Tensions run high on PDAB expansion vote
Republican Minority Whip Jesse Pippy, right, and Minority Leader Jason Buckel rise with other GOP lawmakers Friday to challenge Majority Leader David Moon, left, after he criticized President Donald Trump and Elon Musk during floor debate. (Photo by Danielle J. Brown/Maryland Matters)
Just days after pointed, but civil, debate on a proposal to expand efforts to control prescription drug costs, the House floor erupted in a partisan shouting match Friday that had to be gaveled back to order by an angry Speaker Adrienne Jones (D-Baltimore County).
The uproar came during the final House vote on House Bill 424, a bill that would expand the authority of the Prescription Drug Affordability Board. That board was created in 2019 and charged with reducing the cost of prescription medicines purchased by state health plans. Even though it has made slow progress on that front, HB424 would give the board the power to rein in the cost of drugs purchased by any drug provider in the state.
Republicans fought the bill all week, pointing to the lack of progress by PDAB on its current goals, saying the regulations would drive pharmaceutical companies out of the state and suggesting that expanding the board's authority could threaten the availability of drugs in Maryland.
GOP lawmakers offered a string of unsuccessful amendments Wednesday that they said were aimed at potential unintended consequences of the bill, such as limiting access to prescription drugs and creating market disruptions.
Supporters, like Del. Bonnie Cullison (D-Montgomery), the sponsor of the bill, argued that PDAB will not set price caps, as opponents claim, but would merely establish the the highest price the state — and under HB424, other purchasers — were willing to pay for a drug. It has the potential to lower drug costs for those who need it most, they said.
The debates earlier this week, were calm — boring, even. That changed during Friday's debate.
House set to approve expansion of drug board's authority to lower costs
Republicans renewed many of their criticisms from earlier in the week, including arguments that expanding PDAB could limit access and threaten research and development of new drugs. Several took the opportunity to use HB424 as a proxy for health care regulation in general, and veered into long criticisms of the 2012 Affordable Care Act.
Several Democratic lawmakers tried to steer the discussion — which took up more than 40 minutes of Friday's hourlong floor session — back to the bill at hand. By the time Majority Leader David Moon (D-Montgomery) stood to explain his vote, he had heard enough of what he called the 'Bizarro World floor debate' of the Republicans.
'The minority party is claiming to worry about research and development into lifesaving medications. They claim to care about access to health care. This bill is not your problem if those are concerns,' said Moon, who turned the debate into an argument over the rapid-fire cuts to federal agencies by President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk, who is in charge of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency.
Moon referenced recent layoffs at federal regulatory agencies such as National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration, which are housed in Maryland, and had been cited in some Republican amendments earlier in the week.
'President Musk, and what Vice President Trump are doing – that is your problem,' Moon said.
His deliberate mischaracterization of Trump and Musk's dynamic first earned a few chuckles from Democrats, and then a chorus of 'boo's' from Republicans.
''Boo' — Yes, 'boo,'' Moon responded sarcastically.
When Del. Lauren Arikan (R-Harford) stood up and interrupted Moon to explain her vote, Moon snapped, 'I'm not done.'
That led Arikan to charge Moon had gone over the two-minute time limit to speak. She was joined by a half-dozen other Republicans demanding to make a point of order, to explain their votes or to argue that Moon had exceeded his time, until Jones stepped in to quiet the cacophony of voices.
'I've not recognized anyone else,' Jones shouted over disruption, bringing the gavel down hard three times to stop the frenzy.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'Let me speak,' Jones demanded. 'His [Moon's] time is up, he's going to sit down.' Moon agreed and sat.
She then told everyone to sit back down and 'relax – if you can.'
Jones then recognized Arikan, who called the exchange 'painful.'
'I don't know what this bill could possibly have to do with Donald Trump or Elon Musk. This bill is about rigging the market. Conservatives never like that. I am so sorry to offend you with our belief that the free market is the best way to lower the cost of things.'
