[Senate Hearing 119-90]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-90
HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2026
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
[BEFORE THE]
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
LABOR, AND PENSIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
----------
MAY 14, 2025
----------
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov'
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
60-601 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
BILL CASSIDY, M.D., Louisiana, Chairman
RAND PAUL, M.D., Kentucky BERNIE SANDERS (I), Vermont,
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine Ranking Member
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska PATTY MURRAY, Washington
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
ROGER MARSHALL, M.D., Kansas CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
TIM SCOTT, South Carolina TIM KAINE, Virginia
JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
JIM BANKS, Indiana ED MARKEY, Massachusetts
JON HUSTED, Ohio ANDY KIM, New Jersey
ASHLEY MOODY, Florida LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
ANGELA ALSOBROOKS, Maryland
Matthew Gallivan, Majority Staff Director
Danielle Janowski, Majority Deputy Staff Director
Warren Gunnels, Minority Staff Director
Zain Rizvi, Minority Deputy Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2025
Page
Committee Members
Cassidy, Hon. Bill, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions, Opening statement......................... 1
Sanders, Hon. Bernie, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from the State
of Vermont, Opening statement.................................. 2
Witnesses
Kennedy, Hon. Robert F., Jr., Secretary of Health and Human
Services, Washington, DC....................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Summary statement............................................ 11
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa:
National Task Force letter................................... 55
Hassan, Hon. Maggie:
HHS Employee Directory Geier................................. 58
Geier Charge................................................. 59
Geier Order.................................................. 77
Markey, Hon. Ed:
Make America Sick Again...................................... 115
Blunt Rochester, Hon. Lisa:
CDC has no Acting Director................................... 135
Sanders, Hon. Bernie:
HHS reorganization budget and RIFs letters................... 145
Murphy, Hon. Christopher:
Two articles about Robert F. Kennedy Jrs. vaccine opinions... 225
HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2026
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES BUDGET
----------
Wednesday, May 14, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:31 p.m., in
room 430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bill Cassidy,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Cassidy [presiding], Paul, Collins,
Murkowski, Mullin, Marshall, Scott, Hawley, Husted, Banks,
Moody, Sanders, Murray, Baldwin, Murphy, Kaine, Hassan,
Hickenlooper, Markey, Kim, Blunt Rochester, and Alsobrooks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CASSIDY
The Chairman. I was waiting for the cameras to leave, and
they weren't, so decided to rein them in. The Senate Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions will please come to
order.
Secretary Kennedy, thank you for coming before the
Committee. President Trump has taken on the mission to reform
the Federal Government, making healthcare more affordable and
making America healthy again. It is clear the status quo does
not work. Bureaucratic bloat, regulatory hurdles at the
Department of Health and Human Services have made it harder to
deliver critical services.
HHS needs to work better for the American people. This
means finding ways to speed up approvals for life-saving drugs,
improving delivery of health care services so Americans who
need these benefits can receive them, addressing the high
levels of chronic disease, and holding bad actors accountable
to lower health care costs for the American people.
I am encouraged that HHS is already working to address
these issues. I want to note that this is the first time in at
least two decades the HHS Secretary is testifying on the
Department's budget before the HELP Committee. And I appreciate
Secretary Kennedy for coming to answer our questions on the
fiscal year 2026 budget.
Now, people fear change, even when it is from worse to
better. But without a clearly defined plan or objective, people
assume the worst. Much of the conversation about HHS's agenda
has been set by anonymous sources in the media and individuals
with a bias against the President.
Americans need direct reassurance from the Administration,
and from you, Mr. Secretary, that these reforms will make their
lives easier, not harder, and that is why I have invited you.
No one can make that case better than you. These are the
questions about how HHS will be able to preserve its primary
functions and duties under this proposed budget.
Many offices and programs potentially seeing changes are
essential for implementing bipartisan laws, including laws
championed and signed into law by President Trump. Example, in
2018, Congress worked with President Trump to pass the Support
for Patients and Communities Act, provide--protecting
communities, saving lives through increased access to naloxone,
and prevention and treatment for fentanyl addiction.
The HELP Committee and President Trump also worked together
to pass laws to improve research into health disparities,
address the needs of Americans with traumatic brain injuries,
Alzheimer's, Lyme disease, support family caregivers, and help
moms and babies live healthier lives, programs essential to
achieving President Trump's goal of making America healthy
again.
The proposed budget offices that are responsible for
overseeing many of these initiatives, which were initiated by
President Trump, will be consolidated or repurposed. Now, I
agree with Secretary Kennedy that HHS needs reform. Over the
past several years, I have engaged stakeholders and worked with
colleagues to identify opportunities to modernize a wide array
of HHS agencies and programs.
The Department needs to have an effective plan to fulfill
statutory duties in tandem with efforts to increase
transparency, accountability, to streamline programs, and to
root out wasteful spending. Congress and the Administration
should work together to ensure reform strike the right balance
and deliver for all Americans.
Mr. Secretary, once more, no one can set the record
straight better than you to explain how the Department will
maintain its critical duties and implement change important to
Americans' health.
By providing this clarity, we in Congress will be able to
advocate for shared priorities in future legislation, and you
will gain the trust of the American people, putting their minds
at ease. I appreciate you being here.
I look forward to hearing how the proposed HHS budget will
advance President Trump's mission. And with that, I recognize
Senator Sanders for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SANDERS
Senator Sanders. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary,
thanks for being with us. Let me begin by quoting a sentence
that came from your prepared remarks.
You state, and I quote, ``The United States remains the
sickest developed nation, and we spend $4.5 trillion annually
on health care, two to three times more per capita than
comparable nations. Clearly something is structurally wrong
with our approach.'' You are right. The current healthcare
system is broken. It is wildly expensive. It is dysfunctional.
What do we do, Mr. Secretary, to address it? Maybe for a
start, we do what every other major country on earth does and
recognize that health care is a human right guaranteed to every
man, woman, and child.
Maybe we understand that the function of a rational health
care system is not to make hundreds of billions of dollars in
profit for insurance companies and drug companies who often
engage in stock buybacks, pay their CEOs outrageous
compensation packages. There was a guy from one of the major
drug companies sitting exactly where you are sitting last year.
The guy makes $50 million a year. Meanwhile, we don't have
enough doctors.
We don't have enough nurses. We don't have enough dentists,
we don't have enough pharmacists, we don't have enough health
care workers in general. You are right, the system is
structurally broken. We spend far more, we have a shorter life
expectancy than other countries.
This is an issue that I want to address with you. How in
fact do we guarantee health care to all people and do it in an
effective way? Let me say a word about prescription drugs. You
and President Trump had a press conference earlier this week
discussing an Executive Order that both of you claim would make
sure that the American people pay the lowest prices in the
world for prescription drugs, not the highest.
As you mentioned at your press conference, this is a
concept that I personally strongly support, and I think you are
aware of that. But as President Trump and you should know, this
Executive Order, like Trump's previous Executive Orders on the
subject, will likely be thrown out by the courts, and we will
be back to exactly where we are today, paying by far the
highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. In my view,
the way forward is through Legislative action.
If you and President Trump are serious about significantly
lowering the outrageous price of prescription drugs in this
country, as I hope you are, I would very much appreciate both
of you working with me and other people on this Committee and
in the Senate on legislation that I will soon be introducing
which accomplishes exactly the same goal as you and the
President talked about, making sure that we pay no more for
prescription drugs than people in other major countries.
If we are serious about that, let's work together and let's
make that happen. And in fact, if Republicans and Democrats
come together on this, if we prioritize it, we can pass that
legislation in a couple of weeks. Thirdly, Secretary Kennedy,
all of us want to make the Government more efficient and cost-
effective, none fewer than I--there is too much bureaucracy.
But let me tell you also what we want and what the American
people want. And that is we want the Federal Government to play
a major role in continuing its efforts to combat such terrible
diseases. There is cancer, Alzheimer's, diabetes, heart
disease, and others terrible illnesses that claim the lives of
millions of Americans.
In that regard, I must tell you that I have heard from
citizens, patients, and doctors in Vermont and all over this
country who are deeply concerned that under the leadership of
you and Mr. Musk, the Trump administration has terminated at
least $13.5 billion in health care funding, including more than
1,600 grants to conduct vital research into cancer prevention,
Alzheimer's, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease, among many
other medical research investments.
In the first 3 months of this year, the National Institute
of Health has been effectively cut by $2.7 billion, a 35
percent cut reversing over a decade of investment in medical
research. Under your leadership, cancer research has been
slashed by 31 percent.
Further, Secretary Kennedy, under your leadership, you have
undermined the vital role vaccines play in preventing disease
during the single largest measles outbreak in 25 years, which
has led to over 1,000 cases of measles, over 125
hospitalizations, and 3 deaths.
Let me say a word about USAID. Elon Musk, the richest man
on earth, who has led the effort to cut health and nutrition
programs for the poorest people on earth, has absurdly
suggested that no one, ``no one'' has died from the massive
cuts to USAID. Mr. Musk is 100 percent wrong.
According to independent researchers, nearly 200,000 people
have already died throughout the world as a result of the
massive cuts in funding to prevent malaria, tuberculosis, HIV,
malnutrition, and other serious diseases. Further, as a result
of the elimination of U.S. funding for a global vaccine
program, it has been estimated that over a million children
will die because of the cuts that will save taxpayers very,
very little money. So let me just conclude by saying this.
The United States of America is the wealthiest country on
earth. We should have the best healthcare system in the world,
not one of the worst. Given our purchasing power, we should be
paying the lowest prices on earth for prescription drugs, not
the highest.
Instead of giving hundreds of billions of dollars in tax
breaks to the richest people in this country, we should be
proudly investing in coming up with cures for cancer,
Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, and other terrible illnesses.
That is what we should be doing, but I am afraid that in too
many ways, we are doing exactly the opposite. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Sanders. I will now
introduce the witness. We are joined today by the Hon. Robert
F. Kennedy, Jr., the 26th Secretary of the United States
Department of Health and Human Services.
In his role as Secretary, Mr. Kennedy is responsible for
overseeing the Nation's civilian Federal health agencies who
serve over 150 million Americans. We look forward to hearing
from you today, Secretary Kennedy. Again, thank you for joining
us.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., SECRETARY OF HEALTH
AND HUMAN SERVICES, WASHINGTON, DC
Secretary Kennedy. Thank you, Senator Sanders. I just want
to begin by saying I know how determined President Trump is for
us to have the lowest drug prices in the world as between
Europe and the United States. And I also know that he doesn't
care how we get there, that is where he wants Americans to be.
He has said I don't know how many times since I have been
involved with him, about that. We shouldn't be paying or be
able to go to London and buy GLP for $88 that in this country
cost us $1,300. And I know it is something that you have been
talking about for many years, and I look forward to working
with you on legislation or----
Senator Sanders. Thank you.
Secretary Kennedy [continuing]. Any way that we can to get
there. Thank you, Chairman Cassidy and Senator Sanders. I am
honored to be before you today to present the Department of
Health and Human Services Fiscal Year 2026 budget. Debilitating
disease, contaminated food, toxic environments, addiction, and
mental illness affect Americans across every race, class, and
political belief.
When my team and I took the helm at HHS, we set out with
clear goals. First, we aim to make America healthy again with a
special focus on the chronic disease epidemic. Second, we
committed to delivering more efficient, responsive, and
effective service to over 100 million Americans who rely on
Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs.
Third, we focus on achieving these goals by cutting costs
for taxpayers. We intend to do more, a lot more, with less. The
budget I am presenting today supports these goals and
reflects----
[Public interruption.]
The Chairman. The witness will suspend. The Committee will
come to order. Capitol Police are asked to remove the
individuals from the hearing room. Members of the audience--are
reminded disruptions will not be tolerated. Members of the
audience are reminded disruptions will not be permitted while
the Committee conducts its business.
Capitol Police are asked to remove the individuals from the
hearing room. That was a made for C-SPAN moment. The Secretary
will resume. Just a second, Mr. Secretary. Let's get the doors
closed and the ruckus is totally clear. Got it. Okay. And we
thank the Capitol Police for working with due diligence. Thank
you very much. Mr. Secretary, please resume.
Secretary Kennedy. The budget, I am----
The Chairman. Excuse me, Mr. Secretary. Will you reset the
clock? The clock has been running. Whatever it would be. Okay,
please.
Secretary Kennedy. All right. The budget I am presenting
today supports those goals and reflects two enduring American
values, compassion and responsibility. I invite the Committee
to unite around these ideals with me.
The United States remains the sickest developed nation in
the world, and we spend $4.5 trillion annually on healthcare.
Two to three times more per capita than comparable nations.
Clearly, something is structurally and systemically wrong with
this system. Furthermore, healthcare costs are steadily
increasing at a rate of 2 percent greater than the economy.
If we don't staunch this unsustainable hemorrhage, we will
ransom our children to bankruptcy, servitude, and disastrous
health consequences. Yes, an exploding debt is a social
determinant of health. We won't solve this problem by throwing
more money at it. We must spend smarter. We will shift funding
away from bureaucracy and toward direct impact.
Some things at HHS will not change. We will preserve legacy
programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start, as the
foundation of the MAHA Agenda. Vulnerable populations, seniors,
and veterans deserve consistent access to care, and I will
ensure that they receive it.
Today, 83 million Americans, urban and rural, lack adequate
access to primary care physicians. We will prioritize these
families, especially Native American and Alaskan communities.
We will protect IHS funding, streamline its operations, and
give the tribes more autonomy in managing their resources.
Let me be clear, we intend to make the Trump HHS not just
the most effective, but also the most compassionate in U.S.
history. Our official budget statement outlines many
priorities, but I want to highlight a few. First, we will
consolidate programs to better tackle mental health and
addiction.
These issues now rival chronic disease and their impact.
HHS will aggressively combat the opioid crisis, especially the
spread of synthetic drugs like fentanyl. We will empower state,
local, and tribal leaders to create effective solutions.
Second, we will address nutrition, physical activity, and
healthy lifestyles.
The President's budget requests $94 billion in
discretionary funds to support these priorities, including the
Administration for a Healthy America. We will emphasize healthy
eating in Head Start, and ensure the program continues to serve
its 750,000 children and parents effectively.
Third, we will equip FDA to expand its food safety efforts
through research, regulation, inspection, and education, remove
harmful chemicals from food and packaging. Fourth, we will fund
cutting edge research at NIH while cutting risky or non-
essential studies. That includes ending gain-of-function
experiments and research based upon radical gender ideologies.
At the CDC, we will return to core missions, tracking
disease, investigating outbreaks, and sustaining public health
infrastructure while cutting waste. Fifth, we will eliminate
DEI funding and redirect resources toward real poverty
reduction. We will move beyond lip service to communities of
color and take meaningful action to meet their needs.
Six, we will strengthen cybersecurity and health IT. The AI
revolution has arrived, and we are already using new technology
to manage health data more efficiently and securely. Finally,
we will rebuild public trust, a trust that eroded through years
of industry capture, corruption, waste, and misplaced
priorities.
We will launch a new era of transparency in public service,
creating an honest science-driven HHS that answers to the
President, to Congress, and to the American people. I look
forward to working with Congress to pursue this mission
together as a bipartisan cause.
Let's work side by side to make America healthy again.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Kennedy follows.]
prepared statement of robert f. kennedy, jr.
The mission of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or
Department) is to enhance and protect the health and well-being of the
American people.
President Trump and all of us at HHS take that charge seriously.
So, when a program is not as effective as it can be, or costs more than
it ought to, or fails to deliver on its promise--change and reform are
necessary.
The President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Budget applies this mindset
to the work of the Department, making thoughtful and strategic
decisions to transform HHS and better protect the health and well-being
of the American people. The budget invests in methods to address
chronic disease; protect American families from environmental toxins;
promote nutrition as well as food and drug safety; strengthen services
for American Indians and Alaska Natives; encourage innovation in
America's healthcare future; and focus resources toward proven and
effective initiatives. This budget, likewise, recognizes the fiscal
challenges our Country faces today, and the need to update and redirect
our investments to meet the needs of a rapidly changing world.
