part of Augusta Health's ongoing response to the one big beautiful bill act and the resulting realities for
healthc care delivery. Then on December 19th, 2025, Sentra announced its decision to discontin all OBGYn services at their Sentra Southside Community Hospital in Farmville, which is in rural Southside, Virginia. And the
announcement, Sentra said, quote, "Centra, like other rural healthc care providers, must adapt to significant financial and operational challenges, including recently enacted reductions in federal healthcare funding. And then just in the last two weeks, Valley
Health, which provides health care in the northern Shannondoa Valley in and around Winchester, announced it was making significant changes across its hospital system, including closing an observation unit that serves patients too sick for discharge. In the
announcement, the systems president said it quote has become more urgent following the adoption of the House Resolution One, which will reduce Valley Health's funding by over $80 million annually. Mr. Chair, I'd like to introduce into the record these
announcements and press articles about the closures of facilities in Virginia without the bill. >> Um, these are not hypothetical losses. the the Medicaid adjustments from last year were actually not scheduled to
actually be implemented for a while, but these institutions look at the Medicaid percentage of their population and the Medicaid changes and they realize they just can't make it work. And all of these closures in Virginia, uh the OBGYn ward in Farmville, so you have to travel
a lot farther to have kids, primary health clinics, all of them are in rural Virginia. And overall, the Virginia Hospital Association indicates that they'll lose $34 billion over 10 years as a result of the OBBA. Um, I now that
I know that CMS should focus on that or Dr. Oz should focus on that, I'll direct my questions that way. But I think it's important for everybody in this room to know if these closures in rural Virginia are happening even before the Medicaid
changes get implemented, we're going to see an awful lot more of them. Can I reply, please? >> First of all, Senator, I think it's tra it's an absolute tragedy to lose those hospitals. I know what that does to our rural areas from touring the country
that you're not just denying people access to health care, but it is an economic driver for those communities. It's the largest employer in many cases, the highest pay, and businesses will never move there once that facility closed. So, we're doing everything in
our power. This is not a problem that was created by the Trump administration, the one big beautiful bill, which hasn't even gone into place yet. >> Yeah. But can I just say >> because 20 of those hospitals the past 10 years. >> Yeah. Not not in Virginia. Interestingly enough, not in Virginia. And all three
of these cited the reconciliation bill as the reason for the closures. I'm glad you walked through the challenges because you're right. It's not just the loss of patient care. It's also the loss of jobs, health care jobs. And as you point out, once the hospital closes,
it's really difficult for businesses to move into these communities because they realize we can't move because there's no healthcare available. So, I I like the fact that you connect all the dots in this, and I'm just urging my colleagues as these Medicaid cuts actually get implemented, I think these closures are
going to become even more dramatic and need this committee's attention. I yield back, Mr. Chair, Senator, and Dr. Marshall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to remind everybody that um Medicaid spending is going to be going up hundreds of billions of dollars over the next uh
several years. I I think the Trump administration has done more for rural health care and the rural economy than any administration. Mr. Secretary, maybe you can just talk a little bit about the monies. I mean, real monies, a billion dollars in the Medicaid uh range, an
extra billion dollars we've given to Kansas and another $220 million to the rural health transformation fund. Is the what has the Trump administration done to help fund rural health care? >> Well, first of all, I you know, one of the Democratic talking points is that
we've cut Medicaid by a trillion dollars, but CBO disagrees with that. CB the recent CBO report from two weeks ago says that Medicaid will raise will raise from about 600 billion to 900 billion by
2036 a 47% increase. Only in Washington is that considered a cut. Second of all, the president is making the biggest investment in rural health of any administration in history. The rural health transformation fund if gives $50
billion. And just to put that in context, over five years, Medicaid, which everybody's which we've just heard is is closing hospitals, >> Medicaid only gives 7% of its funding to rural hospitals. It's about 20 billion a
year. We are now increasing that influx of federal funds by 50% per year, >> 10 extra billion dollars a year. This gives those hospitals a chance to restructure their to to rebuild their infrastructure
to install teleaalth to remodel themselves. As you've pointed out, a hospital a hospital cannot exist. The business model is failed for a lot of those hospitals. Again, 1.6 patients a day. You cannot have an overnight
hospital and have a business model that works. We need to have another model and we need to help them transition to that and that's one of the things that the Rural Health Transformation Fund will do. >> Yeah. Thanks, Secretary Kennedy. Let's talk about something near and dear to our hearts is is you were committed to
make America healthy again and very specifically targeting children and their health. Just tell me some of the things that you've done and where are we going briefly. What's what's the goals for the next year to help make America healthy again? Well, I think thank you for that question, Senator. I think the
mo, you know, the probably the most impactful thing that we've done is change the food pyramid. The food pyramid was written by food industry lobbyists for 50 years. And it was it reflected the merkantile impulses of
those companies that put Froot Loops at the top of the food pyramid. We have now done a science-based guideline. The best nutritionists in our country from the biggest universities came together for almost a year in a science-based guidance and that guy that emphasized
protein, vegetables, whole grains that will now revolutionize the dietary culture in this country because we're changing the subsidy program. So we give $45 million just from USDA a day to food subsidies
to the Wix program, to school lunches, to the Indian Alice Services, to SNAP and all these other programs and they will now change to align with the dietary guidelines. The military is now
changing the uh the food on all of its bases. And so we're going to see massive changes across the culture and we're going to see more availability of this food and I can explain why that'll happen but I think that's the most important thing getting rid of the grass
standards which we've had bipartisan support on there on that Senator Saunders has been a leader on that issue. We are actually doing it now. We have final regulations again in the inter agency process on grass right now.
We're getting rid of food dyes. We're reforming uh through operation stork speed infant formula. We're redoing the nutrients. Uh making sure to to test for all the contaminants we got. >> If I could just get one more one more question. So, thank you. And I do
commend you. You've done your job. You guys have done great work with uh transparency with prior authorization. You're starting to talk about grass. But I think we need to look in a mirror. And so many of my colleagues are, you know, saying what have you done or not? what have you done? But we have bills right before us. Our our transparency, our
price tag bills, 18 bipartisan co-sponsors, our prior authorization bill, 68 co-sponsors. Let's get those across the finish line. Grass legislation, our MA package. We just released a large HSA package of bills. All of these would drive down the cost
of health care, codifying much what you have done as well. But Congress needs to we need to do our job, too. And uh quit quit treading water up here. >> Thank you, Mr. Senator Marshall. >> Mr. Secretary, before I go to Senator
Hass, uh what was the CDC paper you said attributed improvements and longevity to p to sewer treatment for example, not vaccines? I'm looking for that on chat GPT and it says it doesn't exist. So what is that author? It's >> called Guyire. The lead author is
Guyire. G U E R. There's another one that came out in 1977 that was a required reading in virtually every medical school that says the same thing. It actually >> Who's the author of that one? >> That one was called McKinley and McKinley. >> McKinley and McKinley. Um that one is
not CDC according to >> it's not the guy is CDC and John's Hopkins. >> Senator Hassid. >> Well, thanks Mr. Chair and good to see you again, Secretary Kennedy. Um, look, I agree with you that all Americans should have access to healthy food.
However, President Trump has made it far harder for families to afford their groceries. Last year, the typical family paid hundreds of dollars more than they did the previous year on groceries such as fresh vegetables, fresh fruit, meat, coffee, and dairy. And while a few items
such as eggs have gotten cheaper this year, other staples like beef continue to reach historic highs under President Trump. Do these high grocery prices make it easier or harder for families to eat fresh, healthy foods? >> I would say that beef has dropped by 1%
in the last quarter. >> I know. Look, beef prices are up 20%. Banana prices are up nearly 7% since President Trump took office. Cheese prices are up 6%. So again, when groceries get more expensive, easier or harder for families to afford the very healthy foods that you want them to eat?