Other than a few snarky remarks about the flare-up itself, the debate went on without any other disruptions and HB424 ultimately passed on a party-line vote, 94-38. It now heads to the Senate, where a companion bill has yet to get a committee hearing.
Following the floor session, Moon defended his floor remarks.
'It's just very strange to me, given the totality of everything going on in the world, to be having a conversation about pharmaceutical research and development,' he said, 'specifically talking about the NIH and the FDA in floor debate on Republican amendments, supposedly to improve access to health care and lower prescription drugs — and specifically foster research and development
'The thing that's actually threatening what they claim to care about … is all of the announcements that we've heard from the federal government this week — gutting mass layoffs and the likes at those very agencies,' Moon said. 'It's just a wildly disconnected conversation.'
The final word Friday went to Del. Stephanie Smith (D-Baltimore City), the majority parliamentarian, who gently reminded House members of the rules of floor debate and the need to keep things cordial — reminders that are becoming a semiregular occurrence.
'Just a couple of refreshers — we only speak when we are acknowledged by the Speaker to do so. Also, when we are rising to explain our vote … the clerks are timing,' she said. 'Also, the Speaker is the keeper of order and quorum in the House. It has been the custom of this chamber to not be overtly political or personal in this chamber.
'That's for everyone in the chamber, no matter what side of the aisle you are on,' she said to a smattering of applause. 'We all have to abide by those rules.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate GOP tax bill includes largest cut to U.S. safety net in decades
The Senate Republican tax bill speeding to passage includes the biggest reduction of funding for the federal safety net since at least the 1990s, targeting more than $1 trillion in social spending. Although the legislation is still estimated to cost more than $3 trillion over the next decade, the Senate GOP tax bill partially pays for its large price tag by slashing spending on Medicaid and food stamps, which congressional Republicans maintain are rife with fraud. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. The tax bill centers on making permanent large tax cuts for individual taxpayers, extending the cuts that Republicans first enacted under President Donald Trump's first term. The bill includes an increase to the standard deduction claimed by most taxpayers, rate reductions for most U.S. households, and a partial version of Trump's plan to end taxes on tipped wages, among many other provisions. But it offsets these expensive tax cuts in part through what several experts said may prove to be the most dramatic reductions in safety net spending in modern U.S. history. While last-minute changes to the bill text makes precise estimates impossible, the legislation appears on track to cut Medicaid by about 18 percent and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by roughly 20 percent, according to estimates based on projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Previously, the biggest recent cut to food stamps was a roughly 14 percent cut approved by Congress during President Bill Clinton's administration in the 1990s, according to Bobby Kogan, a senior policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, a center-left think tank. (Food stamp benefits also sharply increased, and then fell, after the expiration of covid benefits.) The biggest prior cut to Medicaid was during President Ronald Reagan's term in the 1980s, when Congress and the White House approved a roughly 5 percent reduction to the federal health insurance program that primarily benefits low-income households during his first two years in office, Kogan said. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate tax bill will lead to roughly 12 million fewer people receiving Medicaid and more than 2 million fewer people receiving food stamps. 'This is not only the biggest ever - it's by a mile the biggest ever,' Kogan said. 'You can very safely say this is the biggest cut to programs for low-income Americans ever.' The legislation achieves these steep reductions by imposing a slew of new requirements and restrictions on low-income Americans who rely on government assistance, although it includes some revisions sought by nonpartisan experts as well. On Medicaid, the bill institutes new federal work reporting requirements for the first time in the program's history - forcing millions of people to regularly prove they are working at least 80 hours a month to keep their health insurance. The bill provides exemptions for certain groups of people, including those who are pregnant, some caretakers and those with disabilities. But it also imposes burdensome paperwork requirements that experts say states are ill-equipped to take on, and they warn that both those who are meeting the requirements and who qualify for exemptions could lose coverage because they will struggle to submit proper documentation. The bill also mandates that people just above the federal poverty line begin paying out of pocket for Medicaid services, such as some doctor's visits or lab tests. States would be allowed to charge these enrollees up to 5 percent of their income in cost-sharing - a fee