The Fiscal Year 2026 Budget request includes reforms to put
healthcare spending on a sustainable fiscal path. We must remake the
government to maximize efficiency and productivity in order to fulfill
the President's promise to Make America Healthy Again (MAHA). HHS has
made progress toward these goals, promoting the health of Americans
while instituting significant workforce reductions and identifying over
$13 billion anticipated in contract savings--and there is more to come.
Over the next few months, we will work together with Congress to
restructure the Department and improve how we deliver services to the
American people. HHS takes seriously our role as responsible stewards
of taxpayer dollars, and we look forward to working with you to
implement the President's agenda while continuing to cut government
bloat and rescope the Federal role. Protecting the health of Americans
has to be done hand in hand with protecting our Nation's fiscal
health--they rely on each other. The Fiscal Year 2026 Budget will
reduce duplication of programs and services, increase accountability,
and work with state and local governments to improve flexibility.
The Fiscal Year 2026 Budget protects key programs that Americans
rely on that keep us competitive with our enemies, and fulfill promises
made to Tribal Nations. This budget allows us to do our part to restore
fiscal responsibility to the Federal Government while optimizing HHS's
ability to improve and save American lives. The reductions made are
necessary to right-size the Department's budget, which has ballooned by
about 40 percent since the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Fiscal Year 2026 Budget focuses on restructuring efforts to
transform HHS to Make America Healthy Again. I look forward to working
with you on our vision to Make America Healthy Again. The President's
Budget for HHS also reflects proposals to meet the President's
comprehensive Government-wide Transformation Plan through a sweeping
restructuring that aims to identify opportunities to improve the work
HHS does for the American people, in terms of its efficacy, efficiency,
quality, and cost-effectiveness.
The HHS restructuring will serve multiple goals without impacting
critical services. First, beginning in fiscal year 2026 it could save
taxpayers an estimated $1.8 billion per year through a reduction in
workforce. Our reductions have focused on aligning HHS staffing levels
to reflect the size of HHS prior to the COVID-19 pandemic which saw
around a 15 percent increase in the number of employees.
Second, it will streamline the functions of the Department.
Currently, the 28 divisions of HHS contain many redundant units. The
restructuring plan will consolidate them into 15 new divisions,
including a new Administration for a Healthy America, or AHA, and will
centralize core functions such as Human Resources, Information
Technology, Procurement, External Affairs, and Policy. The
restructuring plan intends to reduce regional offices from 10 to 5 by
planning to close regional offices in high-cost cities. This
restructuring will reduce the number of full-time employees to
approximately 62,000, while preserving critical staff such as FDA food
safety inspectors.
Third, the overhaul will implement the new HHS priority of ending
America's epidemic of chronic illness by focusing on safe, wholesome
food, clean water, and the elimination of environmental toxins. These
priorities will be reflected in the reorganization of HHS.
Finally, the restructuring will improve Americans' experience with
HHS by making the agency more responsive and efficient, while ensuring
that Medicare, Medicaid, and other essential health services remain
intact.
In summary, these changes will allow us to act more nimbly and
focus on the core mission of improving the Nation's health. Without
duplication of resources, and reduced bureaucracy, HHS can use Federal
dollars to more directly impact the lives of those served by HHS
programs. HHS will be prepared to share additional information with
Congress in the coming weeks. We look forward to congressional
collaboration in this process.
Making Americans Healthy
One of the Department's top priorities is fighting the scourge of
chronic disease facing our Country. Today, Americans' overall health is
in a grievous condition. Over 70 percent of adults and a third of
children are overweight or obese. Diabetes is ten times more prevalent
than in 1960. Cancer among people 50 and under is rising by one or 2
percent a year. Autoimmune diseases, neurodevelopmental disorders,
asthma, Alzheimer's, ADHD, depression, addiction, and a host of other
physical and mental health conditions are on the rise.
The United States has worse health than any other developed nation,
yet we spend far more on healthcare--at least double; in some cases,
triple. Last year we spent $4.9 trillion, not counting indirect costs
like missed work. That's almost 17.6 percent of our Nation's GDP. But
more than that, it's a human tragedy--today, over half of all Americans
are chronically ill.
The President's Budget requests $94 billion in discretionary
funding to combat these challenges. This budget includes strategic
investments in the new Administration for a Healthy America (AHA). It
is my vision for this new agency to better coordinate programs targeted
to improve chronic care, disease prevention, and other health
resources.
The Fiscal Year 2026 Budget provides resources to the Department of
Health and Human Services that would allow the Secretary to tackle
issues related to nutrition, physical activity, healthy lifestyles,
over-reliance on medication and treatments, the effects of new
technological habits, environmental impacts, and food and drug quality
and safety.
CMS
Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program
remain a cornerstone of the MAHA agenda to improve outcomes for our
seniors and children. This budget continues CMS program funding to
maintain beneficiary service levels, streamline program administration,
and move toward improved health outcomes while eliminating non-
statutory and wasteful spending. The Trump administration remains
committed to protecting these programs by ensuring that Federal
taxpayer dollars are protected against waste, fraud, and abuse.
Mental Health and Substance Use
It is estimated that one in five adults in the United States lives
with mental illness--that's nearly 20 percent of the adult population.
Approximately 16 million Americans with mental illness had serious
thoughts of suicide. As the number of deaths by suicide continues to
increase, it is more important than ever that HHS expand access to the
care people need when they need it. An estimated 49.5 percent of
adolescents have had a mental health disorder at some point in their
lives. As child and youth mental health declines, HHS is dedicated to
providing resources to children and youth in their communities.
The Fiscal Year 2026 Budget invests in behavioral health by
streamlining programs to avoid duplication and supporting block grant
funding for these critical services. The Administration is committed to
combating the scourge of deadly drugs, especially synthetic opioids
like fentanyl, that have ravaged American communities, as President
Trump did during his first term. The President has made reducing the
initiation of drug use, particularly among young people, and increasing
the number of individuals receiving evidence-based treatment, leading
to long-term recovery from substance use disorders, a top priority. The
Budget also proposes to refocus activities that were formerly part of
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, by
eliminating funding for programs that duplicate block grant funding, or
are too small to have a national impact.
Primary Care
Under the President's Executive Order to establish the Make America
Healthy Again Commission, I am committed to investigating any potential
root causes of the chronic disease epidemic. As part of AHA, programs
related to primary care will be streamlined, and focused on needs of
all Americans no matter where they may live and at what income level.
The Budget and the transformation at HHS support these efforts and
ensures that primary care includes prevention and addresses the root
causes of chronic disease.
Head Start
For Americans to be healthy, we must start when they are children.
The President's Budget recommends Head Start continue to receive
funding equal to the Fiscal Year 2025 Enacted level. In exchange, Head
Start needs to be consistent with Administration priorities. This
includes increasing parental choice; improving health, education, and
employment outcomes; increasing program delivery efficiency; and
promoting parental engagement. Head Start directly supports local-level
institutions, including faith-based centers, empowering them to oversee
care. Head Start also enables parents to find dignity in work when
their children are enrolled in a safe and secure Head Start program.
Make Americans Safe
I am committed to making Americans safer. I am working to make sure
our tax dollars support healthy foods--and we are scrutinizing the
chemical additives in our food supply.
Wholesome food is a key component of the MAHA agenda and
maintaining FDA activities that enable the United States to identify
harmful ingredients, and overall make the food supply safer, will be a
key component to the Department's ability to realize a healthy future.
Protecting Our National Security and Sustaining Scientific
Competitiveness
This budget also supports the Nation's public health infrastructure
and capacity to respond to existing and emerging public health threats,
with a focus on infectious diseases, preparedness, and outbreak
response.
While we need to rescale our biomedical research budget, HHS will
continue to prioritize America's national security and competitiveness.
Biomedical research continues to be one of our Country's biggest
exports. NIH is the largest single public funder of biomedical and
behavioral research in the world. This budget includes $27.5 billion
for NIH, a rebalancing that will focus on essential research at a more
practical cost and invest in security infrastructure. We will focus
only on Gold Standard science at NIH and across HHS, increasing
transparency for research done there.
NIH has broken the trust of the American people with wasteful
spending, misleading information, risky research, and the promotion of
dangerous ideologies that undermine public health. The Administration
is committed to restoring accountability, public trust, and
transparency at the NIH.
Supporting and encouraging scientific research is a longstanding
Federal priority, one that results in both a growing economy and
Americans living longer lives. Executing this responsibility demands
that the Federal Government regularly considers how to organize this
support in the most efficient manner possible. HHS is committed to
safeguarding taxpayer resources so that institutions are adequately
supported at a sustainable level, and that we are only funding
essential costs, in line with private-sector standards. The budget
proposes to consolidate major HHS research institutions in NIH to
maximize the effectiveness of their research.
The proposed budget shifts NIH's focus away from foreign interests
and reforms its efforts on the core research activities that align with
the President's commitment to Make America Healthy Again. NIH will no
longer issue grants to promote radical gender ideology to the detriment
of America's youth, or fund dangerous gain-of-function research, though
related research will continue consistent with Administration policy
and oversight. Our Administration is committed to eliminating radical
gender ideologies that poison the minds of Americans.
Restoring Trust
At HHS, we're committed to empowering states, localities, and
Tribal communities by supporting science-based policies, rebuilding
trust in public health, and protecting future generations from harmful
exposures. We are committed to restoring a tradition of gold-standard,
evidence-based science--not one driven by politicized DEI, gender
ideology, nor sexual identity. We are removing the financial conflicts
of interest in our agencies--to create an honest, unbiased, science-
driven HHS, accountable to the President, to Congress, and to the
American people.
Americans do not want their tax dollars going to initiatives that
espouse radical ideologies. We are proposing to eliminate programs like
the Community Services Block Grants that have been hijacked from true
poverty reduction to fund DEI initiatives, saving taxpayers $770
million. Americans need to trust that we are good stewards of the
dollars they entrust to us, and this budget shows our commitment to
pursuing pathways to gain back taxpayers' trust.
We have also ended HHS as the principal vector for child
trafficking. The Budget re-focuses the Unaccompanied Alien Children
(UAC) program on its core mission of sheltering unaccompanied alien
children while also protecting them from child trafficking and labor
exploitation. During the Biden administration, HHS became a
collaborator in child trafficking for sex and slavery. The Biden
administration operated the UAC program like an assembly line,
prioritizing the quick release of children to insufficiently vetted
sponsors over the children's safety. And we have ended that. We are
very aggressively going out and trying to find these children that were
lost by the Biden administration.
The Budget refocuses the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
mission on core activities such as emerging and infectious disease
surveillance, outbreak investigations, and maintaining the Nation's
public health infrastructure, while streamlining programs and
eliminating waste. The Budget proposes merging multiple programs into
one grant program that will address Sexually Transmitted Diseases,
Viral Hepatitis, and Tuberculosis giving States more flexibility to
address local needs.
Strengthening the Indian Health Service
Through the Indian Health Service (IHS), HHS is responsible for
providing quality healthcare services to more than 2.2 million eligible
American Indians and Alaska Natives.
HHS has a unique trust responsibility to provide healthcare for
Tribes, including on remote reservations and other vulnerable
communities in Indian Country. Without this support, many of these
communities truly have no other options for care. The budget
prioritizes and preserves funding for this agency.
Looking forward, and consistent with our statutory authorities, we
recognize that our provision of quality healthcare in Indian Country
and beyond must change to achieve and ensure the high quality of these
services. As more Tribes have assumed the responsibilities of providing
healthcare for their members with support from the IHS, investments in
the budget reflect our support for the growth of Tribal self-governance
in the provision of healthcare.
* * *
The President's 2026 budget for HHS recognizes the importance of
focusing government spending on programs that work and reforming our
Nation's healthcare programs for a fast-changing world. This Budget
recognizes that securing America's future demands sound fiscal
management and responsible decisions about our priorities. If we are
serious about fulfilling HHS's mission of enhancing and protecting the
well-being of all Americans, we must adopt the bold innovation and
direction espoused by the President's Budget to Make America Healthy
Again.
______
[summary statement of secretary kennedy]
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee.
I'm honored to appear before you today to present the Department of
Health and Human Services' Fiscal Year 2026 budget.
Debilitating disease, contaminated food, toxic environments,
addiction, and mental illness affect families across every race, class,
and political belief. When my team and I took the helm at HHS, we set
out with clear goals. First, we aimed to make America healthy again,
with a special focus on the chronic disease epidemic. Second, we
committed to delivering more efficient, responsive, and effective
service to the over 100 million Americans who rely on Medicare,
Medicaid, and other programs. Third, we focused on achieving these
goals while cutting costs for taxpayers. We intend to do more--a lot
more--with less.
The budget I'm presenting today supports these goals and reflects
two enduring American values: compassion and responsibility. I invite
the Committee to unite around these ideals with me.
The United States remains the sickest developed nation, and we
spend $4.5 trillion annually on health care--two to three times more
per capita than comparable nations. Clearly, something is structurally
wrong with our approach.
Furthermore, health care costs are steadily increasing at a rate 2
percent greater than the economy. If we don't staunch this
unsustainable hemorrhage, we will ransom our children to bankruptcy,
servitude, and disastrous health consequences. Yes, an exploding debt
is a social determinant of health.
We won't solve this problem by throwing more money at it. We must
spend smarter. The 2026 budget cuts costs through restructuring--not by
eliminating essential services. We will reduce 28 divisions to 15,
eliminate redundant units, and centralize functions like HR,
procurement, and policy. These changes will return us to pre-COVID-19
staffing levels and yield immediate savings of $1.8 billion per year,
with more savings ahead.
We will shift funding away from bureaucracy and toward direct
impact.
Some things at HHS will not change. We will preserve legacy
programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start as the foundation of
the MAHA agenda. Vulnerable populations, seniors, and veterans deserve
consistent access to care, and I will ensure they receive it. Today, 83
million Americans--urban and rural--lack adequate access to primary
care physicians. We will prioritize these families, especially Native
American and Alaskan communities. We will protect IHS funding,
streamline its operations, and give tribes more autonomy in managing
resources.
Let me be clear: We intend to make the Trump HHS not just the most
effective, but also the most compassionate in U.S. history.
Our official budget statement outlines many priorities, but I want
to highlight a few:
First, we will consolidate programs to better tackle mental health
and addiction. These issues now rival chronic disease in their impact.
HHS will aggressively combat the opioid crisis, especially the spread
of synthetic drugs like fentanyl. We will empower state, local, and
Tribal leaders to create real solutions.
Second, we will address nutrition, physical activity, and healthy
lifestyles. The President's budget requests $94 billion in
discretionary funds to support these priorities, including the
Administration for a Healthy America (AHA). We will emphasize healthy
eating in Head Start and ensure the program continues to serve its
750,000 children and parents effectively.
Third, we will equip the FDA to expand its food safety efforts--
through research, regulation, inspection, and education--to remove
harmful chemicals from food and packaging.
Fourth, we will fund cutting-edge research at the NIH while cutting
risky or nonessential studies. That includes ending gain-of-function
experiments and research based on radical gender ideology. At the CDC,
we will return to core missions: tracking diseases, investigating
outbreaks, and sustaining public health infrastructure--while cutting
waste.
Fifth, we will eliminate DEI funding and redirect resources toward
real poverty reduction. We will move beyond lip service to communities
of color and take meaningful action to meet their needs.
Sixth, we will strengthen cybersecurity and health IT. The AI
revolution has arrived, and we must use new technology to manage health
data more efficiently and securely.
Finally, we will rebuild public trust--trust that eroded through
years of industry capture, waste, and misplaced priorities. We will
launch a new era of transparency and public service, creating an
honest, science-driven HHS that answers to the President, to Congress,
and to the American people.
I look forward to working with Congress to pursue this mission
together--as a bipartisan cause. Let's work side by side to make
America healthy again.
