[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 97 (Tuesday, June 12, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H5071-H5074]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 CREATING OPPORTUNITIES THAT NECESSITATE NEW AND ENHANCED CONNECTIONS 
         THAT IMPROVE OPIOID NAVIGATION STRATEGIES ACT OF 2018

  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 5812) to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize 
the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to carry 
out certain activities to prevent controlled substances overdoses, and 
for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 5812

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Creating Opportunities that 
     Necessitate New and Enhanced Connections That Improve Opioid 
     Navigation Strategies Act of 2018'' or the ``CONNECTIONS 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. PREVENTING OVERDOSES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.

       Part P of title III of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 280g et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 399V-7. PREVENTING OVERDOSES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.

       ``(a) Evidence-Based Prevention Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Director of the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention may--
       ``(A) to the extent practicable, carry out any evidence-
     based prevention activity described in paragraph (2);
       ``(B) provide training and technical assistance to States, 
     localities, and Indian tribes for purposes of carrying out 
     any such activity; and
       ``(C) award grants to States, localities, and Indian tribes 
     for purposes of carrying out any such activity.
       ``(2) Evidence-based prevention activities.--An evidence-
     based prevention activity described in this paragraph is any 
     of the following activities:
       ``(A) With respect to a State, improving the efficiency and 
     use of the State prescription drug monitoring program by--
       ``(i) encouraging all authorized users (as specified by the 
     State) to register with and use the program and making the 
     program easier to use;
       ``(ii) enabling such users to access any updates to 
     information collected by the program in as close to real-time 
     as possible;
       ``(iii) providing for a mechanism for the program to 
     automatically flag any potential misuse or abuse of 
     controlled substances and any detection of inappropriate 
     prescribing practices relating to such substances;
       ``(iv) enhancing interoperability between the program and 
     any electronic health records system, including by 
     integrating the use of electronic health records into the 
     program for purposes of improving clinical decisionmaking;
       ``(v) continually updating program capabilities to respond 
     to technological innovation for purposes of appropriately 
     addressing a controlled substance overdose epidemic as such 
     epidemic may occur and evolve;
       ``(vi) facilitating data sharing between the program and 
     the prescription drug monitoring programs of neighboring 
     States; and
       ``(vii) meeting the purpose of the program established 
     under section 399O, as described in section 399O(a).
       ``(B) Achieving community or health system interventions 
     through activities such as--
       ``(i) establishing or improving controlled substances 
     prescribing interventions for insurers and health systems;
       ``(ii) enhancing the use of evidence-based controlled 
     substances prescribing guidelines across sectors and health 
     care settings; and
       ``(iii) implementing strategies to align the prescription 
     of controlled substances with the guidelines described in 
     clause (ii).
       ``(C) Evaluating interventions to better understand what 
     works to prevent overdoses, including those involving 
     prescription and illicit controlled substances.
       ``(D) Implementing projects to advance an innovative 
     prevention approach with respect to new and emerging public 
     health crises and opportunities to address such crises, such 
     as enhancing public education and awareness on the risks 
     associated with opioids.
       ``(b) Enhanced Surveillance of Controlled Substance 
     Overdose Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Director of the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention may--
       ``(A) to the extent practicable, carry out any controlled 
     substance overdose surveillance activity described in 
     paragraph (2);
       ``(B) provide training and technical assistance to States 
     for purposes of carrying out any such activity;
       ``(C) award grants to States for purposes of carrying out 
     any such activity; and
       ``(D) coordinate with the Assistant Secretary for Mental 
     Health and Substance Use to collect data pursuant to section 
     505(d)(1)(A) (relating to the number of individuals admitted 
     to the emergency rooms of hospitals as a result of the abuse 
     of alcohol or other drugs).
       ``(2) Controlled substance overdose surveillance 
     activities.--A controlled substance overdose surveillance 
     activity described in this paragraph is any of the following 
     activities:
       ``(A) Enhancing the timeliness of reporting data to the 
     public, including data on fatal and nonfatal overdoses of 
     controlled substances.
       ``(B) Enhancing comprehensiveness of data on controlled 
     substances overdoses by collecting information on such 
     overdoses from appropriate sources such as toxicology 
     reports, autopsy reports, death scene investigations, and 
     other risk factors.
       ``(C) Using data to help identify risk factors associated 
     with controlled substances overdoses.
       ``(D) With respect to a State, supporting entities involved 
     in providing information to inform efforts within the State, 
     such as by coroners and medical examiners, to improve 
     accurate testing and reporting of causes and contributing 
     factors to controlled substances overdoses.
       ``(E) Working to enable information sharing regarding 
     controlled substances overdoses among data sources.
       ``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Controlled substance.--The term `controlled 
     substance' has the meaning given that term in section 102 of 
     the Controlled Substances Act.
       ``(2) Indian tribe.--The term `Indian tribe' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--For purposes of 
     carrying out this section and section 399O, there is 
     authorized to be appropriated $486,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2019 through 2023.''.