Well, there's [clears throat] also you can eat beef, you can eat poultry, you can eat fish, and beef is the price of beef is dictated by the size of the herd. The herd dropped at the lowest. >> If it's Look, you're you're not answering, but obviously if the food is more expensive, >> President Trump for something that he
didn't do. >> Well, let's let's take a look at this image. Did you post this image in 2024 about grocery prices being too high? >> I don't recall. >> Well, you did post it. That that that's your that's your handle up there. And it's a and I agree that grocery prices
were too high in 2024, but under President Trump, they have skyrocketed even further. So now, uh, let's go to an updated version of this post. Um, will you post this, the most expensive vehicle? >> Oh, because President Trump actually
brought down grocery costs for most of his term. I think there's been a raise recently in the price of everything. Look, um, families are facing historic prices at the register. You don't need to be a Secretary of
Health and Human Services to know that. You don't need to be a United States senator to know that. The people in New Hampshire, the people across this country know that because they go to grocery stores today. And the fact that you don't e you either don't know it or you don't want to admit it just shows how out of touch you and the Trump
administration are. Now, let's go to another issue. Earlier this year, President Trump signed an executive order to increase production of the pesticide glyphosate, commonly known as Roundup, and to grant immunity from liability to the company that makes it.
You've said that glyphosate causes cancer. You told Senator Shots yesterday that you still believe that glyphosate causes cancer and you expressed displeasure about the president's glyphosate order and that the pres and
you also told Senator Shots that the president's reasoning had to do with national security. So does President Trump's executive order does his decision mean that more Americans are likely to be exposed to this chemical and get cancer? No, it doesn't because
it doesn't increase the use of glyphosate. We're the president has invested more in trying to transition off of glyphosate than any other president. >> Exactly. When when and how did he do that? He he did an executive order that
says increase the production of it for both military for weapons and for as herbicides. and he granted immunity to the huge corporation that produces this, a corporation that I believe you once sued and got recovery from because
this chemical caused cancer. So, >> does President Trump's decision mean >> that if there's more of this chemical, there's going to be more cancer? Yes or no? And it's not increasing production. It's increasing domestic production to
displace the Chinese production because 97% of our corn crop is dependent on glyphosate. 98% of our soy crop and 100% of >> But yet here's the thing. When you were running to get the MA vote, you told people you would stand up to
chemical companies. you would take carcinogens out of our out of our uh agricultural system. You said that you would get these chemicals out of foods. That's what you said you would do to make America healthy again. And yet when push comes to shove and a big
corporation, I mean, talk about the status quo here. It's bear Monsanto or something like that. It's the big company. And when the president of the United States rather than trying to work to find alternatives, rather than try to get him to limit that executive order, you just stood down instead of standing
up. Thank you, Mr. >> You asked what President Trump has done. He's given me $200 million to help get America off of glyphosate. >> Well, I would look forward to finding out who is doing the research and the science. And are you working and are you working with the EPA? >> This problem. You guys helped create
this problem over the past 30 years. and you just told the big corporation that they don't even have liability for it anymore. >> He is dealing with a national security vulnerability where the Chinese could shut off our food supply in a single day. >> So before situation, >> Mr. Mr. Chair, Mr. Chair, I'm going to
I'm going to turn I'm going to yield my time, but I'm just going to say this. You have now been changing your testimony over time about this. >> Not changed my You said earlier you were displeased with this. You tried to talk the president out of it. He did. >> And now And now you're just fully supportive of a huge corporation no
liability. Thank you. >> I sue that corporation and got 11 billion dollars from him and it put him on the edge of bankruptcy. >> Right. And now you're just folding right in front of him. Thank you, Senator Tubberville. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thanks. >> Microphone on.
>> Is your microphone on? >> Pardon? >> Your microphone? >> Yeah, it should be on. Is it on? Yeah, my lights on. Is it working? Good. Uh, thank you. Seven Seven hearings in the last few weeks. My god. Can we not let
you can we one week? Can we not let you do your job? I mean, we don't do much up here, so we might as well let you work. But I I'd like to address something on the on the food prices. I'm on the egg committee. That's where this ought to be. Biden administration put 150,000
farms out of business when they were in when they were in uh in charge. 150,000. We're not going to have any damn food if we don't watch it. And we better back our farmers and do everything we possibly can because that trash that we get out of Brazil and Asia that we're
eating ain't maja. I promise you that. So, thank you for what you're doing. You're a hero in my state because the kids are starting to understand the food pyramid and you have pushed it and you made it work. Uh again, I came from a a
uh former business that tried to eat right with supplements and working out and all those, but it has caught fire and thank you for what you're doing and continue to do what you're doing and uh uh we'll make progress in this. One thing I want to ask you is I I see where
in our country we have 10,000 ingredients that we can use in food, but in Europe they only use four or 500 food ingredients. Could you explain that? Yeah, and thank you for that, coach. And this is something again uh Senator Sanders has shown leadership on.
Congress has talked about this many years. I actually got it done. It's the grass standards generally recognized as safe. It's a loophole that was added in 1948, the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act to exclude from the necessity of testing
foods that were traditionally used like vinegar, salts, wheat, etc. The food industry because FDA has been captured for 50 years, hijacked that and put every new lab created monstrosity through so it doesn't have to be tested.
We have 10,000 ingredients in our country. We don't FDA doesn't even know what they are. We have no list of them anywhere. None of them have been adequately tested and um and they have 400 in Europe and we're trying to ch close that loophole
now. So that and then go back and we've already have the 38 mo worst of those chemicals under review and we're going to get rid of the bad ones one at a time. >> Thank you. I'm I'm I'm going to say something about Senator Kaine earlier
talked about Medicare, Medicare, Medicaid, you know, in in my state. Uh it's going to be a lot like his state. Uh you know, the wage index is killing us. Absolutely. And we but we can only change it through Congress. You know, it's been that way for 40 years. And we
struggle to keep our hospitals open. It's simple fact that we're considered a low wage state. But don't you think things change in a 40-year period? We've really grown. Uh it do you agree that Congress needs to fix this? >> They absolutely need to fix it. You
know, Sheldon White House was here the last hearing talking about people in his state, doctors in his state get 20% more less than a doctor right across the border in Massachusetts or Connecticut. But the rural areas are the areas that
are suffering the worst. I can't change it because the Social Security Act and but but we need to change it or we're going to lose all these rural hospitals. >> Thank you. And and food dyes, petroleum based synthetic food dies. Thank you for what you're doing. Thank you. And it's
uh we just need to keep that momentum going. It's it's so important. There's no reason we should be using that those dyes in our food. And I just say a few words about psychedelic treatments for PTSD. Thank you and President Trump for
what you're doing for veterans. Um, it's worked. It's worked in our state and thank you for agreeing to look into it and and make it happen more and more. Could you say something about psychedelics? >> Well, the chair of the um the department
of of John's Hopkins that that it became I became specifically is the most promising treatment for depression and PTSD that anybody's ever seen. And right now, veterans
who have served this country, who have come back from deployment with severe PTSD and who are killing themselves 23 a day, they're having to go down to Mexico to get this treatment. We know, we don't know much about doses. We don't know
much about screening. We don't know much about the protocols. We need to get this promising treatment here. We need to do the proper studies and make it available to these vets and we're doing that right away. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> Senator Blunt Rochester. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The United States first became measles free over 25 years ago, a quarter of a century. We have maintained that status in every
year since until you became secretary. A simple yes or no. Does the president know there is a historic measel surge occurring nationwide? >> You want me to answer the question? >> It's just a very simple question. >> Grand stand. >> You're going to get your opportunity.
>> You want a grand stand? >> I can answer that question. I didn't cause it started before I came in. >> Sir, I'm opportunity to answer the question. Mr. Chairman, can I get my time back from this this rudeness?
Mr. Chairman, >> I'm sorry. >> I was asking, can I get my time back from him interrupting? >> Yes. >> A simple yes or no question. >> Does the president know there is a historic measel surge occurring nationwide? >> I'm sure he does.