______
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I will start with
questions. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate that NIH wants to
recalibrate its research portfolio to address conditions not
previously attended to sufficiently, nutrition, conditions such
as a rise after viral infection like myalgic encephalomyelitis
or chronic fatigue syndrome.
But this is happening in tandem with reports that HHS is
closing the office for long COVID research and practice. And I
talk to people for whom long COVID is seriously impacting their
life.
To what extent will HHS continue to support research, data
collection, and other programs focused on understanding ongoing
health impacts of long COVID?
Secretary Kennedy. Senator, I am 100 percent committed to
finding treatments for long COVID. I am deeply involved in that
personally. I have a son who is really dramatically affected by
long COVID.
I have many, many friends who are affected by that, and by
Lyme disease, incidentally, which we also--is also a priority.
The COVID office was cut by an Executive Order from the White
House, but we have--everybody at NIH and at CDC is committed to
these kind of studies. And I can tell you personally, I will
make sure that they happen.
The Chairman. Thank you. The NIH is the largest public
funder of biomedical research in the world, given us an edge
over countries like China with whom we are obviously a
geopolitical rival.
But it takes a long time to develop this. And the rising
prevalence of neurodegenerative disease is one area in which we
have an impending crisis if we don't support the research and
advanced cures. And my concern--and now I will speak as a guy
from Louisiana. If NIH funding is substantially reduced, they
have folks at my universities, at Tulane and LSU, who are doing
work on these sorts of things.
Knowing that the NIH budget is getting squeezed, and the
indirect cost likewise, how will the NIH successfully do more
with less? How will we build those new scientists to find these
cures and to compete with geopolitical rivals?
Secretary Kennedy. Well, for one thing, Senator Cassidy,
you are talking about neurodegenerative disease. Now----
The Chairman. For example, ALS or Alzheimer's.
Secretary Kennedy. ALS, right. The Chinese are not spending
a lot of money on DEI. And there are--and we are cutting those
studies.
We are cutting studies on gain-of-function studies, and we
are cutting grants to foreign scientists from adversarial
countries, and particularly the Chinese, which have the
Thousand Talents Program, which is openly trying to exploit
U.S. research and take our IP.
We spend more than any country in the world on biomedical
research. We spend--NIH controls about 70 percent of the global
funding for biomedical research. The cuts we have made today
are cuts--are administrative cuts.
As far as I know, we have not fired any working scientist.
Of the working scientists, the people who are actually doing
science, there are some people who were--scientists that were
doing IT or administration. But in terms of--who did lose their
jobs. But in terms of working scientists, our policy was to
make sure none of them were lost and that research continues.
The Chairman. Let me--thank you. Let me ask you, the budget
proposes to eliminate several large block grants for hospital
and health Department emergency preparedness, and other core
public health capabilities, explaining states are better
equipped. To fund these activities.
Now, I agree that frontline public health happens at the
local level, but what works well in say Louisiana may not work
well in a State like New York. But rural under-resourced states
especially rely upon Federal funding to support public health.
How do you propose we balance competing interests,
returning power to states because there is a difference in how
different states do it, but replace the funding necessary to
combat these public health problems?
Secretary Kennedy. Well, I think it is a balance, Mr.
Chairman. And we have a legal obligation, CDC has a legal
obligation, to do national pandemic response, and we will meet
that obligation.
In fact, we are going to improve it, and particularly if we
can get support from this body, to refund, reappropriate the
PAHPA, which is critical for a pandemic response. But there are
some functions that are local in nature. And in those cases, we
will be supporting local infrastructure to respond.
They know better than we know, and we saw this during some
of the hurricane response with Governor DeSantis's response,
which was really Florida localized. There was no deaths and
very little destruction to a hurricane that was as bad as the
one that followed that relied on Federal response and was
really a catastrophe for the state.
I think experience shows that the locality is going to
often do better with some functions, particularly with the
hospitals and infrastructure. But we are not relinquishing our
responsibility at CDC to manage national emergencies.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Sanders.
Senator Sanders. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me start
going back to prescription drugs. Mr. Secretary, did I hear you
correctly to state that your goal is to have Americans pay the
lowest prices in the world or equivalent to what is paid in
other major countries? That is my goal. That you are prepared
to work with us on legislation to achieve that goal?
Secretary Kennedy. Absolutely.
Senator Sanders. All right. And I believe there's
bipartisan support for it. I believe that if the leadership
here prioritizes that, we can do that in a very short period of
time. Look forward to that. Let me ask you this, as Secretary
of HHS. We have in America today some 85 million Americans who
are uninsured or underinsured.
We spend more per capita as you have indicated than any
other country. Is healthcare a human right? Are we making
America healthy when so many people cannot afford to go to a
doctor, when 68,000 people a year die because they don't get to
a doctor when they should? Is healthcare a human right? Will
you work with us to guarantee health care to every man, woman,
and child in America?
Secretary Kennedy. Well, I think you are asking two
different questions. You are asking a philosophical question
about whether it is a human right, like a Constitutional right.
As an attorney, I would say that it is not a right of a
kind that we otherwise enshrined in the Constitution, because
healthcare costs your neighbor money. If I smoke cigarettes for
20 years, I make that choice, which is my choice----
Senator Sanders. I don't have a lot of time, so I just--
what I am get----
Secretary Kennedy. If you ask a question--if you are asking
me a philosophical question, I got to give you a thoughtful
answer.
Senator Sanders. Within 30 seconds.
[Laughter.]
Secretary Kennedy. It is not like freedom of speech, which
costs everybody----
Senator Sanders. But every other country, Mr. Secretary,
every other country guarantees health care to all people as a
right. Should we as Americans?
Secretary Kennedy. The objective is to get Americans the
level of the health care that they want, the choice, which
Americans want.
Senator Sanders. They don't want the choice to be
uninsured. They don't want the choice to die because they don't
get to a doctor on time.
Secretary Kennedy. Americans prefer private insurance to
other insurance sources.
Senator Sanders. Do you believe--Okay.
Secretary Kennedy. What I would say is I want to find a
solution to this. I want every American to have insurance.
President Trump wants every American to be insured and have
access to health care. The question is, how do we get there?
Obamacare is not working. It is not working. And this is the--
--
Senator Sanders. We can--sorry to interrupt you. All right,
the reconciliation----
Secretary Kennedy. My job is to try to make it work.
Senator Sanders. All right. I have limited time. The
piece--the reconciliation bill that is now being worked on in
the House will come to the Senate. As it stands right now, cuts
Medicaid in the Affordable Care Act by more than $715 billion,
which the CBO has estimated would eliminate health insurance
for 13.7 million Americans.
Also raise those payments for millions of others. Is
throwing 13 million Americans off of the health care they have,
poor and working class people, keeping America healthy?
Secretary Kennedy. I haven't seen that number. I have seen
the number 8 million. And you are the people--the cuts are not
true cuts. The cuts are eliminations of waste, abuse, and
fraud. And I can go through--I can go through with the people
who will lose it. A million people--there are million people--
--
Senator Sanders. Mr. Secretary, I really don't mean to be
rude, but as you know, I have a very limited amount of time.
Secretary Kennedy. You asked the question. I am going to
answer it.
Senator Sanders. Well--yes, I have got a bunch of questions
that I would like you to answer as well. All right. We talk
about austerity, doing more with less, but in that very same
bill that is being worked on in the House right now, there are
$235 billion in tax breaks for the top two-tenth of 1 percent.
Do you think that makes sense, when that same bill would throw
13 million people off of Medicaid? Should we give tax breaks to
billionaires and throw kids and others off of Medicaid?
Secretary Kennedy. You are conflating the Congressional
bills with proposals from the President. The President----
Senator Sanders. No, I am talking about the Congressional
bill. I am talking about the bill, the reconciliation bill.
Secretary Kennedy. I mean the President is not trying to do
tax cuts for billionaires. He is trying to have no tax on tips
and no tax for overtime.
Senator Sanders. $235 billion by--through the estate tax.
Secretary Kennedy. How many people--how many billionaires
do you know that are making overtime or making any--tips----
Senator Sanders. $235 billion--look, it is a big bill.
There are a lot of provisions in it. But you cannot deny, the
top two-tenths of 1 percent will get $235 billion in tax rates
while we cut Medicaid.
The Chairman. Okay.
Senator Paul.
Senator Paul. Thank you. I want to commend Secretary
Kennedy and the Administration for putting forward less
spending. And one of the reasons I think we need to look at NIH
and other grant-making organizations is, if you keep giving
them the same amount, you will keep getting the same frivolous
grants.
I will recite a couple of them so people can remember.
660,000 was given to study the impact of microaggressions on
obesity-related eating in Latino Americans. Really maybe heart
disease, diabetes, obesity, but eating disorders in Latino
Americans. Here is another one.
$419,000 to study if lonely rats seek cocaine more than
happy rats. Maybe we could eliminate that and that could go to
a real disease. Most recently, NIH recorded a $620,000 grant
for LGBTQ+ inclusive teen pregnancy prevention program for
transgender boys. And what they discovered was that girls who
think they are boys are at least as likely to get pregnant as
girls who thinks they are girls.
Amazing, the science. But we should all agree that is just
left-wing ideology. That is not science. We should study
obesity, and cancer, and diabetes. I commend you for shifting
the balance. I have a specific question about closing down Fort
Detrick recently. My understanding is that a contractor
intentionally slashed the hazmat suit or the biosafety suit of
someone who was handling Ebola.
You were immediately attacked in the press by saying it was
just anti-science. Once again shutting down science. Was this a
serious breach, and is it being investigated?
Secretary Kennedy. We brought in the FBI to investigate it.
And as you say, it appears like it was a deliberate criminal
act to try to--that was a kind of--that is equivalent to
attempted murder because the kind of microbe, the pathogens
that they were handling have a very, very high case fatality
rate--up to 50 percent.
The disturbing thing about it is that there are three leaks
a week globally from BSL4 labs, and any of those could be
cataclysmic for humanity. And as a result, we not only closed
Fort Detrick, and we brought the FEI in to investigate that. We
also declared the end of gain of function studies, again, that
will allow those kind of leaks to continue.
Senator Paul. I commend you for that. I think ultimately
legislation will be needed because the next Administration
could reverse it. I think there is bipartisan support for some
controls on gain of function. As you shut down gain of function
though, you have to decide what it is, and then you have to
look for it.
I would suggest that at both Fort Detrick and at the NBAC
lab that is nearby run by the DHS, that we look at experiments
involving Ebola, avian flu, Marburg virus, to determine one,
whether they are gain a function, but also just determine
whether the experiments are wise. I am told in public records
that they are doing experiments or have done experience to
aerosolize Ebola at the NBAC lab. That is the DHS lab nearby to
Fort Detrick.
My hope is that when you investigate whether to do gain of
function or what is gain of function, what is being done, that
you will compile that and at least give us a report in
Congress, and we are going to ask for it. But so there can be
public scrutiny of these things. You will help scrutinize it,
but the whole public needs to know how dangerous some of these
things are and whether we should be doing them.
The idea of aerosolizing Ebola, I think, is a--and, or
training Ebola to be aerosolized is incredibly dangerous,
probably goes against the biological weapons convention, and I
would like to hear a little bit about whether or not as you
investigate this, you plan on bringing information back to
Congress or to the public.
Secretary Kennedy. Yes, we are going to be absolutely
transparent. I am--I have a trip planned to Fort Detrick with
Kristi Noem, the Director of DHS, and with Jay Bhattacharya and
other people in my agency, or experts on bioweapons, or experts
on gain-of-function research and we are going to be absolutely
transparent.
We have also proposed a methodology for regulating and for
determining which--what is dangerous gain of function and what
is legitimate scientific investigation, and how to bring the
public into that debate, which I think as you point out is
absolutely critical.
That is where we messed up last time, and as you know, we
have some of the Democrats here who are talking about the great
science from NIH, but now we have a major agency, intelligence
agency, the CIA, the FBI, the DOE, and the State Department
have all agreed that NIH research almost certainly led to the
pandemic, the COVID pandemic.
That is not the kind of the result that we should be
allowing or enabling, and we are going to end that now.
Senator Paul. If possible--the trip to Fort Detrick and to
NBAC, we would like to be included or invited on that trip, if
possible.
Secretary Kennedy. Absolutely.
The Chairman. Senator Murray.
Senator Murray. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, one
of my constituents, her name is Natalie Phelps. She is a mom of
two from Bainbridge Island in Washington State. She has been
fighting aggressive stage four colorectal cancer for nearly 5
years now. Her best hope now is a clinical trial she is
participating in at the NIH Clinical Center. She flew out to
NIH a few weeks ago for her first appointment, and her care
team there wanted her to come back in 4 weeks to start
treatment.
But because of the thoughtless mass firing of thousands of
critical employees across NIH and HHS that you have carried
out, Natalie's doctors at that clinical center have told her
they have no choice but to delay her treatment by an additional
4 weeks.
Now, an extra 4 weeks may not sound like a long time, but I
will tell you, for stage four cancer patients like Natalie,
this could mean the difference between life and death.
Secretary Kennedy, how many staff have been cut from the NIH's
Clinical Center? I want a specific number.
Secretary Kennedy. I can't tell you that now, Senator
Murray. But what I can tell you is that if you contact my
office tomorrow, I will look specifically into that.
Senator Murray. Well, that is not acceptable. I want an
answer back on that. She deserves it. I do--she doesn't have
much time. She deserves an answer back.
Secretary Kennedy. Wouldn't you rather get her into that
clinical trial as fast as you can?
Senator Murray. Absolutely. I wanted----
Secretary Kennedy. If you contact my office tomorrow, this
is a--if that happened----
Senator Murray. You are here to defend your budget. I am
here to ask you questions about the impact of that.
Secretary Kennedy. You asked me--you asked me about a
specific case that I want to help with. I don't think anybody--
I don't think that should happen to anybody.
Senator Murray. Okay. Well, what have you, and I mean you
personally, done to assess how those staff cuts are impacting
patient care? She is one of many. What have you done to assess
that?
Secretary Kennedy. I provided the guidelines that said we
shouldn't--no clinical trials should be affected by the cuts. I
have--Matt----
Senator Murray. Mr. Secretary, I just have a short amount
of time. They are impacting clinical trials.
Secretary Kennedy. You asked me a question. Do you want me
to answer it?
Senator Murray. I want to tell you. You need to know this.
You are here to defend the NIH budget which you are----
Secretary Kennedy. Senator, do you want me to answer your
question? Do you want me to answer your question, Senator?
Senator Murray. I want to tell you that Natalie is sitting
there waiting for treatment and you are here to----
Secretary Kennedy. I am offering to help her, but you don't
care. You don't care about Natalie. I've offered to help
Natalie.
Senator Murray. I am asking you a question and it is
critical. You are here to defend cutting NIH by half. Do you
genuinely believe that won't result in more stories like
Natalie's?
Secretary Kennedy. I think the cuts that we are--that are
now proposed by the NIH are going to hurt. I think that
President Trump, listen, there is no agency head in the
Government, like myself, that wants to see their budget cut.
And----
Senator Murray. Well, and I asked you, have you personally
assessed what this is doing to patients? And I am telling you
one story of one person. It is an impacting life or death
situation. I think it is pretty----
Secretary Kennedy. You want me to answer your question,
Senator?
Senator Murray. Well, you did.
Secretary Kennedy. Okay. I have not. You have not allowed
me to answer it.
Senator Murray. Well, I will just say that it is my job to
be a voice for people like Natalie and countless other patients
who are like her. So, you have got to fix this. I want to know,
and I want a personal update on Natalie's case. And you have
offered that. Please give that to me in the next 24 hours. And
I expect details and transparency about the state of NIH
clinical care.
Secretary Kennedy. You contact my office, Senator, and I
will do everything in my power to try to get Natalie into
that----
Senator Murray. Let me--I have got 1 minute left, and I
want to ask you about the NIOSH cuts. I am really alarmed by
your decision to essentially eliminate the National Institutes
for Occupational Safety and Health. You have already fired
nearly 90 percent of the staff.