     SEC. 3. PRESCRIPTION DRUG MONITORING PROGRAM.

       Section 399O of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     280g-3) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 399O. PRESCRIPTION DRUG MONITORING PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each fiscal year, the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Director of National Drug Control 
     Policy, acting through the Director of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, the Assistant Secretary for 
     Mental Health and Substance Use, and the National Coordinator 
     for Health Information Technology, shall support States for 
     the purpose of improving the efficiency and use of PDMPs, 
     including--
       ``(A) establishment and implementation of a PDMP;
       ``(B) maintenance of a PDMP;
       ``(C) improvements to a PDMP by--
       ``(i) enhancing functional components to work toward--

       ``(I) universal use of PDMPs among providers and their 
     delegates, to the extent that State laws allow, within a 
     State;
       ``(II) more timely inclusion of data within a PDMP;
       ``(III) active management of the PDMP, in part by sending 
     proactive or unsolicited reports to providers to inform 
     prescribing; and
       ``(IV) ensuring the highest level of ease in use and access 
     of PDMPs by providers and their delegates, to the extent that 
     State laws allow;

       ``(ii) improving the intrastate interoperability of PDMPs 
     by--

       ``(I) making PDMPs more actionable by integrating PDMPs 
     within electronic health records and health information 
     technology infrastructure; and
       ``(II) linking PDMP data to other data systems within the 
     State, including--

       ``(aa) the data of pharmacy benefit managers, medical 
     examiners and coroners, and the State's Medicaid program;
       ``(bb) worker's compensation data; and
       ``(cc) prescribing data of providers of the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs and the Indian Health Service within the 
     State;

[[Page H5072]]

       ``(iii) improving the interstate interoperability of PDMPs 
     through--

       ``(I) sharing of dispensing data in near-real time across 
     State lines; and
       ``(II) integration of automated queries for multistate PDMP 
     data and analytics into clinical workflow to improve the use 
     of such data and analytics by practitioners and dispensers; 
     or