>> You're sure he does? Remarkably, Ralph Abraham, your former CDC principal deputy director, said that losing our measles free status is not really significant and just the cost of doing business with our borders.
Another simple yes or no. Does the president think this is not a significant issue? >> Losing our measles elimination status. >> Yes. Well, most of the countries are losing that. >> Does he think it's a significant problem?
>> Does he think it's a good development that's happening all over the world? >> Have you talked to him about it? >> About measles, >> about the outbreaks, about the crisis in this country? >> Okay. So, yes or no, he does know it's a problem.
>> Yes. According to the Washington Post, the president makes public statements about his plans for the new Golden Ballroom at a pace that rivals and even exceeds the mentions of some major policy priorities. He talks publicly about the ballroom one out of every
three days. >> And so I have a question. Do you know how many times the president has spoken about the measles epidemic? >> I don't count that. I don't we don't keep track of that data at the CDC yet. So, as head of our nation's head health
agency, have you advised the president to sound the alarm and encourage Americans to obtain the measles vaccine? >> Am I going to get a question to a chance to answer this or you're just >> That was a question for you. >> Excuse me.
>> The question was, have you alerted the president to sound the alarm? You're the head of HHS, the leading health agency in our country. >> That's my job and we do it. So, yes or no? >> It's my job, not the president's job. And I do my job.
>> I'm I'm concerned about it. I've watched a lot of these hearings. You've blamed the menite menites. You blame immigrants. You blame the globe. We've been part of the globe and still we are in this situation. Do you take global epidemic?
>> Do you take any responsibility in your role for the situation that we are in with this measles epidemic? >> As I said, the measles epidemic began before I came into office. The people >> I'm going to take that as a no. The Pan-American Health Organization was
scheduled to review our measles-free status on April 13th. Did your department request to delay this independent international review of our measles elimination status to November after the election? >> No. So, you did not request it. You had no
knowledge of the request. You had no communication with the White House. Thank you. It's It's awfully convenient that we're postponing it until after November when people won't have the opportunity to know our measel status. I would just say this. Um
there has been a lot in terms of polling on trust. You've talked a lot about trust. The people don't trust you. And I would uh ask what is different from all these other years you are. If the American people don't trust you,
which most of the polls show, I don't know why the president should trust you either. I yield back. >> Senator Macowski. >> Mr. Chairman, thank you. Secretary, welcome back to the committee. Um, you and I have had many opportunities to
talk about uh uh IHS funding and I appreciate uh your trip to to Alaska last year very targeted on what we are doing uh with regards to health care for um uh Alaskan natives as well as American Indians, Native Hawaiians. Um
so I appreciate uh what we're seeing with the advanced appropriations for IHS in in the budget. uh this really helps with uh providing certainty to our tribal health systems. So um that's a good uh another good is the billion
dollar increase including critical investments in IHS health IT and the hospital oversight. So good there. Uh where where I do have concerns is the reduction that we're seeing in the sanitation facilities construction account. This is an 87%
uh cut and you have had an opportunity on your visits to Alaska to see what it means when you have communities that don't have uh running water, that don't have clean drinking water, that don't have um uh sanitation facilities and are
using honey buckets. So, I we we've made some good headway under the infrastructure uh law, but that was intended to supplement, not supplant our annual appropriations. So, I just want to make sure that uh you're you are
committing on behalf of your folks within IHS to to maintain a key um uh a key eye on funding for tribal sanitation facilities construction. We're going to work I'm certainly going to work on on
my side on the appropriations committee, but also as chairman of the Indian affairs to make sure that we don't go backwards on on these important investments in in basic sanitation for people in remote areas. >> Absolutely. If that if that you know we
had to get cuts across the department, IHS was protected from those cuts. >> They received a billion dollars for infrastructure. Nobody else, I don't know, across the government has received that except maybe the defense department. I've made more visits to
Indian country than any HHS secretary in history. And [clears throat] uh if you know we don't like to make any of these cuts, it's up to Congress ultimately. If you appropriate the money, I of course will spend it. >> Well, and know that we want to work with
you to make wise investments. But again, when we think about those areas where we see just really dispiriting um health outcomes in in rural areas, so much of it can be traced back to they don't have access to basic clean water and
sanitation. So, we want to work with you on that. Uh last year, I had a chance to raise with you uh the lie he program, the low-income home energy assistance program. Uh we have had a pretty tough winter. I was in Fairbanks over the weekend and I was reminded that they had
152 consecutive days of temperatures below zero. 152 is a long time to be cold. And so this is where I look at lie heap and it's not just kind of a nice to have but for so many it was it was very
imperative. So I'm worried again that um that lie heap funding is not made a priority. last April uh you eliminated all staff assigned to administer lie heap. Um it's my understanding now that responsibility for administering the
entire program rests with a single staff member. I really hope that that is not accurate but uh we need to know that not only uh these levels of important support are going to continue um but that there is adequate staffing to help
uh address this. And I think particularly it's not just cold winters that we faced, but but now all of our families are seeing increased prices when it comes to to home heating fuel. Uh so many of our communities, our
diesel-powered uh communities and the the price of diesel is going to be shockingly high when that first spring barge comes in in June. So I'm just asking for your your help once again. And I I know you understand the priority of lie he but I'm putting it back on your radar
>> and I spent all 90% of the money that I could spend. We've now gotten the last 10% released and we will spend that. So we have adequate staffing to do that and you know how I feel about that program. >> Well, again, I'm just putting it back on
your radar. Uh, I've got 20 seconds to to just raise my concerns about um the the programs focused on domestic violence and sexual assault program. You have um combined into a single program
under the Administration for Healthy America. This is the Delta program and the RPE, the rape prevention education. I'm concerned that uh the programs aren't interchangeable. They serve distinct populations, different models administered through fundamentally different structures. But I'm I'm
concerned that we're looking at nearly half the funding for programs that have a really proven record of improving public safety, reducing crime, and pro protecting victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. So again, I know it's a priority of yours, certainly a priority of mine that we have effective
tools when we're talking about prevention of domestic and sexual violence. >> Thank you, Senator. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. And and just speaking as a doctor, just to close the conversation, thank you for giving Guyire's name. I've looked up the article. The quote is,
"Thus vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in mortality seen in the first half of last century. The reductions in vaccine preventable diseases, however, are impressive. I'll condense. In the early 1920s there were about 500 there about a half a million
annual cases before the introduction of vaccine of the measles vaccine in the 60s because of vaccines these deaths have been virtually eliminated. So that's the complete context >> I was talking about mortality senator >> that's what they're saying the deaths have been virtually eliminated. Okay. Um
Senator Baldwin. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you uh Mr. Secretary for being here to answer our questions in your marathon. uh uh hearing schedule here. Um Mr. Secretary, uh premiums for working families who
purchase their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces have uh in many cases doubled, tripled, even quadrupled this year because the administration and Republicans in Congress refused to extend enhanced
premium tax credits. with the higher costs, people are literally choosing between rent, groceries, gas, and uh their health insurance. Um, and please, if you don't know the answer, be feel free to say this, but I'm I'm wondering
how closely you're watching this, Secretary Kennedy, the tax cut expired in December. Do you know how many Americans have lost their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace this year? I know that 87%
of the the advanced tax credits are still there. So 87% of the people who are on Obamacare are still getting their insurance for under $96 a year. 54% >> inquiring, do you know how many people have lost their health insurance as a
consequence? >> Well, it would be the top 13% then. >> Okay, the answer is 1.3 million. And I wouldn't expect you to know Wisconsin figures, but uh it's 22,000 in the state of Wisconsin. And uh another two million
were forced to buy plans with higher deductibles to stay insured. Um which may cost them more money in out of pocket costs uh in the long run. Um, do you know what percentage of
individuals were unable to pay their health insurance premiums on the Affordable Care Act um marketplace in the month of January after the enhanced premium tax credits expired?