That includes the staff in my state at the Spokane Research
Lab. Those are experts. They do essential work to protect
miners, and firefighters, and farm workers. People who work in
dangerous conditions. I am told that after backlash you are
reinstating some of those, mainly in the West Virginia office.
But there doesn't--nobody in the Western United States. And
there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to how you have
made these decisions. And how do you explain this to my
constituents in Spokane who are out of a job, and the workers
that are being impacted by that?
Secretary Kennedy. The work in NIOSH will not be
interrupted. We are going--I have brought back 328 workers,
mainly in the Cleveland office, and the Morgantown office, and
for the World Trade Center site.
That work will continue. The work on mine safety will
continue. The epicenter of that work has been Cleveland, and it
has been Morgantown. We understand it is a critically important
function, and I did not want to see it end.
Senator Murray. Mr. Chairman, I would just say you can't
fire 90 percent of the people and assume the work gets done.
The Chairman. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary,
nearly seven million Americans are living with Alzheimer's
disease. And caring for people with this devastating chronic
disease costs us some $360 billion a year. I am the author of
the law that is known as the BOLD Act.
It takes a public health approach to Alzheimer's. It
educates providers, promotes earlier diagnosis. It helps
caregivers, and it also promotes lifestyle changes. I have
worked very hard to make sure that HHS has the resources to
carry out this law, which was just recently extended. I am
concerned that the reductions in force of approximately 10,000
staff across HHS will completely undermine this Act.
This Act in many ways is very consistent with your approach
of looking at public health issues for chronic diseases. For
example, the Healthy Aging branch administers the BOLD Act for
Alzheimer's. It has lost all of its staff.
How can you ensure that the CDC continues to implement the
BOLD Act and the Alzheimer's programs under it when all of the
staff responsible for that administration have either been
placed on administrative leave or let go?
Secretary Kennedy. I Don't know enough about that program.
I know that under the--that division has been folded into the
America--the Agency for Healthy America. And a lot of the
reports that whole divisions have been liquidated were just
wrong. They were divisions that were being reassigned under the
reorg.
Now, I am under a constrain here because at 4 o'clock
yesterday afternoon we were told that there was--that a Federal
judge granted a TRO in our case on the reorg. And my attorneys
have asked me not to talk about any details of the reorg today.
So I--but on that budget line, I will work with you. I am
committed, Alzheimer's has run in my family.
As you know my cousin Maria Shriver who is deeply involved
in it. The NIH had a very, very checkered history on studying
Alzheimer's because of the amyloid plaque scandal. And we have
an opportunity now to do really good science and find a cure
very quickly.
Also find out equally, importantly, why so many people are
getting Alzheimer's in this generation. I want to make that
happen. I want to work with you, Senator, to make sure that
happens and that those programs continue.
Senator Collins. Thank you. I chaired recently the first
Appropriations Committee hearing of the year, and we have
focused on biomedical research and how important it is that
America not lose its global edge in innovation that is
producing life-saving and life-enhancing discoveries.
Among the many issues that we covered, as you might expect,
the hearing explored the 15 percent arbitrary, one size fits
all percent cap that NIH has imposed on indirect, but still
research-related costs for its grants. What we heard is that
this cap will mean less basic research, fewer clinical trials,
and that it will also cause our scientists and researchers to
leave the United States and go to other countries.
I believe strongly that this proposed cap is poorly thought
out, that it is harmful, and I know that it violates current
law because since 2018, we have included in the Appropriations
bill specific language that prevents NIH from imposing such a
cap.
I know the system needs to be looked at, but are you
reviewing how NIH's approach of this one size fits all 15
percent on indirect costs would affect laboratories, whether
they are private, nonprofit labs, or whether they are in
universities, as far as doing crucial biomedical research?
Secretary Kennedy. Senator, we are. And you and I have
talked about this issue. And I think that the impetus for the
cap was that there were a lot of private universities with
giant endowments like Stanford and Harvard that were getting
indirect payments of 78--70, 78 percent.
What that means if you get a million dollar grant, NIH then
has to pay you an extra $780,000, or administrative costs. And
a lot of those costs weren't even going to anything to do with
science. They were going to the university budget. And in order
to curb that abuse, we adopted a 15 percent which is the
industry standard. That is what the Gates Foundation or any
other foundation would pay.
But I understand the University of Maine, University of
Alabama, many other universities, state universities were not
abusing it. We lost about $9 billion a year in those kind of
costs. And so, we have a plan for how to address.
Issues like what is happening at the University of Maine. I
am being gaveled out, so I will talk to you privately about
that.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Baldwin.
Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary
Kennedy, you run a Department that touches the lives of almost
every American. Yet for this budget hearing, these are the six
pages that we have gotten in terms of your budget request.
We are also seven and a half months into this fiscal year,
and yet you are not telling the American public anything about
how you are spending the billions in taxpayer dollars right
now. You had to submit an operating plan to the Congress, and
this is just a sample page. But 530 programs simply have
asterisks. Secretary Kennedy, this isn't about your hiding
information from me.
This is about your hiding information from the American
public. And if you are going to cut cancer research or gut
mental health support at least stand by your work and explain
it to the American people.
Now, Secretary Kennedy, I want to start with what I hope is
an easy question for you. Do you think lead poisoning in
children is a significant concern?
Secretary Kennedy. Is lead poisoning--?
Senator Baldwin. In children a significant concern.
Secretary Kennedy. Is an extremely significant concern.
Senator Baldwin. Thank you. Then I would like to know why
your Department has effectively shut down the very program to
address lead poisoning in children. The city of Milwaukee
requested assistance from the CDC to help the city respond to
lead poisoning cases tied to public schools.
Six schools have been closed, displacing more than 1,800
school children. The request for Federal assistance was denied
because of lack of staff. The entire childhood lead poisoning
branch has been fired. In the words of a Milwaukee mom, it
really sends a message of, you don't matter.
I don't know what you would say to parents who must now
test their children for lead and deal with school closures. But
do you intend to eliminate this branch at CDC, yes or no?
Secretary Kennedy. No, we do not.
Senator Baldwin. Okay. Because you cannot tell us that you
want to make America healthy again when you are willfully
destroying programs that keep children safe and healthy from
lead poisoning. Congress dedicated $51 million in funding for
this particular program.
But when a community asks for help to prevent lifelong
complications for children, and there was no one there to pick
up the phone--and it is not because this program is
ineffective. It is because you fired the entire team whose job
it is to support communities like Milwaukee.
Secretary Kennedy. If that money has been appropriated, we
will spend that money. If it has been appropriated to
Milwaukee, we will spend it in Milwaukee. I have spent a lot of
time in Milwaukee working on that----
Senator Baldwin. It is to provide expert--the entire staff
has been fired. Secretary Kennedy, I did note in your opening
testimony, although we wouldn't know it from the skinny budget
that we have, that you plan on funding the Head Start program.
But I want to tell you about the ramifications of what has
happened to date with regard to Head Start. I have heard from
families across the state. People who are terrified about these
uncertainty and instability surrounding Head Start. Just 1 week
into President Trump's administration, Head Start programs in
Wisconsin suddenly couldn't access their grant funding.
It forced one Head Start in Waukesha, Wisconsin to
temporarily close, leaving 250 families without care. Over the
last 4 months, HHS has provided roughly $1 billion less to Head
Start programs across the country than during the same period
last year. The delays in funding have exacerbated uncertainty
for programs needing to make payroll. And in some instances,
like the one I cited in Waukesha, programs have had to shut
their doors until the payments came through.
Now, I don't know what you would say to a parent who is
unable to drop their child off at preschool because you failed
to get already appropriated money out the door. Or maybe I
should ask you, what would you say to a parent who shows up for
childcare or for Head Start and the doors are closed?
Secretary Kennedy. I would be very sad if somebody showed
up--I fought very, very hard to make sure that there would be
no cuts.
Senator Baldwin. What is causing the delays in Head Start
funding? That is my question.
Secretary Kennedy. I fought very hard to make sure that
Head Start gets all of its funding next year.
Senator Baldwin. Well, we need it this year. And why are
there delays now?
Secretary Kennedy. I don't know that there are, Senator,
and I will look into it. But I don't know--there should not be
any delays. The funding is there. We are spending it. It is
allocated. I don't know why there would be those kind of
problems.
There were--I can tell you that within the agency, there
were, there were people who wanted to make the Trump
administration look bad and that there were checks held up that
shouldn't have been. I will have to look into that, Senator.
The Chairman. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary,
welcome. Good to see you. I want to talk a little bit about the
HHS reorganization on some of the programs that impact Alaska's
most vulnerable populations. I sent you a note letting you know
that just after this hearing, I am going to be chairing a
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, specifically examining HHS
tribal programs that are outside of IHS.
I really thank you for your early efforts to exempt IHS
health care providers from the RIFs. That was very important.
But I have also heard concerns from tribal leaders on the
impacts of RIFs to key HHS programs serving their communities.
I know you are going to have some of your folks tuning in
on that, and I really appreciate that. But some of the other
reductions that we are looking at within your budget do have
significant consequences to a state like mine.
One is the LIHEAP program, the Low Income Energy
Assistance. For us, it is not a budget line item. You have been
to Alaska. You know that the temperatures there can get really,
really tough. Keeps people from freezing to death in their
homes. Another program is NIOSH.
I know that HHS had rescinded a number of those employees.
That was great news. But the employees that received RIF
notices for the program were not rescinded in the NIOSH Center
for Marine Safety and Health Studies. So this is--this is a big
deal for our commercial fishing safety.
It could effectively leave our fishing fleet out of
compliance with Coast Guard safety regs, so we are watching
that very, very carefully. And then, again, shared focus here
on making sure that our children are as healthy as they
possibly can be.
I want to look to ways that we can strengthen and not
eliminate the Head Start program. But I wanted to ask you----
Secretary Kennedy. You are talking about the NIOSH program.
Senator Murkowski. NIOSH, yes.
Secretary Kennedy. You should talk to me about that. And as
you know, that is something that I am deeply concerned with the
commercial fishery. So, we should talk about it and let's, and
let's work for a solution.
Senator Murkowski. Got it. I am with you right there. Let
me ask about domestic violence and sexual assault funding.
Right now I am talking--I am receiving a lot of incoming from
our community based domestic and sexual violence program
operators.
They are really concerned about the delayed release of
Fiscal Year 2025 funding, the absence of notices of funding
opportunities, as well as proposed cuts or consolidations that
might threaten the Office of Family Violence Prevention and
CDC's Division of Violence Prevention.
You have got some programs there that are really
foundational to domestic and sexual violence. They have been
reauthorized with bipartisan support, so. I am going to enter
into the record a letter from the National Task Force. And it
basically--was sent to you, I guess, yesterday. Just urging the
communication of concrete plans for releasing some of these
funds.
[The following information can be found on page 55 in
Additional Material:]
You are--I am going to raise that to your level. But I want
to make sure that we are sending the right signal to so many
who are just really on the edge with, again, these community
based services that are helping the most vulnerable of the most
vulnerable. So we have got the funding that is out there. It is
just delayed. We need help releasing that.
Secretary Kennedy. My understanding is that the domestic
violence funding was not cut, so I don't know. I mean, I have
to go back and check, but I specifically asked about that
program last night and was told that there was no cuts. That
President Trump is committed to it. And so, I don't know why
people would be experiencing even delays.
Senator Murkowski. It may be that it is--with the RIFs, you
don't have people that are processing these things. So again, I
want this to be at the top of your screen.
Secretary Kennedy. That could be.
Senator Murkowski. Last question for you. I mentioned
LIHEAP. The budget proposal, the skinny budget proposes to
eliminate LIHEAP. And the proposal says that it is unnecessary
because states have policies preventing utility disconnection
for low-income households, effectively making LIHEAP a pass-
through benefiting utilities in the Northeast.
Further, LIHEAP rewards States like New York and
California, two of the top recipients for LIHEAP funding, which
have implemented anti-consumer policies. I am just telling you,
we are not in the Northeast. We are not in that bucket. We are
cold. There are other places that are hot. LIHEAP is a
lifesaver.
I did see your statement from yesterday saying that OMB was
thinking that President Trump's energy policy is going to
reduce costs dramatically. It may. It may be a while. Right now
folks in Alaska still need those ugly diesel generators to keep
warm, so I would ask----
Secretary Kennedy. I know. I was on a Navajo--first of all,
I have heard that my whole life because my family was involved
in providing low-cost energy to the poor in New England. And
there are people in New England who suffer from--if energy
prices are high and you have a cold winter.
I was on the Navajo Reservation a couple of weeks ago and
the Navajo President, Buu Nygren, said to me, if we cut LIHEAP,
people will die on this reservation. I know the same is true in
Alaska.
The presumption behind the budget cuts were that the energy
prices were going to drop dramatically in which case these
payments would just become a subsidy to the oil industry. If
that doesn't happen, I would expect Congress would then still
appropriate the money and I will spend it.
I have already spent $400 million between January and now
on this program, and we have made to get it out--made sure to
get it out to all the families that needed it, so----
Senator Murkowski. I think you are going to find a lot of
support on this Committee for that.
Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Secretary
Kennedy, I want to talk to you about your relationship with
this Committee and this Congress. I want to talk to you about
the statements that you made to the Chairman of this Committee
and to Members of this Committee during your confirmation
hearing about vaccines.
You didn't tell the truth. I find that to be really
dangerous for our relationship. If I were the Chairman, who
believes in vaccines and voted for you because he believed what
you said about supporting vaccines, my head would be exploding.
In the hearing, you told us, ``I will not work to impound,
divert, or otherwise reduce any funding appropriated by
Congress for the purpose of vaccination programs.'' That is not
the truth. You have done exactly----
Secretary Kennedy. I have----
Senator Murphy. Let me finish my question.
Secretary Kennedy. I didn't hear what you said. I am just
asking you to repeat it so I can understand your question.
Senator Murphy. During the hearing--during the hearing--I
will repeat it. During the hearing, you said to this Committee
and to the Finance Committee, ``I will not work to impound,
divert, or otherwise reduce funding appropriated by Congress
for the purpose of vaccination programs.''
That is not what happened. You have done the opposite. You
canceled $12 billion in grants to the states, including my
state, that are used to administer and track vaccines. You
promised Chairman Cassidy----
Secretary Kennedy. When did I do that?
Senator Murphy. Madam Chair, would you allow me to finish
my question?
Secretary Kennedy. When did I do that?
Senator Murphy. Let me--let me finish my question----
Secretary Kennedy. You are making accusations. Just tell me
when I did it so I can understand what the question is.
Senator Murphy. You have canceled $12 billion in public
health grants to states. Whether you know this or not, that
funding is used by the states in part to be able to administer
and dispense information about vaccines. Let me give you----
Secretary Kennedy. Which programs?
Senator Murphy. Mr. Secretary, let me give you the full
panoply of the things you have said before this Committee that
didn't turn out to be true. You also promised Chairman Cassidy
that the FDA would not change vaccine standards from
``historical norms.'' But what happened as soon as you were
sworn in?
You announced new standards for vaccine approvals that you
proudly referred to in your own press release as a radical
departure from current practice. And experts say that departure
will delay approvals. You also said specific to the measles
vaccine that you support the measle vaccine, but you have
consistently been undermining the measles vaccine.
You told the public that the vaccine wanes very quickly.
You went on the Dr. Phil Show and said that the measles vaccine
was never fully tested for safety. You said there is fetal
debris in the measles vaccine.
Secretary Kennedy. All true.
Senator Murphy. This morning----
Secretary Kennedy. All true. All true.
Senator Murphy. This morning in front of----
Secretary Kennedy. Do you want me to lie to the public?
Senator Murphy. That is not--none of that is true.
Secretary Kennedy. Of course it is true. Of course it is
true, Senator. Senator, begging your pardon, you do not know
what you are talking about.