that could amount to hundreds of dollars annually. While Democratic-led states might opt for modest co-pays, Republican-led states could impose substantially higher fees, potentially pricing out many low-income residents, experts said. Although it's unclear if this measure will survive final passage, the legislation has also sought to crack down on loopholes that raise what the federal government is reimbursing hospitals for Medicaid services, said Marc Goldwein, senior vice president at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan group. The changes to Medicaid could also force already struggling rural hospitals to close or significantly pare back their services, hospital groups have said. Between a rise in uncompensated care and smaller federal reimbursements through states because of changes to what is called the provider tax, hospitals are expected to take a significant hit. 'No question - this is definitely the biggest cut. It's the biggest rollback in federal support for health care ever,' said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF. On food stamps, the bill rolls back decades of long-standing policy by tightening work requirements. Parents of children have generally been exempt from work rules, but under the new proposal, single mothers of teenagers as young as 14 would be required to work or lose benefits. The bill also raises the upper age for able-bodied adults without dependents who are subject to work requirements from 49 to 64, sweeping in millions of older Americans previously shielded from the rules. Additionally, it would make it harder for states to waive work requirements during times of high unemployment, effectively limiting assistance unless a generationally severe recession hits. The legislation also changes how poverty and household budgets are calculated for the purposes of food stamp eligibility, potentially reducing benefits for millions. Under President Joe Biden, internet access was recognized as a basic necessity for modern life and factored into cost-of-living calculations that help determine eligibility and benefit levels. The new bill reverses that. Conservatives and Republicans have defended these changes as necessary to arrest the rising cost of safety net programs. Robert Rector, research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, said U.S. food stamps are rife with fraud, saying the federal government's spending on welfare programs has risen from about $1 trillion per year before the covid pandemic to $1.69 trillion now. Rector said stricter limits in particular made sense for the food stamps program. 'Welfare spending is out of control. Fraud is out of control,' Rector said. 'There's extensive massive fraud. There's massive fraud in food stamps in particular.' Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma) on Sunday argued on 'Meet the Press' that the legislation was only 'getting out the ones that should never be' on Medicaid and was focused on 'able-bodied' individuals. 'We don't pay people in this country to be lazy. We want to give them an opportunity, and when they're going through a hard time, we want to give them a helping hand,' Mullin said. 'That's what Medicaid was designed for, and it's unfortunately, it's been abused.' But Republicans may face political blowback if the changes to the safety net programs result in significant reductions in benefits. The cuts also fly in the face of prior promises made by party leaders: Vice President JD Vance has long been critical of cuts to Medicaid, and Trump has repeatedly promised not to reduce benefits in the program. Even as the bill moves toward passage, some congressional Republicans from rural states have also expressed concern about the political impacts of cuts to Medicaid. 'Let's watch and be careful that we don't cut into bone, don't hurt our rural hospitals,' Sen. Jim Justice (R-West Virginia) said late last week. 'If we do that, it's going to be a bad day.' Others had hoped large spending cuts would at least be used to reduce the nation's $36 trillion federal debt. Goldwein, of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said it is a shame that Republicans are using funding from spending cuts only to partially mitigate the more than $3 trillion cost of their tax bill. 'What bothers me is there are really hard savings to find in here. But all the money is being used not for deficit reduction, not to fully pay for tax cuts, but to reduce the amount of money we're borrowing,' Goldwein said. 'We're going in the wrong direction.' - - - Yasmeen Abutaleb and Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Lights! Camera! But not enough action in a fading, worried Hollywood. Facing entry-level job crunch, new grads question the value of a degree Dynamite outside a synagogue: Civil rights stories imperiled by federal cuts
Bloomberg
25 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump, Republicans Rush to Overcome Internal Clashes on One Big Beautiful Bill
By and Jamie Tarabay Save Republican party leaders are rushing to overcome lingering internal fights over President Donald Trump's massive tax and spending package as Democrats launch attacks to exploit the divisions. Senate Republicans were still at odds Monday over how much to cut Medicaid and other social safety-net programs and how rapidly to end Biden-era clean energy tax breaks as Democrats gained the chance Monday to force votes on amendments to the package.