>> No, I mean I know that the Democrats when they control both >> So, you don't know. I I'll just I'll just uh furnish that information. According to uh Wall Street Journal reporting, they indicated that about 14% of enrolles, which is a significant
increase from past years, um uh lost their uh or were not were unable to pay their January health insurance premiums. In some states, um it was up to a quarter of all enroles, a shocking
figure. Um, do you know how much overall enrollment is expected to decline? >> No, I know that the last time we looked at it, it was flat except for the 1.5 million people who were
um who were cheating. So 1.5 million who were committing fraud. If you deduct that number, the enrollment was flapping. I don't know how it will be in >> Right. I'm talking about the Affordable Care Act uh marketplace uh participation. Overall enrollment is
expected to decline by up to 26%. Um and and this is likely going to be in part healthier enrolles who choose not to pay. Um raising the likelihood uh that because
sicker or unhealthier enrolles will continue to figure out a way to keep their insurance that there'll be even higher premiums for individuals who need uh coverage. Um uh your department has also proposed
significant changes to the Affordable Care Act plans for 2027 which would increase out-ofpocket costs in in introduce more junk insurance and raise deductibles for working families.
The rule also adds millions of hours in red tape paperwork to the enrollment process. Do you know how many Americans your department estimates would lose their health coverage under your proposed rule?
>> I think it's um you [snorts] under under the ACA rule. >> Yeah. >> Um I can't tell you the exact number. >> Two million uh Americans, Mr. Secretary. And that would be on top. That's why
it's important to do low premium plans that give people some kind of access to better health insurance at lower costs. >> So 2 million that would lose their health insurance due to the uh rules that you're proposing. And that would be
on top of the 15 million Americans projected to lose coverage thanks to the uh uh provisions in the big ugly bill and the combination of that with the ending of the enhanced premium tax
credits. Now yesterday uh uh in our um labor H subcommittee hearing secretary >> at the wheel you're over your time. I will submit these uh for the I in in association with the question that I
could not answer. I did want to have a submission for the record. I would ask unanimous consent and then I will uh include a reference to those two documents in my question that I submit for the record. >> Thank you, Senator. >> Thank you, >> Secretary. Thank you so much for taking
time to be here. We appreciate it. Um, and thank you, Chairman Cassidy, for for holding this hearing this afternoon. I I think it's great that you're >> Sure. better. >> I think it's great that you're here and taking on the tough questions and
showing the American people how you're thinking outside the box and bucking up against the status quo to try and change the really tragic and sad trajectory we're on in terms of health in this country. Um, takes a lot of guts to do that and we appreciate it. And I think talking about where you're wanting to
put resources is always a good thing. So, thank you very much. I think the most important thing uh that you are doing is is putting in the work, rolling up your sleeves, and trying to to reverse course on some of the horrible statistics that quite frankly American is paying
attention to more now than they ever have. And I think that has a lot to do with you at the helm. Um 30% of our population is obese. We rank highest overall in cancer burden. And we're seeing cancer rates skyrocketing, especially among our youth. We have over
half a million cases of people with Alzheimer's. That's expected go up to a million in the next few years. Um, in my state and certainly across the country, we suffer severely, people suffer severely from the oppression of chronic
disease. And no one really wanted to look at the root cause of that critically uh within government until you started talking about it. You you took the helm and started fostering, allowing, promoting
scientific debate, true debate. And that's important in this country. I think during the co years that became very apparent. Uh you said it best in your testimony. nutrition is the bedrock
of health. As a mom that truly wants to make America healthy again, I couldn't agree more. And I'm glad that we're having these hearings. And I wasn't surprised when you chose Miami, Florida as the place where you announced that you were going to engage hospitals and
require that they actually serve nutritious food. I will never forget the time I was in the hospital with um one of my parents and uh they came in and I was asking what they should eat, what they shouldn't eat of the doctor and they looked at the the plate of food and
they're like none of this, >> none of this. And that's exactly why we were in the hospital. I thought that was very strange. Um but so many Fidians end up in the hospital because they've had a lifelong diet of ultrarocessed polluted food. And so, how can we hope to heal people in a medical setting when the
food we're serving them is nutrient deficient, infused with microlastics, pumped full of added sugar, artificial dyes? We know that so much of this can contribute to weakening the immune system can contribute to cancer. Um, so many of
our schools aren't even serving food that meets the highest standard. Certainly, what you would call, I guess, the MA standards. um anywhere between 30 and 60% of a child's nutrition comes from school meals. So, we have to address that. We all want our children eating healthy, nutritious meals, and
certainly for their long-term lifetime health, that's going to be important. Prior to your swearing in, the overwhelming majority of medical students received no nutrition education. None. That's insane. That is insane when
you're looking at these this chronic disease and the rates that we're facing. Less than 1% of lecture hours in medical schools were dedicated to this fundamental part of health. Just last month, you secured historic agreements with well over 50 of the top medical schools in America to require
comprehensive nutrition education, giving our future health care providers the tools necessary to attack chronic disease at the most fundamental level. I'm so proud six Florida schools were part of this agreement and they are very excited that HHS has invested $5 million
to support the integration of this curriculum. So all in all before you came along and and thought to do these things and pushed for these things we expected to keep working within the status quo and expecting our
chronic disease rates to change. So, thank goodness you came along. Florida wants to be ground zero for the fight for nutrition. Uh, I know our moms want that. I'm part of that caucus. Uh, and you and your team have grabbed the bull by the horns. You've partners with
industry. You're standing strong for our kids and for Americans. How transformative do you think that HHS's new nutrition guidelines combined with new nutrition education requirements for medical students will be for America? You know, 80% of young
doctors today say that they feel um inadequate to offer nutritional advice. And you have most of our 80% of our or 90% of our health care costs are chronic
disease that are diet induced. Oh, upwards of 70% of type 2 diabetes can be cured just by changing diet or vastly improved. And a doctor should know that that there's other things other than the
pharmacopia to turn to that you can have dietary changes and lifestyle changes that save your life without getting addicted to a lifetime of pharmaceutical interventions. >> I see that I have blown past my time. So, thank you very much, Secretary
The information of senators will take a short break at 3:30. At that point, I'll ask our guests in the audience to remain seated until the secretary steps out, but that'll be at the bottom of the hour. And with that, Senator Murray. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Secretary Kennedy. I uh you were before
appropriations yesterday and I asked you about the insanely bloated military budget that we are seeing from the White House this year. At the same time, the president isn't doing anything to invest in our health care here at home. And now we have learned he's not not even investing in our troops health.
Secretary Higsth announced that the US military will no longer require American troops to get the flu vaccine. My own colleague, Senator Wicker, called it a mistake and pointed to his own experience, noting, quote, I dutifully
took my flu shot every year. as a whole, it made for a healthier and flufree force. Secretary Kennedy, is CDC or any agency at HHS ready and able to detect or monitor localized flu outbreaks in
our military as a result of this new what I think is a backwards policy. >> Secretary Hexes was just recognizing that these soldiers being sent over to fight for our freedoms and that they should have some freedom, too. The the flu shot is an intervention that is
often ineffective. Has a 20% efficacy rates. There are studies that show that getting a flu shot actually increases the chance of a non-flu infection. A soldier, >> you and I may differ on that, but my question to you wasn't about that. My
question to you is HHS or CDC, either one, now going to monitor any flu outbreaks on our military ships or >> I don't know if there is any program specifically for the military, but we
definitely monitor flu outbreaks. >> Well, this was a very old policy. It wasn't based in science. It was >> B Secretary is improving the food. All of the military >> Mr. Secretary, if I can finish, the 1918 pandemic actually sickened 40% of our
service members and killed 20,000 soldiers. If you have a submarine full of people who we are counting on and a virus goes flying through it, we don't have a ready military comparing that if you have our military have a
pandemic or flu or anything fly through them, they are not ready. So my question to you was not about kill entire submarines. >> Mr. Secretary, it is my time. I'm asking you simply and you you didn't answer me whether or not we were going to monitor that to make sure that we do have uh
troop ready uh two troops ready in these very critical times. But let me go on here because I just have a few minutes left. Um, yesterday when we talked, you went on a very long tangent about how you were just cancelling woke grants, but I I want to for the record put the
numbers here. You cancelled 17 at least 17 maternal health grants, $4 million because apparently any research research involving women is woke. You canled 58 grants for vaccine research, $94 million.