Senator Murphy. I will submit for the record----
Senator Murkowski. Let's have a little bit of order so that
you can get your question, and he can get his statement.
Senator Murphy. Madam Chair, I didn't ask for a response
yet.
Senator Murkowski. I understand.
Senator Murphy. I would like to lay out the predicate of my
question before I am interrupted by the witness. He should have
some respect for this Committee.
Senator Murkowski. Go ahead. Go ahead.
Senator Murphy. Just this morning in front of the House of
Representatives, you also said that you, in fact, would not
recommend that kids get vaccinated for measles. You said you
would just lay out the pros and cons.
Okay, so this is the summation of everything that you have
said to compromise people's faith in the measles vaccine in
particular. It is contrary to what you said before this
Committee. You said you support the measles vaccine, but then
you have laid out a set of facts that are contested.
I will submit information for the record from experts who
can contest what you have said about the vaccine. And the
result is to undermine faith in the vaccines. Kind of like
saying, listen, I think you should swim in that lake, but the
lake is probably toxic, and there is probably a ton of snakes
and alligators in that lake, but I think you should swim in it.
Nobody is going to swim in that lake if that is what you say.
I want you to acknowledge that when you say you support the
measles vaccine, and then go out and repeatedly undermine the
vaccine with information that is contested by public health
experts, that is not supporting the vaccine. And so, I guess I
have two simple questions for you.
One is, can you clarify what you said in the House this
morning? Are you or are you not recommending that families get
their children vaccinated, or are you just giving people the
pros and cons? And do you understand that when you say these
things about the measles vaccine, what ends up happening is
less people get the vaccine. That may be what you want.
But do you understand that the result of constantly
questioning the efficacy or safety of the vaccine results in
less people getting the vaccine. So, I don't necessarily want
to spend the remaining 20 seconds in an argument over the
science, but you at least understand that is the consequence of
what you are saying? And are you actually still recommending
people get the vaccine or are you not?
Secretary Kennedy. If I advise you to swim in a lake that I
knew there to be alligators in, wouldn't you want me to tell
you there were alligators in it?
Senator Murphy. Are you recommending the measles vaccine or
not?
Secretary Kennedy. What I have said, and what I said in
the----
Senator Murphy. It doesn't sound like you are if that is--
--
Secretary Kennedy. Are you going to let me answer? Are you
going to keep----
Senator Murphy. Are you or are you not?
Secretary Kennedy. Are you going to let me answer? What I
pledged before this Committee during my confirmation is that I
would tell the truth--that I will have radical transparency. I
am going to tell the truth about everything we know, and we
don't know about vaccines.
Senator Murphy. Are you recommending the measles vaccine or
not?
Secretary Kennedy. I am not going to just tell people that
everything is safe and effective if I know that there is
issues. I need to respect people's intelligence.
Senator Murphy. I think you are answering the question. I
think you are answering the question. That is really dangerous
for the American public and for families in this country.
Senator Murkowski. We are going to--we are going to move to
Senator Marshall.
Secretary Kennedy. The reason they have lost faith in this
program is because they have been lied to by public officials
for year, after year, after year.
Senator Murphy. The Secretary of Health and Human Services
is no longer recommending the measles vaccine----
Senator Murkowski. Senator Marshall.
Secretary Kennedy. By the way, I said at the hearing this
morning that I was recommending the measles vaccine. You can go
look at the transcript.
Senator Murkowski. Senator Marshall.
Senator Marshall. Madam Chairman. Thank you so much for
being here, Mr. Secretary. We are glad you are here. Let's stay
on the measles vaccine just for a second. Let me catch my
breath after that--all that. I am an obstetrician. If a 25-
year-old pregnant woman asked me if she should take the measles
vaccine, the MMR, I would have--give her the answer, no you
shouldn't.
But if she was 25 and trying to get pregnant, I would give
her different advice. I have always valued the sanctity of the
physician-patient relationship. I went to medical school for 4
years. I did 4 years of residency. I delivered thousands of
babies.
It is my job to give that recommendation. What is the role
of the Secretary of HHS as far as recommendations of vaccine,
and just discuss it a little bit further.
Secretary Kennedy. Well, the vaccine recommendations,
Senator, are normally made through ACIP, the Advisory Committee
of Immunization Practices, which is an outside consulting
committee at the CDC.
There is another committee called FERPAC which is within
FDA that actually recommends whether the vaccines get licensed
or not. And so, that is where the recommendations come from.
Traditionally, they have not done evidence-based medicine.
They only adopted evidence-based medicine about 12 years ago.
And what we have said during our Administration is we want to
have safety studies prior to the licensure and recommendation
of vaccines.
Vaccines are the only medical product that is exempt from
pre-licensing safety testing. So the only vaccine that has been
tested in a full-blown placebo trial against an inert placebo
was the COVID vaccine.
The other 76 shots that children in this country receive
between birth and 18 years old, none of them have been safety
tested in pre-licensing studies against the placebo, which
means we don't understand the risk profile for those products.
And that is something that I intend to remedy.
Senator Marshall. Okay. You said earlier you couldn't talk
about the reorganization, and maybe you cannot answer this
question, but I--maybe you can at least confirm these facts for
me or not.
Isn't it true that under Joe Biden's White House, they
added 20,000 employees to HHS? When you were nominated, there
was 28 divisions with HHS. 100 communication offices, 40 IT
Departments, 9 H.R. units as well. Is that--can you answer that
question?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes, that is right there. There are
dozens of IT Departments. There are eight senior finance
officials.
There are nine separate offices on women's health. Eight
separate offices for minority health. Twenty-seven separate
offices for HIV. Fifty-nine behavioral health programs. Forty
opioid programs.
What we are trying to do is consolidate, streamline,
eliminate the redundancies, eliminate all those administrative
costs for each one of those little Departments, consolidate
them, and make them make sense and make them accountable to the
American people.
Senator Marshall. I don't--or I suppose all those IT
systems communicate with each other? You all are on one IT
system?
Secretary Kennedy. There is 40--as you pointed out, there
is 40 procurement Departments with four separate computer
systems that don't talk to each other. So and as you pointed
out, this--my Department grew by 38 percent over the last 4
years. I would say that is great if Americans got healthier,
but they didn't. It got worse.
What we are trying to do is go back to the pre-COVID
levels, and to start making the Department function as it would
if you, in a rational universe. And to bring in modern AI and
telemedicine and all the opportunities we have now. These new
efficiencies, and for medical delivery to the American people
and for patient care.
We are not able to take advantage of any of them because
there is so much chaos and disorganization in this Department
and everybody who has gone up against it in the past has thrown
their hands up and given up. What we are saying is let's
organize in a way that it can quickly adopt and deploy all
these opportunities. We have to really deliver high-quality
health care to the American people.
Senator Marshall. If I could--this was going be a question.
I am just going to make a statement. All the research that we
do on MAHA, on soil health, on nutrition, in my heart, that is
research on cancer. It is research of Alzheimer's.
At the end of the day as well, we should be spending as
much money at the front side of this as we are trying to cure
the end of it. We are seeing epidemics of colorectal cancer.
Young age Alzheimer's. All these things, and I think the
research at the front end is every bit as important at the hind
end.
Secretary Kennedy. Senator Murphy made a good point. We
have--the NIH has made all these extraordinary breakthroughs,
and particularly in treating cancer reducing mortalities for
colorectal cancer, but my question is, wouldn't it be--isn't it
as important to find out why kids are getting colorectal
cancer.
When you and I were a kid, there were zero kids with
colorectal cancer. It is epidemic now. So it is not really a
badge for us when we say, oh, we can make it less lethal. Why
don't we go figure out what is causing it and eliminate that
exposure?
With all of these, with Alzheimer's, with heart disease.
Something is making Americans very, very sick. And our response
should not be just, Okay, we will develop a pharmaceutical fix
for it, or a medical fix. Let's figure out what it is and get
rid of it so we can have healthy kids again.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you. Mr. Kennedy, I want to ask you
some questions about staff reduction and kind of the timing of
it. You were confirmed by the Senate on February 13, so I am
sort of assuming that things happened before you were confirmed
where other people's work.
On January 28th, the fork in the road letter came out to
people across the Federal employment space. Widely attributed
to OPM and Elon Musk and DOGE. But that was before you were
confirmed, so you had nothing to do with the fork in the road
letter, correct?
Secretary Kennedy. Correct.
Senator Kaine. Okay. You were confirmed on February 13. On
February 14, 1 day later, HHS announced that 3,500 probationary
employees were going to be laid off. I know you are a hard
worker, but am I right to assume that in the 1-day between your
confirmation and the next day, you weren't the primary decision
maker about laying off probationary employees at HHS?
Secretary Kennedy. I was aware of it, and I could have
blocked it.
Senator Kaine. Yes. You were aware of it. So, you weren't
the primary decision maker. Was that a decision that was made
like OPM or DOGE? And because it wasn't just HHS, it was all
Federal agencies who would lay off probation. Do you know where
that decision was made?
Secretary Kennedy. I had my full upper staff in place
before I got there.
Senator Kaine. Right, but did they make the decision or was
it White House and DOGE to lay off probationary employees.
Secretary Kennedy. They made the decision. My staff made
the decision.
Senator Kaine. Okay.
Secretary Kennedy. Although, DOGE came in and DOGE gave us
information that we wouldn't otherwise have had access to.
Senator Kaine. Okay. Next we go to April 1st.
Secretary Kennedy. I can also say this----
Senator Kaine. No, all I asked was if you made it and you
answered the question. And I appreciate it. April 1, HHS RIFs
10,000 employees effective June 2. Now, by this point you had
been Secretary for about 6 weeks.
A few days after that announcement, HHS staff briefed our
staff at the Senate HELP staff, and basically just here are
some highlights. In that 10,000 RIF, 467 staff at the
Administration for Children and Families, 2,473 at the Centers
for Disease Control, 322 at CMS, 400 at HRSA, 1,312 at National
Institutes of Health, 197 at SAMHSA, 2,019 at the Food and Drug
Administration.
By now, you have been Secretary for 6 weeks, so this was
RIFs, not the forks, but you were involved in the decision
about these 10,000 RIFs, correct?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Kaine. In tandem with your leadership team,
correct?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes. And as I said before, I pushed back
on certain ones and canceled certain ones.
Senator Kaine. Yes. I think yesterday, it might have been
earlier today, you confirmed that 20,000 employees have been
let go--at HHS. 10,000 RIF-ed and 10,000 forked. Do you know
how many of the 20,000 were veterans?
Secretary Kennedy. No, I don't know.
Senator Kaine. That is a fact that is very easy to
determine from someone's personnel file, so I am going to ask
that question for the record. We are finding across the
Government that Veterans are disproportionately being let go,
(A), because they are a higher percentage of the Federal
workforce and (B), there a dramatically higher percentage of
probationary employees because they leave military service
after 10 or 25 years, and then they are probationary new
employees when they join the civilian service.
I want to find the answer to that question. Where does the
rubber meet the road on 20,000 RIFs, and layoffs, and forks? In
people not getting cancer trials--and I appreciate your
willingness to help Senator Murray's constituents. In state
grants being canceled. In Virginia losing $425 million in
funding to the Virginia Department of Health. But here is a
small example.
All of our offices do case work. All of them do casework.
And we get requests from constituents all the time. CMS is the
largest agency in the Federal Government. Its budget is nearly
twice the size of the Pentagon. And people who depend on
Medicaid, Medicare, and the S-CHIP program really, really
depend on.
It is the most consistent in the top three or four in terms
of constituent requests to my office. Answer this question
about Medicare, or Medicaid, or the S-CHIP program. In every
Administration I have served with, Obama, Trump one, Biden, I
get answers to questions on behalf of constituents.
I may not get them as fast as I like, and sometimes I like
the answer and sometimes I don't. But let me show you what CMS
is now doing to answer constituents' questions. I have omitted
the name of the constituent, and I have omitted the name of my
staffer. This was very recent.
A hard-working retiree, patriotic, taxpaying American who
is on Medicare wrote to ask CMS a very simple question about
Medicare. Couldn't get an answer. Asked us to reach out. We
reached out to the Medicare Part C and D Congressional Liaison
Office, and here was their answer to our basic question.
Unfortunately, there is not an update to provide. With the
recent change of Administration, we are unable to provide any
information related--on matters related to Mr. X's request.
Congressional casework team.
I mean, if you are just an everyday, hard-working American
retiree on Medicare and you have a basic question about it, you
ought to be able to get an answer. And I am just going to say,
I have shared this with my colleagues, and many of us are
having the same experience where our constituents can't get a
basic question answered. I wonder if 20,000 fewer employees is
connected to this. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. Senator Husted.
Senator Husted. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Kennedy,
thank you for being with us today. I appreciate the work that
you have done in trying to raise awareness about making America
healthy again, particularly as it relates to our dietary
consumption. How food can be medicine, and food can make us
sick. You have raised a great deal of awareness.
When we talk about public education campaigns, I think you
have done more to shine the light on things that average
American can do to make themselves healthier than almost any
Secretary I can recall. So, thank you for that service. I also
have listened to a lot of the conversation today where somehow
we think that spending more is somehow compassionate.
On every single thing, like you have to spend more to do it
even though every single person in this Congress knows that
they are spending borrowed money that our children will have to
repay. $106,000, their share of the national debt when you are
a child born into this Nation right now. And everything that
you can do to create savings and improve the quality of
services that American taxpayers get from your agency, I
commend you on it. I encourage you to do so.
I want to give you the opportunity to share a couple points
that you might want to share some of the work that you are
doing in this budget is going to help people become healthier,
generate some better outcomes for them, and savings that you
think can be created that would not harm somebody's health, but
actually preserve the fiscal future of this Nation, so that
those children can grow up and have access to the American
dream that we all had access to when we were born in this
Nation. So, share your thoughts.
Secretary Kennedy. I appreciate you raising that about the
debt issue because the point I was making earlier was that
there is no agency head that wants to reduce the size of their
agency. I would rather have as much money and power as I can
possibly have.
I recognize that President Trump and the OMB Director have
a larger duty and a larger vision, which is we are spending $2
trillion a year that we don't have, and we are billing our
children, and that is a moral deficiency. Senator Sanders asked
me about the morality of universal health.
You can--there is a good moral argument for that, but there
is also a moral argument--and, when we are spending $1 trillion
a year just to service that debt, within 5 years, half of every
dollar collected in taxes is going to go to servicing the debt
and within 10 years it could be 100 percent and then our kids
are doomed.
That is a, the debt is a social determinant of health. We
are trying to reverse that, and we are doing it in a way that
it is not just throwing more money at the problem. We are
revising the GRAS standards.
Twenty years of Democrats have said, we need to revise the
GRAS standards. I have done it in 100 days. We are getting rid
of nine synthetic--petroleum-based synthetic dyes in our food.
Twenty years the Democrats have been saying we want to do this,
and I have done that in 100 days.
I am--we are rewriting the dietary guidelines. The dietary
guidelines that President Biden gave us, 453 pages long, and it
is just an industry-generated document. The same industry
impulse that put Froot Loops at the top of the food pyramid.
We are creating a four-page document that can be locally
sourced that will drive the school lunch program. We have
called on and inspired Governors and Legislatures across the
country to ask for exemptions to the SNAP program to get soda
and candy off of SNAP. We have--am I getting--is that a timer?
Senator Husted. You are good. Thank you for the work on
SNAP, by the way, because getting unhealthy foods out of that
program--if you are at the bottom quartile of income, you are
almost twice as likely to be obese as if you are for the top
cohort.
Secretary Kennedy. Also diabetic.
Senator Husted. It is costing people their productivity,
their quality of life. It is costing the American taxpayer more
money through Medicare, Medicaid, and other health services we
provide.
I just would say, we talked about kids. I want to give you
a moment to share a thought. In 2022, we had a shortage of
infant formula. There is a look at children now about how--what
they should have in that infant formula. You are doing that
with the----
Secretary Kennedy. Operation Stork Speed.