       ``(iv) improving the ability to include treatment 
     availability resources and referral capabilities within the 
     PDMP.
       ``(2) State legislation.--As a condition on the receipt of 
     support under this section, the Secretary shall require a 
     State to demonstrate that the State has enacted legislation 
     or regulations--
       ``(A) to provide for the implementation of the PDMP; and
       ``(B) to permit the imposition of appropriate penalties for 
     the unauthorized use and disclosure of information maintained 
     by the PDMP.
       ``(b) PDMP Strategies.--The Secretary shall encourage a 
     State, in establishing, improving, or maintaining a PDMP, to 
     implement strategies that improve--
       ``(1) the reporting of dispensing in the State of a 
     controlled substance to an ultimate user so the reporting 
     occurs not later than 24 hours after the dispensing event;
       ``(2) the consultation of the PDMP by each prescribing 
     practitioner, or their designee, in the State before 
     initiating treatment with a controlled substance, or any 
     substance as required by the State to be reported to the 
     PDMP, and over the course of ongoing treatment for each 
     prescribing event;
       ``(3) the consultation of the PDMP before dispensing a 
     controlled substance, or any substance as required by the 
     State to be reported to the PDMP;
       ``(4) the proactive notification to a practitioner when 
     patterns indicative of controlled substance misuse by a 
     patient, including opioid misuse, are detected;
       ``(5) the availability of data in the PDMP to other States, 
     as allowable under State law; and
       ``(6) the availability of nonidentifiable information to 
     the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 
     surveillance, epidemiology, statistical research, or 
     educational purposes.
       ``(c) Drug Misuse and Abuse.--In consultation with 
     practitioners, dispensers, and other relevant and interested 
     stakeholders, a State receiving support under this section--
       ``(1) shall establish a program to notify practitioners and 
     dispensers of information that will help to identify and 
     prevent the unlawful diversion or misuse of controlled 
     substances; and
       ``(2) may, to the extent permitted under State law, notify 
     the appropriate authorities responsible for carrying out drug 
     diversion investigations if the State determines that 
     information in the PDMP maintained by the State indicates an 
     unlawful diversion or abuse of a controlled substance.
       ``(d) Evaluation and Reporting.--As a condition on receipt 
     of support under this section, the State shall report on 
     interoperability with PDMPs of other States and Federal 
     agencies, where appropriate, intrastate interoperability with 
     health information technology systems such as electronic 
     health records, health information exchanges, and e-
     prescribing, where appropriate, and whether or not the State 
     provides automatic, up-to-date, or daily information about a 
     patient when a practitioner (or the designee of a 
     practitioner, where permitted) requests information about 
     such patient.
       ``(e) Evaluation and Reporting.--A State receiving support 
     under this section shall provide the Secretary with aggregate 
     nonidentifiable information, as permitted by State law, to 
     enable the Secretary--
       ``(1) to evaluate the success of the State's program in 
     achieving the purpose described in subsection (a); or
       ``(2) to prepare and submit to the Congress the report 
     required by subsection (i)(2).
       ``(f) Education and Access to the Monitoring System.--A 
     State receiving support under this section shall take steps 
     to--
       ``(1) facilitate prescribers and dispensers, and their 
     delegates, as permitted by State law, to use the PDMP, to the 
     extent practicable; and
       ``(2) educate prescribers and dispensers, and their 
     delegates on the benefits of the use of PDMPs.
       ``(g) Electronic Format.--The Secretary may issue 
     guidelines specifying a uniform electronic format for the 
     reporting, sharing, and disclosure of information pursuant to 
     PDMPs.
       ``(h) Rules of Construction.--
       ``(1) Functions otherwise authorized by law.--Nothing in 
     this section shall be construed to restrict the ability of 
     any authority, including any local, State, or Federal law 
     enforcement, narcotics control, licensure, disciplinary, or 
     program authority, to perform functions otherwise authorized 
     by law.
       ``(2) Additional privacy protections.--Nothing in this 
     section shall be construed as preempting any State from 
     imposing any additional privacy protections.
       ``(3) Federal privacy requirements.--Nothing in this 
     section shall be construed to supersede any Federal privacy 
     or confidentiality requirement, including the regulations 
     promulgated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance 
     Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-
     191; 110 Stat. 2033) and section 543 of this Act.
       ``(4) No federal private cause of action.--Nothing in this 
     section shall be construed to create a Federal private cause 
     of action.
       ``(i) Progress Report.--Not later than 3 years after the 