A 59 for Alzheimer's research, that was $33 million. and a whopping 108 cancer research grants, $29 million worth. I I just have to say cancer is not woke. Neither is Alzheimer's or women's d women who die in chalibers. These these
are deadly issues. They deserve serious research. Um I I am appalled that it was tossed in the shredder. And meanwhile, as I said, we're shoveling money uh on war spending. So I just want to be clear that the budget that was sent to us is not a MAGA budget. It's not a maja
budget. It is a war budget. No one can call it anything other than that. Why on earth would we take from researchers and rural healthcare, matern maternal healthcare? Um you justified these cuts because of a need to reduce the debt yesterday. This budget actually proposes
to increase the debt for more war. So we're shoveling more money at defense contractors, but we're slashing NIH by more than $5 billion. Fewer patients getting life-saving treatment. Cutting CDC by a third so we can't respond to
dangerous outbreaks. Slashing investments in mental health and addiction treatment. People will fall through the c uh cracks and not investing in child care. Families will have to decide between child care and healthcare and putting food on the table. So, I know my time's almost up
and um and Mr. Chairman, for the record, um I am concerned about the promises that have been broken and I have some items that I do want to uh submit for the record. I ask unanimous consent to uh include these articles. RFK Jr. breaks promise to senators. Guts CDC
vaccine ban of independent experts. RFK Jr. breaks his promise about the CDC on vaccines and autism. uh firing of CDC's vaccine advisors put spotlight on RFK Jr's promises to Cassidy. I have one
that is titled RFK Jr. made promises in order to become a health secretary. He has broken many of them. Uh Cassidy after Whoops. Bill Cast um Bill Cassidy extracted a promise from RFK Jr. Now he sees what that promise is worth. Uh two more Republican senator who voted for
RFK is airing his concerns. Too late now. and an article that is entitled GOP senator refuses to face reality about RFK Jr. after being lied to. I yield back. >> Without objection, they are submitted. >> Thank you,
>> Senator Armstrong. >> Good over here. Good afternoon. Uh, thank you for being here. And, you know, I'm I'm a very new guy, so I'm I'm am somewhat naive about this process. So, I actually have questions about the future and what we can do on a forward-looking
basis to improve things. Um, and I want to first of all just say thanks for the bold vision. Um, I come from business and I know know it takes a lot of energy and conviction to actually bring change especially in an organization like a big federal government. So, I just want to
tell you thanks for your commitment to bringing very significant reforms and a bold vision for the future. I also want to say thanks being from Oklahoma. I want to say thanks and and to remind you how very important it is to make sure that we're not forgetting about the rural areas and the tribal areas that so
desperately need to be uh thought about when we think about health in our country. But my question um really goes to um thinking about drug approval and AI. It's very obvious to me that uh AI
is going to speed up the ability to develop more and more solutions, whether it's drugs, but things that the FDA is going to need to approve. And I noticed that you had the $2 million in the budget for AI, but I'm wondering about
um what you think in the future uh can be done within the department to really accelerate the ability to approve and work in parallel with the drug development. Thank Senator, thank you for that question. Uh, we've done more, I think,
than any agency in government, maybe with the the exception of the CIA and the intelligence department to drive AI into all of our functions. At FDA today, we have a voluntary program called ALA.
90% of the people are using it and we've used it to dramatically shorten the approval time for drugs from of the review of the final application normally takes 60 days. We've compressed that now
to about two hours. And as a result of that, we just approved two cancer drugs, one in 54 days and one in 45 days. AI is going to revolutionize medicine and it may at someday at some point make FDA even
irrelevant. Um, and it's going to give us the capacity to develop new drugs, personalized medicine for every citizen. You know, I just was reading about a a um a dog that had cancer
and his owner used AI to develop a personalized treatment that cured the cancer. We're going to see that now in medicine across medicine and we're very excited about it. AI is very dangerous potentially, but also has the capacity
to bring really great things to humanity, particularly in the realm of human health. >> Great. Thank you very much. Next question I had was around I noticed that you're uh consolidating for the big departments there and curious about what
you're how you think things will operate in the future and the advantages of some of the consolidations that you're looking to do. >> We we're reorganizing them. I mean, we are we've been working for a year to figure out a um a sensible way to
reorganize the department. And I just going to give you an example of what we had um what we what we had when I came in. We have nine separate offices for women's health, eight separate offices for
minority health, 27 separate HIV programs, 59 behavioral health programs, 40 separate opioid programs, 42 maternal health programs, 41 chief information officers, 100 communications offices, 40
procurement departments, and dozens of IT departments. None of them talking to each other. And so there was it was a target-rich environment for reorganization to streamline the agency and make it more efficient. We've developed proposals for doing just that.
And those proposals we are not going to do unilaterally. We are going to submit them to Congress and hopefully Congress will agree that's a sensible way to reorganize. >> Great. Well, thank you very much for the the courage and the energy that it takes to take on all that. So very
appreciative and I yield my time. >> We will now recess for a short break. Again, I ask the audience to remain seated while the secretary departs. I imagine this will take about 5 minutes. The committee stands in brief recess. The committee will please come to order.
Uh, Senator Hickinlooper. Thank you. Um, and I want to uh, Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask unan unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter signed by 155 pediatricians in Colorado from all parts of the state
expressing their grave concerns about the vaccine hesitancy. um and the implications that has on future health of Colorado kids. >> Without objection. >> So, Secretary Kennedy, um measel cases
are increasing. Um I know that it's been raised many times. We've seen eight in Colorado this year, 18 times the number of measel cases that we used to see. Um, all but one this year were unvaccinated uh, individuals and that one only got
one shot instead of the two. Uh, between February and March of this year, state and local public health officials in Colorado spent nearly half a million dollars to respond to 10 measel cases uh, impacting two schools in Broomfield. Um, I thought I'd just go through that.
in Adams County uh responding to an out an outbreak of only five cases required approximately 40 case workers and contact tracers working 14 hours a day because there's a huge sense of urgency here seven days a week for more than two weeks. The workers had to contact more
than 600 people that may have been exposed and and and these contact workers interviewed 284 people by phone. Uh public health workers had to access every single contact for immunization status. They had to ask had you been vaccinated and they needed to those who
hadn't been vaccinated needed to be quarantined for 21 days at additional expense I'm not including here. Uh they had to prioritize obviously for uh infants under one. Uh you look at the outbreaks that we're seeing in 2025 we had 48 outbreaks across 45 states. 2026
we had 19 outbreaks across uh 33 states. Um, I think this work, uh, the contact tracing, uh, keeping people isolated, it's very ownorous to local governments. Um, and President Trump's cuts to public health funding and healthcare coverage
and research mean that there isn't really there isn't any money left. Um, so I think that we have to ask where is the money going to come from to clean up all the all that cost to local government. Um, as a former mayor,
that's something that that concerns me. Um, the health care system overall has has seen about roughly a trillion dollars in cuts. Um, just the the budget next year shows further cuts. Um, so how
do you suggest us that the local governments and state governments, you know, build build back and find those resources? Senator, we've lost, I think, three Americans to measles in 20 years. We lose two million people,
Americans, to chronic disease every year. Do you know what the cost of that is? $4.3 trillion a year. >> I totally get it. You do two things at once, though. I'm not sure that's those are mutually. >> Of course, we need to do two things at once, but we also need to do kind of
adequate quit risk assessments. the the big enemy of our country is chronic disease. It's killing three million of us a year. It's bankrupting our >> I'm not I'm not I don't I am on your side on that. I agree that healthc care that a healthy diet and and and taking
charge of our own health early on is is the best pharmaceutical we've got. I agree with all that. This is separate from that and a a separate uh subset. Um I'm also partial to uh mRNA
um vaccines especially um the recently I'm sure you've seen the news that there it's a promising pathway for people with or patients with pancreatic cancer uh as you know p pancreatic cancer is one of the great killers one of the deadliest
forms of cancer um less than 13% of the patients with pancreatic cancer last over five years uh the patients in this tri trial with MR mRNA are still alive six years later, right? So, you know, less than 13% survive beyond five years.