Senator Husted. Yes, exactly. Tell us a little bit about
that and just--if you have a moment.
[Technical problems.]
Senator Husted. Well, I will just say, Mr. Chairman, thank
you for doing that. How about that? There we go.
The Chairman. But the Secretary made the statement that no
vaccines except for COVID have been evaluated against placebo.
For the record, that is not true. Coronavirus, measles, and HPV
vaccines have been.
Some vaccines are tested against previous versions. So just
for the record to set that straight.
Next, Senator Hassan.
Senator Hassan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Secretary
Kennedy, thank you for being here. I would like to start by
talking about the current measles outbreak, which I know is a
concern for all of us here today.
Two children in Texas have tragically died from measles
this year, the first children to die from measles in our
Country in more than 20 years. Measles is almost completely
preventable with the measles vaccine. As you know, it is
critical that families hear directly and clearly from
healthcare leaders about how they can best protect their
children.
Mr. Secretary, I would like to give you an opportunity to
sate clearly here today to any parents who are watching that
the best way to protect their children from measles is to
vaccinate them.
Secretary Kennedy. I have said that the best way to stop
the spread of measles is through vaccination. I would say this,
we have handled this measles outbreak--we get a measles break
every year. We have handled this measles outbreak better than
any other nations affected----
Senator Hassan. What I was interested in--I am just--you
can say you--what I asked you to do was to say straight to the
camera as you did on social media that it is your position that
the best way for parents to prevent their kids from getting
measles is to vaccinate them, and that is your statement
today----
Secretary Kennedy. I said that to you.
Senator Hassan. All right. Well, that is great. Thank you.
Now, you lead the Nation's health department, so let me ask you
a couple of questions. Do you think HHS should employ anyone
who has endangered the health of children?
Secretary Kennedy. No.
Senator Hassan. You hired David Geier to lead autism
research at HHS, an individual who fraudulently posed as a
doctor and gave dangerous medications and medical tests to
children with autism.
According to the State of Maryland's investigation, David
Geier, who has no medical license or training gave hormone
blocker injections to children with autism who were as young as
8 years old, which the Maryland Board of Medicine said poses a
substantial risk of harm. Secretary Kennedy, yes or no, will
you fire David Geier?
Secretary Kennedy. First of all, what you are saying is not
true. And we did not hire David Guyer to manage autism research
at HHS. And----
Senator Hassan. What is his job--what is this job then?
Secretary Kennedy [continuing]. They have just said some
very defamatory things----
Senator Hassan. Well, no, I----
Secretary Kennedy [continuing]. About a person who, by the
way----
Senator Hassan. Let me just be clear for the record----
Secretary Kennedy. Those charges, Senator. I am going to
correct the record on this because you have defamed----
Senator Hassan. No, let me tell you what the record says
and then I will hear from you. Last week when Mr. O'Neill was
here in his confirmation hearing, I submitted for the record
the charge that the State of Maryland laid out.
Now, if you would like also for me to submit to the record
with unanimous consent today the findings of the State of
Maryland, which fined him $10,000 for practicing medicine
without a license--he does not have a medical license--and for
providing and instructing and giving children hormone blockers.
That is what the finding of the Maryland Department--the
State of Maryland, its medical licensing board was. And I will
submit that for the record I hope with unanimous consent.
Secretary Kennedy. I am assuming that you don't know what I
am about to tell you, or you wouldn't say something that was so
dishonest. You may or may not know that David Geier sued the
American----
Senator Hassan. Oh, I do know that. I do know that. That
doesn't change the findings, nor does it change the experience
of the parents who testified.
Secretary Kennedy. That finding was reversed by court, and
he was awarded $5 million.
Senator Hassan. That is not true. Now, let me ask you, so I
just want confirmation. David Geier is still at HHS. I wrote
you a letter about this a month ago and you have not responded.
Secretary Kennedy. Well, I apologize for that. That is our
bad, and I will respond. But David Geier is not managing autism
research at my agency, and we never said that he was.
Senator Hassan. What is his job at HHS? This is somebody
who gave parents the impression that he was a doctor and gave
hormone blockers to children as young as eight, telling them
that hormone blockers would somehow magically help their kids
with autism.
Senator Hassan. His father was----
Secretary Kennedy. His father is a doctor, but he is not.
And his father was not in the room and did not--and he faked
his father's signature according to the State Board of
Medicine.
Secretary Kennedy. That ruling was overturned by a court.
So what you are saying is just wrong. It is just a lie. And
they were actually--the court said that the Maryland Board of
Physicians was guilty of actual malice in fabricating those
charges against David Geier.
Senator Hassan. Well, we will pursue this. Last--and I will
submit for the record----
Secretary Kennedy. Do you want to know why we brought David
Geier in?
Senator Hassan. Sure.
Secretary Kennedy. Because it wasn't to run autism
research. In 2002, the CDC runs a vaccine safety data link,
which is supposed to be the vaccine information, were the
biggest HMOs that are supposed to allow CDC to have a
surveillance system for vaccine injury. It is a backstop
system. The CDC will not let any physicians in there to look at
it, or any scientists, independent scientists.
Senator Hassan. He is neither a scientist nor physician.
Secretary Kennedy. The Congress ordered. CDC to open it to
the Geiers. So they are the only scientists who have ever been
in there.
Senator Hassan. Yes, but again, Mr. Geier is not a
scientist. Thank you.
Senator Hawley. Okay. Senator Hassan's time has expired.
But before we move on, did you have a unanimous consent request
that I heard in there, Senator?
Senator Hassan. Senator Hawley, I have a unanimous consent
request for the web--the printout of the Web site that shows
Dr. Geier is--not Dr. Geier, that is his father. Mr. Geier is
employed. And also a unanimous consent request for the finding
from the Board of Licensing in Maryland.
Senator Hawley. Without objection to both of those.
[The following information can be found on page 58 in
Additional Material:]
Senator Hawley. Now, Mr. Kennedy, before we get to my time,
do you want--if you would like to finish your response, go
ahead and I will recognize myself.
Secretary Kennedy. Yes. Let me say that David Geier is the
only living independent scientist who has seen the VSD inside.
There has been a lot of monkey business with the VSD, including
allegations of fraud.
He was hired by an independent contractor, not as an HHS
employee, but by an independent contractor to look at the
documents that we were getting from the VSD to see if they
conformed with what he saw between 2002 and 2016. And that is
the only reason that he was brought in, to see if there was--
there is so much information that has disappeared from that
data base.
The only way we could find out what information disappeared
was because he was the one guy who saw it.
Senator Hassan. Just let the record show he is not a
scientist. Thank you very much.
Senator Hawley. All right. Secretary Kennedy, different
subject--on a different subject. You and I have talked before,
and when you have been before this Committee and you, and I
have talked in person a number of times about Mifepristone.
I just want to follow-up with you because since the last
time you were before the Committee the last time you and I
spoke, there has been a major study by the Ethics and Public
Policy Center of 865,727 prescribed cases of Mifepristone
abortions, chemical abortions between 2017 and 2023. Have you
seen this study? Are you familiar with this? Do you know what I
am saying?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes, I am.
Senator Hawley. You will remember then that this data shows
the biggest study on Mifepristone done, I think, ever. And it
showed that nearly 11 percent of women experience very serious
adverse health effects, to include sepsis, hemorrhaging,
infection, of course, emergency room visits.
Now, and by the way, that is 22 times higher, that rate is
22 times higher than the FDA's current label, which says it is
just 0.5, the incidence of serious adverse health events. So my
question to you is this. You previously testified to the
Committee that you would do a top to bottom review of
mifepristone.
Mifepristone is subject to a REMS currently. You have said
you will do a top to bottom review. Do you continue to stand by
that? And don't you think that this new data shows that the
need to do a review is, in fact, very pressing?
Secretary Kennedy. I think the new--first of all, it
validates the CAS study, which is previously probably the most
comprehensive data that we have seen on it. And it is--and it
is alarming. And clearly it indicates that at very least the
label should be changed. I have asked Marty Makary, who is the
Director of FDA, to do a complete review and to report back.
Senator Hawley. Good. Do you have any sense of timeline,
Mr. Secretary, on that?
Secretary Kennedy. I do not.
Senator Hawley. It will be a top priority though for you,
is that safe to say?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Hawley. You say that it probably indicates the
label needs to be changed. Do you think it is also important as
part of your review to consider whether it is necessary now to
put back in place the long-standing safety protocols that
always accompanied Mifepristone until the last Administration,
in-person dispensing, doctor visits, screening for ectopic
pregnancies?
Secretary Kennedy. I know that Marty Makary will make a
recommendation. I feel that the policy changes will ultimately
go through the White House, through President Trump.
Senator Hawley. But you will make a recommendation based on
the data?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Hawley. Good. On a different subject.
Talking about the advertising that is routinely done by
pharmaceutical companies. You have been a long-time critic of
direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising. You wrote, I
think in the Wall Street Journal a little over a year ago,
about the need to revisit guidelines around pharmaceutical
advertising. Is that still your view? I mean, has your view
changed?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes. Pharmaceutical advertising is
particularly insidious because commercial advertising has some
level of First Amendment protection, not as great as political
speech. It doesn't have the kind of strict scrutiny applied to
political speech. It still has a level of protection.
But pharmaceutical advertising is unique because if a
company is advertising, for example, Coca-Cola, the consumer
has a choice whether to buy it, and then he is spending his own
money on it, so he has got skin in the game. With
pharmaceutical advertising, the consumer is purchasing the
product, and it is usually the most expensive form of the
product.
They are usually advertising because they want to vary the
existence and the availability of generic drugs that are much
cheaper and equally effective. And the consumer is spending not
his own money but most often our money--taxpayer money.
Furthermore, the pharmaceutical ad is getting tax deduction, so
we are funding it.
Senator Hawley. I want to ask you just about that. Under
current law, pharma companies can deduct their advertising cost
as a business expense. Do you think it is time to change that?
Secretary Kennedy. I actually have a call in to Scott
Bessent about that, but I am working very hard on this issue,
and we expect to come out with a policy within the next few
weeks.
Senator Hawley. Well, let me propose that we work together.
Today, I am introducing legislation to repeal the tax
deductibility of these advertisements. It is a bipartisan bill
with Senator Shaheen on the other side of the aisle here.
It is a bicameral bill with both the Democrat and
Republican sponsors in the House of Representatives. And my
view is it is time to get rid of these tax breaks for these
companies and to end this practice. Can you support that?
Secretary Kennedy. 100 percent support it.
Senator Hawley. Fantastic. I look forward to working with
you on that. Alright, let the record reflect I am giving up
Senator Hickenlooper 15 seconds----
Secretary Kennedy. I assume Senator Sanders will also
support that.
Senator Sanders. Absolutely. I will go further. I mean, the
idea----
Senator Hawley. This is coming out of your time now, John.
Senator Sanders. All right. The answer is yes.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hawley. All right. Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. Senator Sanders can finish your
thought, please.
Senator Sanders. We are the, I think along with New
Zealand, the only countries on earth that allow for
pharmaceutical advertising. I think it is time we ended that.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank
you, Mr. Secretary, for taking the time and for your
willingness to come into public sector. I am not going to try
and play got 'cha, but it is an opportunity to spend a little
bit of philosophical time. And I guess one question is, do you
think our Country spends too much on scientific research?
Secretary Kennedy. No.
Senator Hickenlooper. Okay. And so, obviously the NIH is
the largest--in terms of biomedical research, there is the
Howard Hughes Institute, but the NIH----
Secretary Kennedy. 70 percent of the world.
Senator Hickenlooper. Exactly, 70 percent the world. And I
guess when you look at the level of cuts that we are facing
over there--and I recognize that a lot of these cuts are
imposed upon you, so. But there is a gap in basic fundamental
research that is going to have to be filled somehow. And have
you got any ideas of how we can do that, given the scale, the
dimension of the loss we are facing?
Secretary Kennedy. Well first of all, my job is to support
the President on this and to support OMB. But the reality is
that, as I have said, no agency head wants to see cuts to his
agency.
I love scientific research, so I want to do as much as
possible. But I think because of the--we are very, very
aggressively implementing AI, and I think we are going to do it
faster and better than anybody else in Government, any other
agency. We brought very, very high caliber people from Silicon
Valley.
Senator Hickenlooper. I get that. And that will accelerate
and help us do more research----
Secretary Kennedy. We can shorten clinical trials. We can
get rid of animal trials, which we are already doing.
Senator Hickenlooper. I am in support of all that, and we
have talked about that for years.
Secretary Kennedy. We can do--we can now do----
Senator Hickenlooper. But the research I am talking about
is not that so much as the fundamental science, basic science
research.
Secretary Kennedy. Like bench science, or epidemiological
studies, or whatever. And I think we can do a lot of that stuff
quicker. I will take as much money as you give me, and I will
spend it well.
Senator Hickenlooper. I just want to make sure to urge you
to be a fighter for more of that research because there is a
questioning of science right now within many in the White
House--not everyone, but many in White House. It really needs
to be pushed back. Senator Hawley, I will sign on to that bill
as well. Second question I have got.
We have a lot of issues around wildfires in Colorado right
now, and with the--I will just go back to the NIOSH, the
National Institute of Occupational Safety. You mentioned that
they kept them in Cleveland, and I think somewhere in
Pennsylvania. Pretty much everyone was laid off in Colorado.
Secretary Kennedy. In Morgantown, yes.
Senator Hickenlooper. Yes. Everyone is laid off in
Colorado. And the question really--and I think a couple have
been ordered to be reinstated. But all the West is dealing with
these--I mean, thousands, tens of thousands, probably hundreds
of thousands of people out fighting fires.
These are people risking their lives. Walk away from their
families every day. And the basic research that needs to be
done, I don't think the replacements are going to be--in many
cases, they are new onto the job.
They are not going to be sufficient to address and really
make sure the specific health needs of these workers, these
outdoor workers are addressed. So, questions. How can we, how
can you make sure that folks in Colorado like firefighters are
able to do their job safely?
Secretary Kennedy. I think a lot of the cuts there we are
implementing now are painful cuts. And that they are cuts that
are going to--are going to be difficult.
But I think the President's position is that we are
spending two trillion dollars that we don't have, that we are
taking from our children. And we have got to protect their
rights to prosperity, to enrichment, to dignity, to choice.
And----
Senator Hickenlooper. Again, I have heard that argument and
I appreciate it. And I am a great frugal--a voice of frugality,
at least in my office, and try to push around the Senate where
it is allowed.
But we are looking at a budget that is going to increase
the deficit by who knows how much, $4 to $5 trillion. To take
things like this that we know are successful--and not just for
Colorado, but for almost every Western state essentially, and
we are cutting receiving such a small amount of money for
something that is so important.
I just hope that you can push back on that a little bit.
And someone has got to take a stand for these things that are
minor financial benefits, but significant losses to how we
provide safety for workers and our citizens.
Secretary Kennedy. I am happy to work with you on that,
Senator.
Senator Hickenlooper. Okay. Great. I yield back to the
Chair.
The Chairman. The Committee will be adjourned for 5 minutes
subject to the call of the Chair.
[Recess.]
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
Senator Banks, you are next.
Senator Banks. Thanks, Chairman.
Secretary Kennedy. Senator, can I just say one word?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Secretary Kennedy. I want to clarify an issue that we
talked about before. Senator Murray had raised the issue of a
constituent of hers who she said had been denied a place in a
clinical trial in Washington due to the RIF. We have been able
to run down that case. The patient was medically ineligible for
that trial.
The Chairman. Ineligible?
Secretary Kennedy. Medically ineligible, and nothing to do
with the RIF. And NIH had been trying to get her into another
clinical trial, but none of our clinical trials were shut down
because of the RIF. That was a canard.
The Chairman. Thank you for the clarification.
Senator Banks.
Senator Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Kennedy,
you have--[technical problems]--compassion for Americans with
autism and their families. There is still so much that we don't
know about the conditions, and there are many questions to be
answered.