     date of enactment of the CONNECTIONS Act, the Secretary 
     shall--
       ``(1) complete a study that--
       ``(A) determines the progress of States in establishing and 
     implementing PDMPs consistent with this section;
       ``(B) provides an analysis of the extent to which the 
     operation of PDMPs has--
       ``(i) reduced inappropriate use, abuse, diversion of, and 
     overdose with, controlled substances;
       ``(ii) established or strengthened initiatives to ensure 
     linkages to substance use disorder treatment services; or
       ``(iii) affected patient access to appropriate care in 
     States operating PDMPs;
       ``(C) determine the progress of States in achieving 
     interstate interoperability and intrastate interoperability 
     of PDMPs, including an assessment of technical, legal, and 
     financial barriers to such progress and recommendations for 
     addressing these barriers;
       ``(D) determines the progress of States in implementing 
     near real-time electronic PDMPs;
       ``(E) provides an analysis of the privacy protections in 
     place for the information reported to the PDMP in each State 
     receiving support under this section and any recommendations 
     of the Secretary for additional Federal or State requirements 
     for protection of this information;
       ``(F) determines the progress of States in implementing 
     technological alternatives to centralized data storage, such 
     as peer-to-peer file sharing or data pointer systems, in 
     PDMPs and the potential for such alternatives to enhance the 
     privacy and security of individually identifiable data; and
       ``(G) evaluates the penalties that States have enacted for 
     the unauthorized use and disclosure of information maintained 
     in PDMPs, and the criteria used by the Secretary to determine 
     whether such penalties qualify as appropriate for purposes of 
     subsection (a)(2); and
       ``(2) submit a report to the Congress on the results of the 
     study.
       ``(j) Advisory Council.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--A State may establish an advisory 
     council to assist in the establishment, improvement, or 
     maintenance of a PDMP consistent with this section.
       ``(2) Limitation.--A State may not use Federal funds for 
     the operations of an advisory council to assist in the 
     establishment, improvement, or maintenance of a PDMP.
       ``(3) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that, in establishing an advisory council to assist in the 
     establishment, improvement, or maintenance of a PDMP, a State 
     should consult with appropriate professional boards and other 
     interested parties.
       ``(k) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       ``(1) The term `controlled substance' means a controlled 
     substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled 
     Substances Act) in schedule II, III, or IV of section 202 of 
     such Act.
       ``(2) The term `dispense' means to deliver a controlled 
     substance to an ultimate user by, or pursuant to the lawful 
     order of, a practitioner, irrespective of whether the 
     dispenser uses the internet or other means to effect such 
     delivery.
       ``(3) The term `dispenser' means a physician, pharmacist, 
     or other person that dispenses a controlled substance to an 
     ultimate user.
       ``(4) The term `interstate interoperability' with respect 
     to a PDMP means the ability of the PDMP to electronically 
     share reported information with another State if the 
     information concerns either the dispensing of a controlled 
     substance to an ultimate user who resides in such other 
     State, or the dispensing of a controlled substance prescribed 
     by a practitioner whose principal place of business is 
     located in such other State.
       ``(5) The term `intrastate interoperability' with respect 
     to a PDMP means the integration of PDMP data within 
     electronic health records and health information technology 
     infrastructure or linking of a PDMP to other data systems 
     within the State, including the State's Medicaid program, 
     workers' compensation programs, and medical examiners or 
     coroners.
       ``(6) The term `nonidentifiable information' means 
     information that does not identify a practitioner, dispenser, 
     or an ultimate user and with respect to which there is no 
     reasonable basis to believe that the information can be used 
     to identify a practitioner, dispenser, or an ultimate user.
       ``(7) The term `PDMP' means a prescription drug monitoring 
     program that is State-controlled.
       ``(8) The term `practitioner' means a physician, dentist, 
     veterinarian, scientific investigator, pharmacy, hospital, or 
     other person licensed, registered, or otherwise permitted, by 
     the United States or the jurisdiction in which the individual 
     practices or does research, to distribute, dispense, conduct 
     research with respect to, administer, or use in teaching or 
     chemical analysis, a controlled substance in the course of 
     professional practice or research.
       ``(9) The term `State' means each of the 50 States, the 
     District of Columbia, and any commonwealth or territory of 
     the United States.
       ``(10) The term `ultimate user' means a person who has 
     obtained from a dispenser, and who possesses, a controlled 
     substance for the