Fox News
31 minutes ago
- Fox News
Tillis denounces Trump 'big, beautiful bill' hours after surprise retirement announcement
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., denounced President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill," just hours after making the surprise announcement that he would not run for a third term in 2026. Tillis voted against a motion to proceed with the spending package on Saturday and then announced his retirement on Sunday, citing political polarization and a desire to spend more time with family. He then took to the Senate floor later Sunday to warn that "Republicans are about to make a mistake on healthcare and betraying a promise" on Medicaid should the package clear the upper chamber. "It is inescapable that this bill in its current form will betray the very promise that Donald J. Trump made in the Oval Office or in the Cabinet room when I was there with finance. He said, 'We can go after waste, fraud and abuse' on any programs," Tillis said. "Now, those amateurs that are advising him, not Dr. Oz, I'm talking about White House healthcare experts, refuse to tell him that those instructions that were to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, all of a sudden eliminates a government program that's called the provider tax. We have morphed a legal construct that admittedly has been abused and should be eliminated into waste, fraud and abuse, money laundering. Read the code. Look how long it's been there." "I'm telling the president that you have been misinformed," Tillis said. "You supporting the Senate mark will hurt people who are eligible and qualified for Medicaid." "I love the work requirement. I love the other reforms in this bill. They are necessary, and I appreciate the leadership of the House for putting it in there," Tillis said. "But what we're doing, because we have a view of an artificial deadline on July 4, that means nothing but another date in time. We could take the time to get this right if we lay down the House mark of the Medicaid bill and fix it." The two-term senator said he consulted with Republican experts in the state legislature, Democrats loyal to Gov. Josh Stein and an independent body from the hospitals' association to gain insight on how the provider tax cuts would impact North Carolinians. In the best-case scenario, he said, the findings showed a $26 billion cut in federal support for Medicaid. Tillis said he presented the report to the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Dr. Mehmet Oz. "After three different attempts for them to discredit our estimates, the day before yesterday they admitted that we were right," Tillis said. "They can't find a hole in my estimate." "So what do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding is not there anymore, guys?" Tillis said. "I think the people in the White House, those advising the president are not telling him that the effect of this bill is to break a promise, and do you know the last time I saw a promise broken around healthcare? With respect to my friends on the other side of the aisle, it's when somebody said, 'If you like your healthcare, you could keep it, if you like your doctor, you could keep it.' We found out that wasn't true." In promoting the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, from 2009 to 2010, former President Barack Obama repeatedly claimed, "If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor." Tillis argued that it was the failures of that package that led to him becoming the second Republican Speaker of the North Carolina House since the Civil War and later to his election to the U.S. Senate. Trump celebrated Tillis' retirement announcement and issued a warning to other "cost-cutting Republicans." "For all cost-cutting Republicans, of which I am one, REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected. Don't go too crazy!" Trump wrote Sunday night. "We will make it all up, times 10, with GROWTH, more than ever before." After his Senate speech, Tillis told reporters that he had told Trump that he "probably needed to start looking for a replacement." "I told him I want to help him," Tillis said, according to Politico. "I hope that we get a good candidate that I can help and we can have a successful 2026." The senator told reporters Trump is "getting a lot of advice from people who have never governed and all they've done is written white papers." He condemned "people from an ivory tower driving him into a box canyon." In his retirement announcement, Tillis said that "it's become increasingly evident that leaders who are willing to embrace bipartisanship, compromise, and demonstrate independent thinking are becoming an endangered species."