In this trial, they're all alive after six years later. This is exciting for the scientific research committee uh community uh and the promise of RNA research. But we still feel hostility to mRNA technology and the and the
research. uh the termination of 22 projects worth $500 million that had focused on mRNA. Um in your announcement of cancelling the projects, you quoted that HHS would shift towards safer, broader vaccine platforms. But again, when you're looking at cancer and
cancelling projects that are so promising for these certain types of cancer, are you aren't you worried about throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Uh, Senator, I've authorized $500 million now for cancer vaccines.
Oh, and I think mRNA is a promising technology for cancer vaccines. I terminated the COVID vaccines because they didn't make any sense. COVID is gone and the mRNA uh vaccines have a limited efficacy
against respiratory illnesses. And if they had a good efficacy, the industry would pay for them. They made a hundred billion dollars on the COVID vaccine. Why are we paying for vaccines that they don't believe are going to work? Because we know they're not going to work. We
mRNA technology is very very promising in certain areas like pancreatic cancer. >> I think that what I guess I want to make sure we continue to do the research we are doing. iron the steel gavvel is cutting me off, but I want to make sure that we focus on some of that basic research that leads to those
breakthroughs in things like RNA vaccines. Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Secretary, good to see you again. Welcome. I want to start by just saying how much I appreciate your efforts to get big pharma back on a leash under control, particularly your efforts to stop direct
to consumer advertising. I mean, there's just no reason the big pharma in particular should be getting federal subsidies to do this kind of advertising, which is frequently misleading, bad for consumers. So, you and the FDA have been leading on this. I appreciate that. Thank you for that. Let me ask you about something that I'm concerned about. The department recently
elected to allow Title 10 grants to flow to abortion providers for another year. Let me let me just give you let me contextualize this and give you an example from my state as to why this concerns me. You're going to see, I think, over my shoulder here, a poster
from an actual provider, abortion provider in the state of Missouri. This is an entity called Beacon Health Reproductive Network. They just received about $8 million from a Title 10 grant. Now, Beacon Health, as you can see here, they do more than just refer for
abortions. They also proclaim their support for all bodies. They provide gender affirming care, including to young people. That's gender transition surgeries. uh these folks now who by the way went to my state legislature and tried to prevent the legislature from writing in
the difference between male and female defining that in state law. They opposed our ban in the state of Missouri on transgender surgeries for minors. So that's the kind of folks here. They're getting now $8 million in taxpayer funding from the Title 10 program
because of the department's decision. When can you tell me when are we going to stop funding people like this? I don't think that this kind of entity ought to be getting federal tax money. >> I agree with you, Senator. And um you know, we paused those grants.
These are five-year grants. We paused them. There's a year left on them. And we looked at the litigation risk and OGC advised us that it was very, very high. And so we're paying them out the last
year. We're monitoring for high amendment compliance. We've just released NOFOS today that I think that are very aligned with your thinking and I think you'll be very happy with. >> What about the protect life rule, Mr.
Secretary? writing that back into regulations that would prevent any going forward any federal tax dollars from flowing to an abortion provider or a an abortion uh referer. I mean where are you are are you still pursuing that? >> You mean outside of the hight amendments
reach? >> Yes. Yeah. But for >> I'm happy to work with you on that. >> Okay. Good. I I think that's important. I think that we should not be funding entities like this. And uh you know, personally, I think a litigation risk. I'd rather take the risk in litigation than subject children in my state to
transgender care funded by federal taxpayer dollars. So I I appreciate you working on this. >> I think if you look at the new Nofos, you'll be very happy. >> Good. Um on a different subject, there are currently in the state of Missouri something like 60 data centers. We have
many, many more that want to come into the state. I think there are 4,000 data centers currently being built in the United States. Over 3,000 are already in operation. When I go home now, I get asked all the time by people who are big maha people. I get asked constantly
about the health risks around these data centers. And I honestly don't know what to tell them because I don't know what the science is. But I just want to rehearse this for you. I'm going to show you a picture of a data center. This is in North Kansas City. I mean, these are these are massive. This is going to consume I think it's 700
megawatts of power. That's that's enough for 300,000 homes in one year. But I get asked constantly things about electromagnetic fields. You know, this is like having these data centers are like having multiple high voltage transformers all located in one place.
Is that an increased cancer risk? I I have people in my state who worry that it is who are now living next to these data centers. They worry about decibel levels causing things like headaches, migraines, vertigo, other neurological disorders. My question to you is, is this something that HHS will study to
look at the the potential health effects here so we can get a handle on on what is what is a health risk, what's really not a health risk, so that we know what we're dealing with when we're talking about thousands and thousands and thousands of these being built, not just in my state, all over the country.
>> Uh yes, sir. And I just want to say that I've litigated on this issue. We produced uh over 10,000 studies for the court of appeals and I won the case to get FDC to redo its regulations on on uh
EMFs and you're right there's a range of injuries that are very very well documented. their neurological very very grave neurological injuries, cancer risk, um, and then just the making the bloodb brain barrier permeable so more
toxins can get into the brain. it the the risks to me are uh are horrendous and um but we are uh I've asked both ARPA and the surgeon general's office to either do meta reviews or to do uh base
studies on this issue so that we can better inform the American public. >> Good. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Senator Kim. >> Thank you, Chairman. Secretary Kennedy, thanks for coming out here today. I I guess I just wanted to start by asking are are you familiar with the limb loss
resource center? >> Limb loss >> limb loss resource center. Are you familiar with this? >> Remind me what it is. >> Uh so this is uh really important. It's the only federally funded resource center dedicated to providing reliable
information, support and assistance to individuals with limb loss as well as limb difference. This is you. It doesn't ring a bell. >> No. With individuals with >> limb loss. >> Oh, limb. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Have you heard of this before?