[[Page H5073]]

     person's own use, for the use of a member of the person's 
     household, or for the use of an animal owned by the person or 
     by a member of the person's household.
       ``(11) The term `clinical workflow' means the integration 
     of automated queries for prescription drug monitoring 
     programs data and analytics into health information 
     technologies such as electronic health record systems, health 
     information exchanges, and/or pharmacy dispensing software 
     systems, thus streamlining provider access through automated 
     queries.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Walden) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.


                             General Leave

  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
insert extraneous materials into the Record on the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oregon?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this is our last bill of the day on opioids. This is the 
25th piece of legislation that we have worked through, not only our 
committee, but also now the House floor.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 5812, the CONNECTIONS Act. Now, this 
legislation enhances and improves state-run prescription drug 
monitoring programs. These are really, really important. Prescription 
drug monitoring programs or, as they are known, PDMPs, are useful tools 
in helping identify and deter drug misuse and diversion. They allow 
health prescribers to identify patients exhibiting risky behaviors and 
assist those individuals in getting help.
  By strengthening the current efforts of the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention, in coordination with the Substance Abuse and 
Mental Health Services Administration, and the Office of the National 
Coordinator for Health Information Technology, the CONNECTIONS Act will 
help make state-run PDMPs more easily accessible, more user-friendly, 
more accurate, and better integrated across the country.
  So I want to thank my colleague from Virginia, Representative Morgan 
Griffith, a terrific member of our committee, Vice Chair of the 
Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, who has done a lot of work 
investigating pill dumping and patient brokering and the kind of abuses 
we have seen that have helped to inform our legislation they have done 
over on the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee. He will speak in 
just a minute.
  I want to thank my colleague from New Jersey, Representative Frank 
Pallone as well, and Representative Brian Fitzpatrick from 
Pennsylvania. They have all worked together on this really, really 
important improvement.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Griffith).
  Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and Ranking Member 
Pallone for his help on this bill.
  The CONNECTIONS Act, as the chairman has stated, deals with state-run 
prescription drug monitoring programs which are widely recognized as an 
important tool in fighting the opioid epidemic. These programs enable 
providers to better identify patients who may be at risk for abuse of 
opioid prescriptions. This is a critical first step in preventing abuse 
by those who may be vulnerable.
  The bill will improve Federal support for state-run prescription drug 
monitoring programs to empower those States to successfully implement 
improvements and build off of their existing programs.
  Now, the legislation facilitates more widespread use by the 
providers. So what we are trying to do is, right now we have 49 of 50 
States that have PDMPs or prescription drug monitoring programs. They 
all are trying to talk to each other.
  And particularly, when you have a district like mine, which kind of 
forms a sort of a triangle in the southwest corner of Virginia, you can 
get to West Virginia, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee all 
within a single day, without any problem. And if you are a physician in 
those areas, you need to know if your patient may have driven a few 
miles across the line in an attempt to get more prescription drugs than 
maybe they ought to be taking.
  So what the PDMPs are supposed to do is to let the physician know 
what is going on. But if our State prescription drug monitoring 
programs don't have the ability to talk to one another or interact 
efficiently, that creates a delay or a dilemma for the physician who is 
trying to do the right thing and monitor what is going on and see about 
those who may be vulnerable or about to step into an arena that they 
really don't want to get into, but they are suffering pain and they 
think this is the way to go. We want to stop that. We want to help the 
physicians.
  What this bill does is it allows the physicians and allows the PDMPs 
run by the States to have more interactivity between the two or between 
the three or four or five, as the case may be, as it would be in my 
district.
  So the PDMPs are especially valuable for districts like mine, as we 
have discussed; and the pharmacies and doctors in other States who are 
just a stone's throw away who can come back in and check to see what is 
going on. This legislation will give these States that ability. It is a 
good, bipartisan bill, and I do appreciate Ranking Member Pallone for 
working on this with me in a bipartisan fashion.
  I also appreciate greatly the leadership of our chairman, Chairman 
Walden, for making this a major issue and allowing us to put forward so 
many bills, both this week and next, that deal with this very serious 
concern; and this is one step in the right direction to making sure 
that we try to ensure that folks don't go down the path of abuse.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume; 
and I rise in support of H.R. 5812, the CONNECTIONS Act.
  I was pleased to work with Representative Griffith on this bipartisan 
legislation. This bill authorizes funding to enhance and improve State 
prescription drug monitoring programs, among other prevention efforts. 
This legislation codifies CDC's Prevention for States program, which 
includes funding to improve State prescription drug monitoring 
programs, or PDMPs.
  As part of that program, the CDC will implement the activities 
described in the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic 
Reporting, or NASPER Act, which I was pleased to see receive funding 
this year. As the original Democratic sponsor of NASPER, I have been a 
longtime champion of PDMPs as public health tools that can prevent and 
respond to opioid abuse.

  The role of PDMPs in the current opioid epidemic has proven why our 
longtime interests and push for investments in this space is so 
critical.
  As the technology has matured, we have moved from working toward the 
goal of ensuring the interstate sharing of PDMP data, to now aiming to 
make PDMPs more interconnected real-time, and usable for public health 
surveillance and clinical decisionmaking.
  Continuing to strengthen PDMPs will improve our ability to prevent 
addiction from occurring in the first place and help identify 
individuals who could benefit from treatment for opioid use disorder.
  I wanted to urge my colleagues, obviously, to support this 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I know we have been here, I guess, for about 4 hours 
now, and we are done with these suspension bills that are part of this 
opioid package, and I don't mean to negate in any way this package, I 
do think it is important. But I still want to say, as we conclude 
today, I want to express my concern that collectively these bills that 
we are considering do not go far enough in providing the resources 
necessary for an epidemic of this magnitude. There are 115 Americans 
dying every day, and we have to ensure that people have access to 
treatment. The bills the House is debating and will pass this afternoon 
and over the next 2 weeks do not do enough to expand treatment for 
millions suffering from this crisis.
  I would also be remiss, again, if I did not also mention the 
Republicans' ongoing efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act and gut 
Medicaid and take away critical protections for people with preexisting 
conditions.
  The Justice Department just announced, under President Trump and

[[Page H5074]]