That is why I was glad that you recently announced an
autism research data base similar to a registry that you
created. The NIH has more than 80 registries for different
diseases, and they are a critical tool to understand disease
progression.
But even in spite of all of that, you were immediately
attacked for privacy violations and accused of ulterior
motives. Can you tell us today how will this data base handle
protected health information, and is it an opt-in or an opt out
database?
Secretary Kennedy. This is like--thank you for that,
Senator--for asking that. This is a database--as you say, there
is actually 190 disease databases at my agency. Almost every
important disease has a registry.
Arthritis has a registry, for example. Heart disease,
cancer, various kinds of cancers. And the registry is intended
to help scientists research what causes the etiology of disease
and also what the cures are. It is entirely voluntary.
Patient privacy is protected. The data is digitalized and
depersonalized so that people cannot find out who the patient
is. And patients have an absolute right to opt out of it. So,
it is entirely voluntary.
But it is a very important tool for scientists to use who
want to understand how to treat diseases. If there is a number
of people who have used, for example, chelation therapies on
autism. And you can look at that. You can see what the outcomes
were--or other kinds of therapies.
Microbiome treatments, all these other--these various
treatments that physicians and frontline treatment nurses and
doctors are using across the country to address disease and
find out which ones work and which ones don't.
Senator Banks. You have also been accused of assuming an
environmental cause of autism and rejecting a genetic cause.
Can we say that your critics are misrepresenting what you
really believe?
Secretary Kennedy. Well, I don't believe--I don't think--I
think if my critics are saying that I reject a genetic cause, I
think they are correct in the sense that autism is an epidemic,
and the genes do not cause epidemics. They can contribute
vulnerability, but you need an environmental toxin.
It is like cigarettes and smoking. Smoking cigarettes was
killing one out of every five of its customers, the tobacco
industry. That meant four out of five survived. So there is a
genetic component to the ones who got lung cancer and died.
That is a genetic vulnerability, but you also need an
environmental toxin. You cannot have a sudden epidemic without
an environmental exposure.
Senator Banks. Have you halted or redirected funding away
from any pre-existing autism research?
Secretary Kennedy. I am told, and I haven't done this
calculation myself, but I am told that there was a 20 to 1
research ratio for genetic cause of autism over the past 20
years at NIH.
If you ask me, I believe that was because they did not want
to look at the environmental exposures because they were scared
of what they found. So, I don't think we should be funding that
genetic work anymore. I think we know a lot about the genes,
the upper fold-field vulnerabilities, high testosterone, low
glutathione on the MTHFR gene, the genes that control
methylation.
All of these are involved, and we know that. And what we
really need to do now is to identify the environmental toxins.
Senator Banks. I appreciate greatly your attention and
effort on that. Secretary Kennedy, we are importing a third of
our medicines from China. It is a public health risk, as well
as a national security risk, and you and I discussed this in
your confirmation hearing. I asked you at that point about
reshoring medicine production from China during that hearing. I
wonder if you could give us any updates on how that is
happening.
Secretary Kennedy. Yes. I think there are very exciting
things happening, and some of them as a direct result of
President Trump's tariffs. And I have been working very closely
with David Ricks of Eli Lilly.
I think they have been the most aggressive of any of the
pharmaceutical companies about answering President Trump's
summons to onshore production. They have nine facilities now
that are breaking ground. And one of them, the API facility,
that they are breaking ground on will be, I believe, the
biggest API facility in the world. These are ingredients active
pharmaceutical ingredients.
China controls that market right now, and this single
facility could give us back dominance of that market. So I am
very, very optimistic about what is happening. And I am
grateful to Eli Lilly, which has not always been a big ally of
mine.
I am grateful, and we have been working very closely with
the leadership of Eli Lilly to make sure they get what they
need to onshore production because we saw during COVID that for
essential medicines, we cannot afford to have the ingredients
offshored.
Senator Banks. Thank you for your leadership. I yield back.
The Chairman. Senator Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, all I have been
hearing from you today is your defense of and advocacy for
brutal cuts to Medicaid, brutal cuts to NIH research to find
the cure for Alzheimer's and cancer or other diseases, brutal
cuts to community health centers, brutal cuts to the CDC, the
early warning system for diseases.
All to find the funding for tax cuts for billionaires and
millionaires. That is all I have been hearing. And it is
absolutely unbelievable that the Secretary of Health and Human
Services can sit before the HELP Committee and make such an
argument.
Secretary Kennedy, for months I have been hearing from
people about the impact that you and Donald Trump have had on
them. And for months I have been sharing their stories. And I
have compiled them here. And Mr. Chairman, I would like to
include my Make America sick agenda--included in the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
[The following information can be found on page 115 in
Additional Material:]
Senator Markey. Thank you. This is a set of stories that
are being told to me that I would like to relate. Jennifer is
from Massachusetts, is a stage four cancer patient. There is no
cure for her diagnosis. Her life depends on Federal investment
in research and for clinical trials to continue uninterrupted
to find a cure for Jennifer--with NIH funding. She is right to
be worried.
I heard from Henry in Rhode Island who wants a--continued
funding for cancer research, where he works. He is worried
about getting fired because the labs NIH grants, under new
leadership, were cut. He wants to work on cancer research to
find the cure for Jennifer. You have already terminated $1.8
billion in NIH funding, which for Jennifer should really stand
for National Institutes of Hope. She is losing hope.
You are defending a 40 percent cut, Mr. Secretary, in
research for Alzheimer's, for cancer, for stroke, for diabetes,
for mental health. They are being slowed. They are being
slashed. And I understand streamlining, but this is not
streamlining. It is a bludgeoning of our health's future and a
giveaway of our global scientific leadership. And it will be
people like Jennifer who will pay the price.
Lou from Massachusetts, he wrote to me about his son who
died of an overdose. He said his son, Zach, was ``a loving and
loved family member who had the illness of addiction.'' He
wants research to cure this disease, funding for treatment
without stigma, support for health workers serving people with
addiction to prevent any other family member from suffering
from the same fate.
Can you honestly tell us, or tell him, actually, that you
can cut $1 billion--$1 billion from the Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Administration, including funding for programs to
teach First Responders how to use naloxone to help to guarantee
that other parents not lose their children?
Can you honestly tell me that the cuts you have already
made to addiction treatment across the country will make anyone
healthier? How can you justify a $1 billion cut to substance
abuse and mental health, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Kennedy. Senator Markey, you weren't here when I
was talking earlier, but one of the things that I have talked
about is that the budget for my agency increased by 38 percent
over the Biden administration, and Americans got sicker, and
more Americans overdosed, and more American died from cancer.
We have now an epidemic of colorectal cancers in our
children. And the chronic disease rate has now gone up to 60
percent. The autism rate has dropped to 1 in 31 children. And
all that money that was supposed to cure those diseases or
revert them, none if it worked.
All we need is leadership and a new vision, and I am
bringing that to my agency. And I am realigning my agency----
Senator Markey. Okay. President Trump is negotiating with
the Chinese about keeping fentanyl out of our Country.
Secretary Kennedy. Well, that is a good thing, isn't it?
Senator Markey. In the meantime, we can't be cutting the
programs for the people who are already suffering from opioid
related diseases. We can't cut the programs. Yes, it would be
great if we could cut it.
Be great if we can reduce it. While we are waiting for that
to happen, why would we cut $1 billion from the programs that
go to the families that have the substance abuse issues right
now? Why would we cut it now, before we get a solution to the
problem. They need things right now.
Secretary Kennedy. First of all, most of the programs that
support addiction, including naltrexone, narcan, suboxone,
methadone, housing, we operate under SAMHSA 500. Are rehabs
that give people access on their Medicaid. We are keeping those
intact.
We have--President Trump, because of his leadership, has
dropped the fentanyl imports from this country because of
leadership at the border by 40 percent.
We are actually doing more with less, and we are going to
continue to do that. And what I am doing at my agency is I am
realigning all these perverse incentives that have driven up
cost and driven down health. I am realigning so that people can
make money in this country and markets can make money at the
same----
Senator Markey. Look--80,000 people died last year. This is
not about efficiency. This is about cruelty. Cutting these
programs--these people are already addicted. These people
already need help. You are slashing the programs that families
need right now.
The Chairman. Senator Markey--Senator Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Moody.
Senator Moody. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for
being here. I think it is wonderful that we are doing this
hearing. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I believe this is the HELP Committee's first HHS budget
hearing in more than two decades. And certainly, I don't think
this afternoon has been easy on you. And we are grateful that
you are willing to answer the hard questions.
Secretary Kennedy. Thank you, Senator Moody.
Senator Moody. Have the difficult discussions because if I
heard you correctly the 60 percent, 50 percent, whatever
increase in the last 5 years in your agency, you said,
reflected or resulted in people getting sicker and more people
dying.
We have to do more than just think of throwing money at
something is going to solve a problem. And I am grateful for
everyone that is stepping up on the cabinet and saying, I want
to do this job in a deliberate way that is going to deliver for
the people that means more than just coming here to Washington,
and throwing money at problems, and spending taxpayer moneys
without giving a lot of deliberate forethought to results.
I think that is what you have been trying to say here
today. And I appreciate you tackling this because not many
people would want to brave this job, certainly at this moment
in time, and as our Nation is spiraling out of control, and
more and more debt, and more and more spending.
We have got to be responsible for the future stability and
success of this country. So, thank you. I start there. I also
note that in some of the numbers that we saw in this proposal,
there wasn't much information in terms of asking for more
money. I am assuming that you are not asking for more money.
Specifically related to the FDA, and I wanted to focus on a
few things--and I believe your approach is probably going to
be, how can we be better? How can we use the resources we have
to do more for the American people, deliver on their health,
without spending more money.
One of those ways I believe in the FDA would be to tackle
Chinese illicit vapes. I think 60 percent of their vape market
that are in no way regulated, we have no idea what are in these
things, chemical ridden vapes. All over the United States--
being bought by all of our kids. I would ask that you dig into
that and look at that.
I know the FDA has been backlogged and the excuse kept,
excuses kept coming out on why they weren't following through
and enforcing this thing. Meanwhile, we have more and more kids
that are vaping these chemicals and we have no idea what is in
them. So would you look at that with your department, using the
resources that you are asking for today?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes, absolutely. We are looking at it
right now. And during the Biden administration, the FDA slow
walked the approvals for U.S. vaping companies. And the U.S.
vaping companies, in my view, were acting very responsibly.
They were putting chips in their vapes that would make sure
that young people could not use them.
They were giving good information about addiction. And they
had very extensive labels. They really went out of their way
not to make it attractive to children. They were slowed walked,
so they are off the market. And in order to fill the vacuum,
hundreds of Chinese companies came in with these colored,
beautifully, attractively comic books----
Senator Moody. Sour grape, watermelon----
Secretary Kennedy. Watermelons--all these flavors are
targeted to kids. They have video games on the vapes that lure
kids into addiction. And we are going to wipe them out. We are
going to get rid of all of them.
Senator Moody. Thank you. Thank you for that commitment. As
a mother of a teenager and on behalf of all moms of teenagers,
I know that vaping was going on in some of even our elementary
and middle schools. We thank you. Using the resources that are
given to you, if we were just more deliberate and aggressive in
what we are doing within the agency, I think we can make a huge
difference.
I want to direct your attention to one more important
issue. One of the things that drives me crazy is when nonsense
regulations are on the books and they have no benefit
whatsoever, but yet they are on the book and businesses are
trying to comply with them. In our citrus industry, our orange
juice producers, there is a regulation that requires a certain
sugar content.
It is called a Brick Standard. Doesn't affect quality or
nutrition at all. In fact, our oranges now that are being
produced in Florida produce slightly less sugar. But because of
this arbitrary standard, producers of orange juice in Florida
have now had to start importing--from foreign companies and
foreign nations, oranges into our Country to mix with our
products to deliver orange juice. The standard, it doesn't
affect quality or nutrition.
Secretary Kennedy. Raise the sugar content in the orange
juice----
Senator Moody. We want to lower the sugar content that is
required by this regulation. I am sure you would not disagree
with that. But would you look into an interim final rule that
would lower that slightly to save the orange juice industry
domestically?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes. Why don't you call Heather Flick,
who is behind me, or Hannah Anderson, this week and we will act
on that as quickly as we can.
Senator Moody. Again, using the resources we have, just
being smarter in our approach, we can do a lot to save a once
thriving industry. Thank you.
Secretary Kennedy. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Kim.
Senator Kim. Thank you, Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I wanted
to just relay, I had a town hall. I had a fire captain show up
to this town hall--somebody who worked at Ground Zero.
He is somebody who said he was diagnosed with cancer. He
said he is on borrowed time, and he was livid, absolutely livid
about what he said, the Administration gutting the World Trade
Center Health Program. And we have talked through some of these
cuts that have happened before. Some staff cuts. Some may be
brought back on.
The Administrator cut. I just need to hear from you. I
promised this fire captain I would ask you about this. What in
the world happened? Why was the staff cut for this program?
What are we to expect going forward?
Secretary Kennedy. I restored this after that program.
Senator Kim. Why was it cut to start with?
Secretary Kennedy. It was part of the overall budget cuts.
Our agency was asked to make very, very serious budget cuts
that were going to be painful. And some of them should not have
been made, and that was one that should not have, and I
reversed it.
Senator Kim. Were you unaware, or were you aware, that the
decision to cut NIOSH staff would cut that World Trade Center
Health Program?
Secretary Kennedy. My agency is the biggest agency in
Government. It is twice the size of the Pentagon. It represents
about 20 percent of the U.S. economy. We have hundreds of
institutes and sub-agencies. We try to be as careful as we can
about what we cut and what we didn't. We made a couple of
mistakes. That was one----
Senator Kim. No, I don't think you were trying to be as
careful as you can. I mean, that is the problem that we have
seen by rushing these decisions. This was, I know, already in
your time there.
Secretary Kennedy. Senator, I understand that if you look
at this from a distance, you would say, why don't you just do
this surgically and cut one person at a time. We--this agency
has grown so big, so fast, and everybody who comes in says, I
am going to cut it down, and nobody has been able to do it.
There was an understanding that the longer that you wait,
the more the inertia kicks in. And we had to act quickly so
that we can do something for the American people that is
lasting. And we understood that there would be some mistakes
made, and that we would go back and reverse them when they were
made.
But it was more important to do decisive action quickly
that could eliminate the metastasizing of this agency which was
growing, and growing, growing as our health declined.
Senator Kim. Where is this going to land now? Can you tell
us right now that the staffing of the World Health--the World
Trade Center Health Program will go back to where it was before
you became Secretary? Is that----
Secretary Kennedy. That program will continue. There will
be continuity in that program. That is all I can tell you.
Senator Kim. Continued, yes. But at full strength to where
it was before you were Secretary?
Secretary Kennedy. The program itself will continue.
Senator Kim. Well, look, the fire captain also raised this
issue about the National Firefighter Cancer Registry. Also
something I promised him I would ask you about. Why was that
shut down?
Secretary Kennedy. Cancer registry--I don't know about
that.
Senator Kim. You don't know about this?
Secretary Kennedy. No.
Senator Kim. Okay. Well, look what I will just tell you
is----
Secretary Kennedy. I am happy to work with you on it
though. It is----
Secretary Kim. There is a National Firefighter Cancer
Registry, and this is something that is part of NIOSH. And
because of the cuts, when I go to the Web site, as I am right
now, it says, ``the information on this page is not currently
being updated and access to tool is limited.
Firefighters can no longer enroll in the National
Firefighting Registry for Cancer.'' So I just raise this
because this is incredibly important, not just for those that
were at Ground Zero, but just writ large across our Nation to
try to help our firefighters. So can you promise me that we
will work together and try to get this back up and running as
soon as possible?
Secretary Kennedy. I will work with you on those issues,
Senator.
Secretary Kim. Look, I understand what you are saying when
it comes to your prioritization, but I will tell you, it is
sending an absolutely disastrous message, especially to our
firefighters.