>> No, I have not. >> I I I just raised this with you because you are proposing to eliminate it. >> And I I wanted to ask you why. >> Well, I'm happy to talk to you about it. You know, we've been asked to make cuts
across the department of 12% and uh you know, nobody I don't think Russ Vote wants to cut our department. Nobody in our department wants to cut it. We have a $39 trillion debt. And um and maybe I
just maybe there was a conclusion that these were duplicative services. I don't know. I'm happy to talk to you and your office. Look, here's what I'll raise is, you know, I learn I heard from a disability leader who used this center for resources when they needed help. You
know, this budget that you're proposing zeros out the dedicated funding for this. I also heard from a constituent, Darren, whose wife slipped while exiting a stairlift, becoming paralyzed. They relied on support from something called the paralysis resource center, which is
also being eliminated under this budget that you're proposing. And I I'll just read through. So the paralysis resource center, limb loss resource center, voting access for people with disabilities, university centers for excellent with excellence in
developmental disabilities, the developmental disabilities projects of national significance. Five projects there that right now are slated for elimination of dedicated funding. Can you tell me what these programs have in common? I it sounds like there are programs that
treat disabilities. >> That's right. And I just I I worry about that immensely because right now more than ever I mean these families that I'm talking to you know they are struggling so much. I mean I cannot imagine you know what some of them are are going through and when they're seeing that
level of focus on cutting these resources dedicated for them. And I get it. you know, you're there there's efforts to try to see if they can boost up some state level funding, but the dedicated funding for these programs is very much on the chopping block. And I
guess I just wanted to ask you, will you consider would you reconsider uh funding for these programs? >> Happy to talk to your office about that. The other thing I wanted to ask you because it raises, you know, again, these are all programs that are focused on disability and it worries me that
there's not a prioritization of supporting the disability community and Americans with disability. Meanwhile, there is conversation, there are talks and proposals by this administration to move IDA from Department of Education to
your Department of Health and Human Services. And we've heard that I heard that from the Secretary of Education and others. I think that, you know, I'm hearing from a lot of families that are very concerned, profoundly concerned about this kind of shift. So, I wanted
to ask you, will you oppose the idea and proposal of this move of IDA from the Department of Ed to Health and Human Services? >> I will not. We're making Look, I'm very committed to serving the disability community. >> I'm not sure you are because of what I just laid out here. I mean the the
dedicated >> we're talking about certain programs. We're putting enormous resources into disabilities in throughout the agency. My uncle wrote the Americans Disability Act. My cousin Teddy uh is is missing a limb. Um these are issues that I'm that
I'm offering to talk to you about. >> We will follow up on we have a $2.3 trillion agency. I don't know, you know, every cut. There's some that we've made mistakes on and but I and I would tell
you this. We are well I'm happy to talk to your office about it. We'll follow back up but I'll just I'll just leave you with this and this is what I heard from these families and I want to just share it with you. They say that if you are moving IDA from the department of ed to health and human ser to health and
human services you are defining these young students by their disability engaging them as patients rather than as students who have the right as anybody else does for opportunity. So I I just want to point that out. Please do not single out uh these students and and
these families with disabilities. Mr. Chair, just before I I finish here, I just want to ask unanimous consent to submit to the record a press release from the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance entitled, quote, "Cost increases from Washington's inaction drives nearly 70,000 New
Jerseyians to drop health coverage since January." >> Without objection. >> Thank you. With that, I yield back. >> Senator Banks. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Kennedy, I think someone in the media told me this is your seventh appearance before a committee testifying. I can't
think of a any other cabinet secretary in the Trump Trump cabinet who has been as transparent as you have been. And I I appreciate you being here today. I appreciate your service. There's not a day that goes by when I don't hear from a hooer mom who tells me to tell you
thank you for your leadership >> and what you're doing. And my wife is in the audience. She's right behind you. She she wants me to tell you thank you as well. Uh what what you do for families all over this country, but especially in Indiana. What what message do you have as we wind down this
committee hearing for families that are counting on you and this team to make America healthier again? >> You know, we spent people have been talking about measles all day long, but we spent when my uncle was
president, we spent zero on chronic disease in this country. Now we spend $4.3 trillion just in my agency. The military, social security, spend more. Altogether, 48 cents out of every tax dollar paid to the federal government is
going to healthcare. 90% of that is going to chronic disease. This is an existential issue. We have the highest chronic disease burden of any country in the world. 77% of American kids cannot qualify for military service. It's a
national defense issue as well. diabetes rate, juvenile diabetes have gone from essentially zero among children to 38% of our teens are diabetic or pre-diabetic. Autism rates have gone from 1 in 10,000
in 1970 to one in every 31 today. And we need to do something to protect our children. This has got to be our top priority. And infectious disease is important. And one of my jobs is to make sure to stem the outbreaks, which I have
done with measles better than any country in the world. But we also can't just talk about that in exclusion to the thing that's really killing our country, which is poor health. During [clears throat] COVID, we had the
highest death rate of any country on earth. The highest. So, we did worse with CO than any nation in the world. We had a death rate of 3,000 per million population. There are other countries that had 14 deaths per million population from COVID.
And when you ask CDC why did all these people die from COVID, Americans more than anybody else, they say it's because of our chronic disease epidemic. The average American who died at 3.8 chronic diseases. This was not an infectious
disease that was killing healthy people. It was killing sick people. So the connection between chronic disease and uh infectious disease is there for everybody to see, but everybody ignores it. Every Democrat in this committee, all they wanted to do
was talk about measles. And none of them they've for years they've talked about trying to reform the food. I'm doing it now. And they're doing everything in their power to impede me from doing it. So it's all partisanship. It's all tribalism. and it's not real.
>> I It's crazy. I I I listen to their questions over and over again. And you've made so much progress, yet the Democrats have tried to obstruct everything that you just talked about trying to do to make this country healthier. I think it's it's totally shameful. And uh there are so many
things that we have yet in the time that we have left with you, as Secretary and President Trump in the White House, things to get done. One thing that you and I have talked a lot about before uh is the is what China has done to dominate the pharmaceutical industry and la last year 42% of clinical drug trials
were conducted in China. It used to be 100% of them that were conducted in the United States. Why why what are drug companies getting out of that? And can you talk about the threat of those drug trials occurring in China instead of in a safer environment in in the US? uh I
mean they're getting faster clinical trials over there and uh because we have a system that was designed you know that typically uh a drug from conception to commercialization because of the reg
regulatory process takes 15 years and we can't afford to do that anymore and senator one of the things >> is it true that they're less safe obviously they're less safe >> they're less safe there's all And they're also breaking all kinds of ethical rules. They're, you
know, Shanghai uh minority groups in China to participate in trials that they don't want to participate in. We're now doing inspections over there to catch that. More importantly, we need to compress the time from concept to commercialization in this country. We
have a bill that we're going to put before Congress to try to compress the phase one trial and actually make it all a seamless phase one, phase two, phase three, and that's going to help us. So, I appreciate >> we want to work with you on that. Thank you for your leadership, Mr. Secretary.
>> Thank you, Senator Banks. >> Uh, again, speaking as a physician, I will say we looked up I looked up the Macau Mckenley articles. There's 3.5 million cases of measles per year before the vaccine came along and about 550 deaths and then the vaccine took those
to less than 100 and um like zero deaths. So the efficacy of the mck the mccaulay paper was written before for events before 1950 which is before the vaccine came out. Uh but then the vaccine came out and that's when deaths
went cases went from 3.5 million down to near zero and deaths went to zero from 550 a year. So a tremendous impact of the vaccination. Senator also Brooks. >> Thank you so much Mr. Chair. Uh good afternoon Secretary. Uh you're familiar
with Aaron Siri correct? >> Yes I am. >> Okay. That's because he served both as your lawyer in your personal capacity and he's a lawyer for an antivaccine group as well. Um, is Mr. Siri on the federal government payroll?
>> No, he is not. >> No, he's [clears throat] not. Okay. So, that I I find that interesting because he is apparently having a really outsized influence uh on you. And in fact, according to her testimony, Dr. Monz last August said that uh during a
very contentious argument with you or conversation that you told her to talk to Mr. Siri so that she could fall in line with his vaccine policies. You let him present to your now illegal and discredited vaccination committee. And then this month uh you signed an updated
charter for the advisory committee on immunization practices uh to focus on vaccine risk after Aaron uh Siri urged you to do so. So, you know, despite him not being on the government payroll, it looks like he is clearly for you he's a top top advisor um in your in your uh
agency. Now, last month, Mr. Siri threatened to sue you uh if you didn't add hundreds of health conditions to the vaccine injury compensation programs. Um and you know, and and just like that, you removed members of the advisory commission on childhood vaccinations uh
to pave the way for changes. So, I just have to ask you, Mr. Secretary, who is running this department? Is Aaron Siri running the department? Are you running the department? >> ASIP has nothing to do with uh with the
uh uh with the vaccine court. Nothing. So, >> no. Just the questions. Is he running the department? Are you running the department? This Aaron Siri guy has a huge apparently influence. >> Yeah. You're you you're just filled with mischaracterizations. If you want to ask me about something, I will. But let me just ask you this. And so Mr.
>> You're going to talk and you're going to grandstand, but you're not going to get at the truth. >> Mr. Sherry is actually he's gone public with the whole thing. Now he's on X and he said um you know that that he's trying he's actually trying to pressure you to immediately change your vaccine policies. In fact, he wrote on X, I have
no doubt RFK Jr., this is his quote, wants to update the table. And the only reason that he wouldn't is because the White House won't let him. So, is the White House preventing you from updating the VIP table? >> Uh, Aaron Siri is an American citizen.