Attorney General Sessions, that they are not going to defend a lawsuit 
that is being brought by Republican attorneys general in many States 
that would basically say that the Affordable Care Act does not have to 
protect people anymore from preexisting conditions.
  When discussing the opioid crisis on the floor this week and next, I 
urge my colleagues to remember that protecting and expanding access to 
care is the most critical piece of the puzzle, and any efforts to roll 
back the Affordable Care Act, such as another Republican-led attempt to 
repeal the ACA or gut Medicaid, will hurt those people who need it 
most.
  I am pleased to support this bill in this package and the other bills 
that we considered on suspension today, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Carter), our resident pharmacist, to speak on the 
legislation.
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I would also like to thank my colleague, Mr. Griffith, for all his 
work on this very important legislation. I would also like to thank him 
for including language that requires a report on the impact of PDMPs on 
patient access to appropriate care. This is critical for epilepsy 
patients that can face barriers to accessing their Schedule V non-
narcotic drugs necessary to control their seizures.
  Several epilepsy medications are classified as Schedule V and, 
therefore, fall under monitoring requirements, despite the fact that 
they are non-opioid, non-narcotic, and there is no evidence to indicate 
that these medications are being abused by people with epilepsy. This 
has led to unnecessary delays in access to their prescribed therapy.
  A handful of States have passed legislation that removes non-narcotic 
drugs from reporting requirements. As we work through legislation 
intended to combat the opioid crisis, we need to ensure that we do not 
limit access to legitimate care, especially to non-narcotic drugs.
  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick), who is a co-author of 
this very important piece of legislation.
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, the opioid epidemic is devastating 
communities within my district and across the country. In the last year 
alone, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, has lost 232 individuals in drug-
related deaths; a staggering 26 percent increase from 2016.
  As vice-chair of the Bipartisan Heroin Task Force, I am proud to rise 
today in strong support of H.R. 5812, the CONNECTIONS Act.
  While my district is just one area in the Nation that is struggling 
to cope with the opioid crisis, I believe the CONNECTIONS Act will 
provide officials on the ground the necessary training techniques and 
resources they need to turn the tide on this epidemic.
  As a longtime proponent of States fully utilizing prescription drug 
monitoring programs to track controlled substance purchases, I am proud 
of the PDMP enhancements in this bipartisan bill.
  Our Nation's drug epidemic is a complicated issue, Mr. Speaker, and 
our response must be multifaceted. This means a reduction in the 
unnecessary dispensing of prescriptions, which could be accomplished by 
tracking and reporting information that allows physicians, pharmacists, 
and other health professionals to make informed clinical decisions and 
to identify troubling trends.
  I would like to thank my colleague from Virginia, Mr. Griffith, for 
his leadership on this important piece of legislation, and I urge my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the passage of the 
CONNECTIONS Act.
  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In conclusion, I just want to thank my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle for their incredible tenacity, their hard work, bringing from 
their districts and from the people they represent these ideas to 
formulate solutions that we are now going to enact into law and move 
over to the Senate. We will pass them here and move them over to the 
Senate and eventually into law.

  I would also point out that, starting in 2016, 2017, Republicans in 
this Congress passed CARA, and the 21st Century Cures Act, putting over 
$1.2 billion into the efforts to combat the opioid epidemic. And then 
we doubled down, literally and figuratively, and even more than that, I 
think we have got $4 billion in the latest spending bill directed 
specifically at opioids, and another couple of billion at mental health 
services. Both of these are big needs for our communities and for our 
citizens, both led by Republicans and the Trump administration in terms 
of this most latest investment in the fight on opioids.
  And I know President Trump and the administration do a lot of work on 
their own through using their executive powers, their administrative 
powers to address the problems of the opioid epidemic through the 
various agencies of the Federal Government. Not only are they leading 
on that, but they are also partnering with our States and our local 
communities.
  We have got to make sure the money that we appropriate gets all the 
way to the ground, gets into these community organizations that are on 
the front lines of helping people get into treatment, helping them get 
the services that they need.

                              {time}  1815

  It has record funding going in. It helps when we change these laws to 
modernize them so that people can get access to the care they need and 
they deserve, and together, we are going to solve this problem.
  It is a big step forward, 25 bills today. We will have more later in 
this week and another 25 or 30 next week. We know that this is an 
ongoing challenge for our country. It will be an ongoing effort for our 
committee.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this particular piece of legislation, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 5812.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________