I mean, I hope that on the list of things in this Congress
that we think are bipartisan, are unanimous, it should be about
supporting our heroes at the World Trade Center, especially
when we have more firefighters who have died since 9/11 because
of medical issues that they have had working there at Ground
Zero. Then, those number of firefighters that died on September
11th.
If we can't even agree on that, if that is not seen as a
high enough priority to try to protect, then I am worried about
everything else that is more controversial, has less unanimity.
Secretary, I will follow-up with you on the National
Registry, and I do want a firm answer on you on what is the
final staffing at the World Trade Center Health Program. And
with that, I will yield back.
Secretary Kennedy. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Senator Murray has returned. She has asked
for a request for 30 seconds to respond to what the Secretary
had responded to her.
Senator Scott. May I ask a question?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Senator Scott. Does her 30 seconds take me down to 4
minutes and 30 seconds?
The Chairman. No, sir.
Senator Scott. Okay.
The Chairman. I will give you 5:30 if you want.
Senator Scott. Even better. Thank you.
Senator Murray. Mr. Chairman, thank you for accommodating
and letting me speak here, because Secretary Kennedy came back
and said that my constituent that I spoke about earlier was not
delayed by staffing cuts. First off, she is already enrolled in
that clinical trial. It is not a question of eligibility.
The issue, as I stated clearly, was the delay in care that
she got. And what you stated, Secretary Kennedy, is not true. I
spoke with Natalie actually last night. She asked her NIH
doctor directly why, and she--when she was informed of the
delay, and her doctor at NIH said very plainly twice, her care
was delayed because of staffing cuts.
I would just, Mr. Chairman, I think it is important for the
record to show my staff has put in inquiries with HHS
leadership, and they have been unresponsive so far. And just to
make it clear, this is just one case of many, but those are the
facts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Scott.
Senator Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Secretary Kennedy, for being here with us today. I oftentimes
hear you say that ``happy to work with you.'' And I will say
that you said it to Senator Kennedy, and as a person who has
asked you to work on a number of topics, when you say happy to
work with you, you have actually been a man of your word, and I
truly appreciate that.
We talked about the importance of sickle cell anemia and
the research being done, and I invited you down to South
Carolina and you took me up on my offer. You came last month,
and I really appreciate you taking the time and investing the
energy to talk about an issue that is critical to so many
folks, specifically African Americans.
As a guy that is thankful that we are working to eliminate
diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Federal Government, I
do not want some folks to think that all things racial are
somehow DEI. And frankly, sickle cell anemia is a classic
example of something that has a racial nexus, but it is not
diversity, equity, and inclusion. It is just a basic fact that
African Americans, 99.9 percent of the time, are the folks that
are suffering through sickle cell anemia.
Frankly, if you go beyond sickle cell anemic, you find
other diseases that have a consistent presence in minority
communities. And to that end, I think it is really important
that we continue to work together on building on issues
impacting minority and other communities.
I would love, Senator--Secretary Kennedy, as you move
through this reorganization that you are currently going
through, I would like for you to answer the question, will you
commit that programs involving minority health will continue
and not get tied unnecessarily and inappropriately to DEI?
Secretary Kennedy. Yes, absolutely. We will continue. We
have--I think that one of the minority health programs has been
terminated and it was one that was deeply embedded with DEI
ideology, but there are seven others that are going to
continue.
I want to thank you for inviting me down to South Carolina.
That was a wonderful trip. It was really--I got to witness a
microcosm, a template for how medicine ought to be working.
Senator Scott. Yes.
Secretary Kennedy. You had brought together under your
leadership, hospital systems, pharmaceutical companies, and the
biotech companies that developed this new technology for
treating sickle cell, and they all--and patients.
They had all worked together to make it affordable so that
South Carolina now has this extraordinary program where if you
have sickle cell in South Carolina, you can get it 100 percent
funding, with I think it is 100 percent cure, or close to it.
Senator Scott. Yes. Very close to. Thank you. I will just
ask the two questions I was supposed to ask in the--preliminary
to the questions. For all the parents with children with sickle
cell, can you please just reassure them that the Administration
of Health for America will work on sickle cell and addressing
minority health issues? It is a simple yes or no.
Will the full budget, and when it is released, reflect
funding at AHA for both the Office of Minority Health and
Sickness Health Activities that used to be housed in CDC?
Secretary Kennedy. Absolutely. You have my commitment. In
fact, I had a company in this morning meeting with FDA that has
a new technology that may--that it seems as effective and may
be even more economical. And I am very, very excited, and I am
excited to show it to you, if it proceeds, if makes it through
the TRAPs at FDA.
Senator Scott. Excellent.
Secretary Kennedy. But yes, absolutely. I am going to
continue to make that a priority of this agency.
Senator Scott. Right. Let me change topics quickly with my
1 minute and 45 seconds left, as I was extended an extra 30
seconds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate the work
that you are doing, frankly, as it relates to addressing how
our food supply contributes to chronic diseases, including the
phasing out of petroleum based as part of your make America
healthy movement.
I am really encouraged by the FDA's announcement last week
approving three new natural color additive petitions. During
your confirmation hearing process, I shared your passion for
shaking up the food industry, and you are truly doing just what
you said you were going to do as it relates to food additives.
Because of your bold actions at HHS regarding petroleum-
based food additives, the food industries responded by getting
rid of these dyes in favor of natural alternatives. Thank you
for your work in bringing healthier food options for our kids.
Can you talk about how you will use your position to
continue to build on your work eliminating artificial food dyes
to further improve the quality of food sold to Americans in our
quest to make Americans healthier?
Secretary Kennedy. I mean, one of the big areas of neglect
has been linking specific food additives and food processes to
the chronic disease epidemic. NIH has neglected that area of
study.
It is now the central focus of NIH is going to be looking
at--and FDA, looking at ultra-process foods, at sugars, and the
10,000 additives that are in our food that are in nobody else's
food in the world.
Looking at the impact so that we can put accurate labeling
on. And when they are really dangerous, we can require--we can
revoke their authorizations under GRAS.
Senator Scott. Thank you, sir.
[Technical problems.]
Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Chairman Cassidy,
Ranking Member Sanders. And welcome, Mr. Secretary. I have
nothing personal against you. I don't even know you.
But what I do know, as the former Deputy Secretary of
Health and Social Services in Delaware, is how important your
agency is to the lives of so many people in our Country. During
the confirmation, your confusion of Medicaid versus Medicare
did not instill a lot of confidence.
But today, as you talk about these budget cuts being
painful, I am reminded of Delawareans who have come up to me
and cried, and said, please don't let folks take away my
Medicaid--individuals with disabilities. While you talk about
cutting this large, large department, there are talks about
including more things in the department from the Department of
Education.
I am concerned about that. And when we met in January, you
committed to radical transparency and responding to all
congressional inquiries within 30 days. Since then, we have
sent dozens of letters. And to my knowledge, like Senator
Hassan, I haven't received any responses.
Given your stated commitment to transparency, and your
focus on efficiency and responsiveness in your opening
comments, I think this is a great opportunity to get your
commitment that you will respond to the letters from this
Committee, and also an opportunity to maybe talk about a few of
the things that I wrote to you about. So let's begin with this
letter.
In March, I wrote you expressing my concern about the
delayed meeting of the Federal Vaccine Experts, otherwise known
as ACIP. The meeting of this Committee is a key step in getting
vaccines to millions of people, from babies to seniors, and
delays can have negative impacts on vaccine accessibility and
affordability.
While I am glad that the meeting finally happened, we are
quickly approaching flu season, and the CDC still hasn't
adopted the April recommendations. And I can understand the
delay, given that there seems to be no current CDC Director. So
in the spirit of radical transparency, my question is, who is
the Acting CDC Director?
Secretary Kennedy. The Acting Director was Susan Monarez,
but she is now up for permanent Director. And so, she has been
replaced by Matt Buzzelli.
Senator Blunt Rochester. Does this person have a medical
background?
Secretary Kennedy. I believe----
Senator Blunt Rochester.--Or public health expertise?
Secretary Kennedy. He is a public health expert.
Senator Blunt Rochester. Public health expert. So, the fact
that the recommendations are kind of stuck is--and the fact you
kind of have----
Secretary Kennedy. Well can I clarify something? The--ACIP
does not do the flu shot----
Secretary Blunt Rochester. Yes. I don't want to get into
the specifics of that.
Secretary Kennedy. Those--the flu shot was----
Senator Blunt Rochester. My question was more about do we
have a CDC Director. And then I want to enter into the record
information about what harms could be caused until we get one.
The Chairman. Is that a request----
Secretary Kennedy. We want the director----
Senator Blunt Rochester. Let the----
Secretary Kennedy. We are relying on this Committee to----
Senator Blunt Rochester. But this was my question. This is
my time.
Secretary Kennedy [continuing]. Confirm the director.
Senator Blunt Rochester. We are Senators. And so, I don't
want to have the same exchange that happened before with other
people. I just want to ask my questions. I want to just shift
gears. Your proposed compassionate budget would cut funding for
multiple maternal and child health programs.
I know as a new parent, I remember learning that my baby
should sleep on their back. The NIH Safe to Sleep Campaign, you
have shuttered. After launching this campaign in 1994, the rate
of sudden infant deaths dropped by 50 percent. Many parents in
this room maybe remember getting their children screened for
hearing loss or rare diseases. That program has also been
shuttered.
You cut programs that collect data on IVF, maternal health,
infant mortality, all while President Trump is calling himself
the fertilization President. None of these policies are based
in compassion.
My only concern, even following up on Senator Kim's
question, is understanding what goes into gutting a program
that has increased the efficacy of parents being able to take
care of their children. I will--my time has expired. But I will
just say, again, a budget is a reflection of priorities.
To me, this budget, the cuts to Medicaid that are talked
about right now across--in the House of Representatives, are
going to have real, like you said, painful impacts on people's
lives.
I hope there is some real compassion in the end, and I hope
that you hear from our constituents as we are hearing from them
as well. And we will continue to--we will continue to try to
fight for them. So, I yield back.
Secretary Kennedy. Let me--no time to respond, but I can
assure you that I will act with compassion.
The Chairman. Senator Alsobrooks.
Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
Secretary--I am talking. I am over here. I have been sitting
through this hearing all day today and have noted that you have
been unable in most instances to answer any specific questions
relating to your agency.
Secretary Kennedy. Because I haven't been given time.
Senator Alsobrooks. Well, no, you have been given time, but
the point of the matter is you have been unable to answer
specific questions. Sir, you are the wrong person for this job.
You had in this hearing today the unmitigated gall to say
at the beginning of your testimony that China is ahead of the
United States in health care because China does not have DEI.
Secretary Kennedy. I didn't say that.
Senator Alsobrooks. We can roll back the tape. You
absolutely----
Secretary Kennedy. You can, and you will find I didn't say
that.
Senator Alsobrooks. That is absolutely what you said.
Secretary Kennedy. I was talking about science. I didn't
say they are ahead of us. They are ahead of us in some forms of
science, certainly not in health care.
Senator Alsobrooks. Well, we can roll back the tape, but
nonetheless, let me go on with my questions and ask you this.
You just heard about the Safe to Sleep Campaign. And you have
made cuts. You made it very clear here today you have no
knowledge whatsoever of the absolutely amazing scientists and
researchers who you have callously fired. You know nothing
about the cuts----
Secretary Kennedy. I didn't fire any working scientists,
Senator.
Senator Alsobrooks. That, sir, is not true either. But
none----
Secretary Kennedy. That is true.
Senator Alsobrooks. It is not true. Let me ask another
specific question.
Secretary Kennedy. It is true.
Senator Alsobrooks. The Safe to Sleep Campaign. Well, can
you name, sir, which office the Safe to Sleep Campaign operates
out of?
Secretary Kennedy. Which campaign?
Senator Alsobrooks. Well, that is the one that the Senator
just asked you about 2 minutes ago that prevents babies from
dying in their sleep. A 30-year program inside your agency. You
would agree that it is important----
Secretary Kennedy. I think it is part of HRSA--or ACF. It
is ACF.
Senator Alsobrooks. No, actually it is in Health and Human
Services.
Secretary Kennedy. They are all within Health and Human
Services, but the subdivision is ACF.
Senator Alsobrooks. No, actually the name of the Office
is----
Secretary Kennedy. Administration of Children and Families.
Senator Alsobrooks. No, let me tell you what it is. The
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. This
is actually the one that your aunt, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, is
the person who it is named after. And you noted just a moment
ago, the Senator reminded you, that although this is a very
important agency, prevents babies from dying, this is the same
one you fired every single person in this office as of April
the 1st.
Secretary Kennedy. As I said, there were no working
scientists fired during the RIF.
Senator Alsobrooks. We can bring you that information
later, because what you just said is not true. Well, then the
question also is in addition to firing the individuals who make
sure babies don't die in their sleep, why did you cut funding
and staff from the CDC's National Center on Birth Defects and
Developmental Disabilities which supports the Special Olympics?
Was that a mistake? I have heard you say you have made some
mistakes today. Was that also a mistake?
Secretary Kennedy. We have switched those programs to the
Administration for Healthy America. They have not been cut.
Senator Alsobrooks. Well, the funding has been cut. And
this is one that oversaw the Special Olympics. Are you aware of
that?
Secretary Kennedy. We have not cut the Special Olympics.
Senator Alsobrooks. Cut the funding. And you have also
dismantled the Division of Reproductive Health and Women's
Health and Fertility. You are aware of that, right?
Secretary Kennedy. We have--right now, we have 42 divisions
that do maternal health, and we are consolidating them. And the
mainstream media has portrayed those as cuts, but they are not
cuts.
They are consolidations. It is ridiculous to have 42
divisions that are all supposed to be doing the same thing with
their own administrators.
Senator Alsobrooks. Well, let me ask you a question. So
that it doesn't exist right now. It has been dismantled. That
is a fact. That that particular division--what you plan to do
in the future----
Secretary Kennedy. There is 42 divisions on maternal
health. We consolidated them.
Senator Alsobrooks. Sir, let me finish what I am saying
here. The fact of the matter is you have dismantled it as we
speak. And are you aware--what does the assistive reproductive
technology mean to you? Are you familiar with that?
Secretary Kennedy. Are you talking about IVF?
Secretary Kennedy. Well, it is assisted reproductive
technology. It is a division. Do you know what it does?
Secretary Kennedy. Is it part of NIH?
Senator Alsobrooks. No, it is actually a part of your
agency.
Secretary Kennedy. NIH is part of my agency, Senator. You
should know that.
Senator Alsobrooks. I do know that, but it is actually a
part of--it is the CDC is where it is.
Secretary Kennedy. Okay, then it is CDC.
Senator Alsobrooks. Right. Okay. Let me just ask you--and
again, these are all other things. You seem unfamiliar with the
ones--the programs that you have cut out.
Secretary Kennedy. You are unfamiliar with my agency--that
NIH and the CDC are part of HHS.
Senator Alsobrooks. Oh, I absolutely know. NIH is in my
county. I was there this past weekend with the researchers that
you have fired, so I absolutely know where NIH is, sir, and
don't need any help from you in knowing that. I cede the time.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Blunt Rochester, did you have
something you wanted in the record? You mentioned something but
didn't formally ask, and I want to make sure.
Senator Blunt Rochester. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
introduce this into the record. It is, the CDC has no Acting
Director, source is confirmed.
The Chairman. Without objection, it is entered into the
record.
[The following information can be found on page 135 in
Additional Material:]
Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you so much.
The Chairman. Senator Sanders.
Senator Sanders. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record 21 letters of groups raising concerns about the HHS
reorganization budget and RIFs. Also ask anonymous consent on
behalf of Senator Murphy to enter two articles into the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
[The following information can be found on page 145 in
Additional Material:]
The Chairman. For any Senator wishing to ask additional
questions, questions for the record will be due in 10 business
days on May 28th at 5.00 p.m. Thank you again, Secretary
Kennedy, for being here.
The Committee stands adjourned.
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Whereupon, at 4:02 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]