He has a right to say what he wants. >> He does. Asking you, is the White House preventing you from updating this? Is Mr. Siri correct about that >> updating the vaccine >> table? >> Uh, no, they are not. >> Okay. Now, regarding the new CDC uh
director nominee, part of the new team that you you said would revolutionize the CDC, Mr. Siri said that the pick will likely be a disaster and has said the only thing that Schwarz will likely restore is the CDC to business as usual. He said that left, this is his quote, left to your own devices, you wouldn't
have even chosen her and that she is, and I quote Mr. Siri here, the queen of mandating vaccines. So, is Aaron Siri wrong about this new nominee or is the president? >> Well, I guess Aaron Siri doesn't have much influence on me after all, does he?
You can't have it both ways of saying he has an outside influence on our department. Who is he asking question? He's suing me and criticizing me >> or something that he for a policy that I've made that he doesn't like. >> So does he have an outside influence or
not? >> You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth. >> Mr. Secretary, my next question. Now, you've had some trouble with the truth. I've I've seen it myself um during your appearances before Congress and as we all saw clearly during your exchange last week with Congresswoman Su. Can you
admit today that you said every black kid can get repared on a wellness farm? Can you admit that you said that >> didn't get repared on a wellness farm? >> Well, let me read exactly what you said. You said every black kid is now just
standard put on aderall on SSRI, benzo, which are known to induce violence and those kids are going to have a chance to go somewhere and get repared to live in a community where there will be no cell phones, no screens. You know, you claimed, in fact, you went on to say,
actually the whole transcript was even worse. said that that if you could, you would send quote every black kid, again, your words, not mine, to go live on farms and work. Is that your >> I would have to see hear that recording because >> Well, I have the recording. >> I have no memory of saying anything like
that. >> Yeah. Well, I actually have the recording um that I can give to you, but it is absolutely what you said. Um and if you want me to play it, I can play it. But if you ask me what my opinion is, I I do not believe that every black
kid should be repared on a wellness farm or whatever. And I have never believed that. >> Well, you said it, sir. I have the video here. In fact, >> I'm telling you, I don't believe it. That's not my vision for our country. >> I'm glad because it was ignorant to say it was dangerous and it was irresponsible.
>> Well, if I said it, I apologize, but I'd have to see the transcript. Senator Marky, Mr. Secretary, holding corporations accountable for threatening Americans health is a core part of your agenda.
Glyphosate, the main ingredient in pesticides such as Roundup made by Monsanto, is harmful to human health. In fact, in 2018, you helped win a $290 million verdict against Monsanto on
behalf of Dwayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper who developed cancer after using Roundup. Afterwards, you said, quote, "The jury found Monsanto knew what they were doing was wrong and doing
it with reckless disregard for human health." So, let's fast forward. Your MA report from May of 2025 cites studies linking glyphosate to cancer correctly. Yet, strangely, only
four months later, in September of 2025, your second MA report did not even mention glyphosate once. What happened during those four months? Well, the CEO of Bayer, which owns Monsanto, which
makes Roundup, met multiple times with the White House. Mr. Secretary, yes or no? Were you aware of those meetings between Monsanto and the White House? >> No. >> Well, you should have been aware, Mr.
Secretary. >> Well, the White House never tried to influence me on that issue. >> Mr. Secretary, I believe that you are aware of the court case Monsanto versus Dell, which is before the Supreme Court next Monday. Here's the background.
Monsanto is asking the court to protect them from lawsuits filed by cancer patients. Lawsuits like the one you help lead for people just like your former client, Mr.
Johnson. But just last month in March, President Trump in a brief asked the Supreme Court to side with Monsanto and Monsanto was thrilled. Mr. Secretary? Yes or no? Were you consulted
before the administration filed that brief? >> Uh, yes. And I opposed it. >> You opposed it. So, you you do you agree with President Trump trying to protect Monsanto from cancel lawsuits? >> I don't think he's trying to protect
Monsanto. I think he's trying to protect the 80% of American farmers who are addicted to glyphosate and who will shut down the food supply if it suddenly disappeared. >> Yeah. Yeah. I think your answer should be no. You don't because you know that
it's going to endanger the health of Americans who are going to be exposed. >> I've always said this. >> I've always said this. >> Right. Well, that that is um where this case is right now. Happy to explain senator or you can grandstand like you
are doing >> gr I >> want to ask a question you can ask >> no you cannot I'm asking the question >> if you want to ask a question to me you can do so that's not >> or you can grant >> in Mr. Secretary, in 2020, you said, quote, "In my life, if my you said in
2020, if my life were a Superman comic, Monsanto would be Lex Luthor because I feel like I've been struggling against it my whole life." And in that same interview in 2020, you even recounted that President Trump during the trial in
2020 sent a message to Monsanto leadership saying, "We have got your back." Mr. Secretary, will you tell President Trump that he is wrong to have Monsanto's back instead of the backs of the American people?
>> I've already express my uh disagreement to the president about this issue. >> Mr. Secretary, despite uh the decades um that you have spent shouting that glyophate and Monsanto are killing
Americans. This is the first that we've heard because you've been silent uh with regard to Trump now shielding it. >> I have not been silent. You're mistaken. >> Well, we I can't find any evidence that you have said that the president
>> said publicly just now and I said it in hearings all week and I said it before publicly. Well, it from from my perspective, um, this is like a a pivotal moment where it just seems to me
that the only immunization you now support is helping through your silence to immunize Monsanto from accountability. This is a major battle that should be going on inside the administration. And thus far, you have been silent. And it's your job.
>> You have been silent. Well, it it's your job as a member of the president's cabinet to speak up on behalf of Americans uh health. Uh and in this instance, I don't think there's enough evidence to convict you of having had that fight inside of this administration.
>> There was a national security consideration that the president that's part of his job. >> Yeah. But you're not like Superman. You're more like kryptonite, a toxic substance inside of the administration which is helping to poison the American home.
>> Yeah. Thank you, Senator Marky. I have a couple quick follow-ups. Secretary, imported seafood comprises about 80% of all seafood consumed in the United States. But if these products are found to be unsafe, contaminated for example with
radiation, true story. Currently FDA is unable to confiscate it. Should we give the FDA the authority to confiscate unsafe imported foods to basically prevent it from being imported through another port and bypassing our customs
officials? Would you be would you agree that that would be a good authority for the FDA to have? >> Yeah, he should have that authority. The same thing is true of vape senator. They do porch shopping because EBA cannot confiscate the those
adulterated products. They they're not legally allowed to. They the ships come in to one port. EPA then blocks them. Then they go to another port and they're now coming from a US port. So there's no inspection and
it is completely ridiculous. >> We're going to work to give FDA that authority and I thank you for your agreement. Next, this builds upon something that Senator Holly asked earlier. The reports of federally funded federally funded community health centers performing performing gender
transition services on children and vulnerable adults. Now, earlier this year, bipartisan, Congress gave record funding to community health centers and we'll have to decide providing more at the end of the year. Were you aware of these reports about health centers perform
performing gender transition services? No. And I've strongly supported the extra funding to the health centers. This is the first I'm hearing of that. >> Got it. Now, can I ask you if you could assess further assess if these health centers have violated federal laws or policy?
The ironic thing is I'm told DOJ, Department of Justice, actually defends these folks in lawsuits. So, they are disobeying a federal an executive order not to do this and then DOJ defends them. So, it would be nice to unravel that and um appreciate
>> that would shock me, but I've been shocked before, but I just can't see DOJ at this time doing that. Maybe >> under the Good Samaritan provision. >> All right, we'll be sending a letter about this and I look forward to working with you. >> I look forward to hearing about it.
>> Before the committee adjourns, we'll again ask the audience to stay seated until the secretary departs. for any senator wishing to ask additional questions. Questions for the record will be due 5:00 pm Wednesday, May 6th. Thank again the secretary for
being here. The committee stands adjourned.