[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 133 (Saturday, August 6, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4065-S4066]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               HEALTHCARE

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, this body has a long record of coming 
together to improve healthcare for Americans.
  In 2003, when I was chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, we 
worked in a bipartisan manner to establish the Medicare Part D benefit. 
More recently, I have worked with my colleagues on the Finance 
Committee on oversight and investigations to hold EpiPen manufacturers 
accountable that were misusing taxpayer dollars and insulin 
manufacturers and PBMs accountable that were unfairly increasing the 
list price of insulin. We can work together and meaningfully improve 
healthcare.
  This Congress, I have worked with my Democratic colleagues to pass 
five of my bills out of committee in a bipartisan way. These bills will 
lower drug prices, create more competition, while holding Big Pharma 
and PBMs accountable. Unfortunately, the leader hasn't brought any of 
these bills up for a vote, even though they would easily pass the U.S. 
Senate.
  But this hasn't stopped me from trying to find other ways to help 
bring down the cost of medications.
  In 2019, as Finance Committee chairman, I began a bipartisan 
committee process with the ranking member from Oregon to lower the 
costs of prescription drugs. That bill is entitled the ``Prescription 
Drug Pricing Reduction Act.''
  We held three committee hearings to learn from policymakers and 
advocates, while also holding Big Pharma and PBMs accountable. We held 
a committee markup, where the bill passed 19 to 9 on a bipartisan 
basis. We continued to hold additional negotiations to make 
improvements in the bill, even after it got out of committee. It 
contained stuff that I like. It also contained stuff I didn't like, but 
that is the way we do bipartisan legislating.
  Today, it is still the only comprehensive prescription drug bill that 
can garner more than 60 votes on the Senate floor.
  I recently outlined on the floor the bill's details in case the 
majority party has forgotten. I won't restate every part of my July 20 
speech, but here are some of the bill's key highlights:
  One, it lowers costs for seniors by $72 billion and saves the 
taxpayers $95 billion.
  Two, it establishes an out-of-pocket cap, eliminates the doughnut 
hole, and redesigns Medicare Part D.
  Three, it ends taxpayer subsidies to Big Pharma by capping price 
increases of Medicare Part B and D drugs at inflation.
  Four, it establishes accountability and transparency in the 
pharmaceutical industry.
  Five, and most important in this body, the bill is bipartisan.
  Now, believe it or not, a bipartisan bill limiting pharmaceutical 
increases is possible. Compare this to what the majority has offered 
us. Their partisan bill includes more reckless spending and tax 
increases. Their partisan bill reduces the number of new cures and 
treatments. Their partisan bill fails to enact any bipartisan 
accountability for Big Pharma and, in particular, for PBMs.
  Even while the majority party has decided to pursue a purely partisan 
bill in secret over the past 20 months, I have continued to meet with 
Democrats and Republicans to advance a bipartisan and negotiated bill. 
I would prefer a bipartisan bill to pass the U.S. Senate.
  We could still pass the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act. My 
colleagues know it. Several of them have thanked me publicly on my 
bipartisan work to lower prescription drug prices. Sadly, the majority 
party has chosen a different route.
  They have chosen a bill that contains zero--zero--PBM accountability. 
It gives middlemen a pass. They have chosen a bill that contains none 
of the 25 accountability and transparency provisions that had 
bipartisan consensus in my bill.
  Finally, one last thing I would like to address about my colleagues' 
reckless tax and spending. I have heard some of my colleagues on the 
other side say this bill's prescription drug provision is what I have 
described today as Grassley-Wyden. This is untrue. This is a reckless 
tax-and-spending bill. It is not bipartisan, and no reporter should 
accept or repeat that notion.
  I oppose the partisan bill because it is a long list of reckless tax 
increases and spending. It is not the bipartisan prescription drug bill 
that passed out of the Finance Committee 19 to 9.
  I will file the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act as an 
amendment today. We could strike and replace this reckless tax-and-
spending spree with comprehensive drug pricing reform that could garner 
more than 60 votes and lower drug prices while holding Big Pharma and 
PBMs accountable.
  We could actually enact meaningful accountability and transparency in 
the pharmaceutical industry. I will file that amendment as well. We 
could pursue PBM transparency and accountability, and I will file that 
amendment as well.
  I have said throughout this Congress that I will work with anyone who 
wants to pass the bipartisan-negotiated Prescription Drug Pricing 
Reduction Act.
  To continue on the bill today, the Democrats' most recent reckless 
tax-and-spending spree suffers from some serious policy whiplash. Just 
last week, all but one Democrat voted to provide nearly $80 billion in 
subsidies to some of the largest and most profitable corporations in 
the world. The goal then was to make America a more favorable business 
environment to attract investments from a critical industry.
  But mere hours later, they unveiled a huge tax hike on domestic 
manufacturing. Democrats tried to justify this 180-degree policy turn 
by claiming their tax hike is necessary to make corporations ``pay 
their fair share.'' However, this claim is laughable, given the so-
called CHIPS+ bill nearly all Democrats enthusiastically supported last 
week. As I pointed out at that time, the CHIPS+ bill ensures many 
large, very profitable semiconductor manufacturers will pay zero tax or 
even receive payments from the IRS exceeding any tax liability.
  Yet Senator Sanders was the only Democrat to express any concern 
about these profitable companies paying nothing in taxes.
  Under the Democrats' so-called book minimum tax, large, profitable 
corporations favored by Democrats can still escape paying any Federal 
tax. While they claim their reckless tax-and-spending bill will ensure 
companies pay their fair share, they include carve-outs and expanded 
subsidies for their favorite industries.
  For example, business tax credits are carved out from Democrats' book 
minimum tax, including a myriad of souped-up green energy tax breaks.

[[Page S4066]]

This is despite the fact that research by the liberal Institute on 
Taxation and Economic Policy confirms these credits are a significant 
reason why seemingly profitable companies pay little or no tax.
  The Democrats' bill not only carves out certain tax credits, it 
doubles down with $270 billion in corporate tax subsidies in the name 
of their Green New Deal agenda. Along with a new provision that allows 
green energy developers to sell their credits to others, a host of 
businesses and industries will be able to use this new loophole to pay 
little or no tax. This could include financial institutions, private 
equity firms, tech firms, and wealthy private investors.
  Democrats' message to the business community is very clear: If you 
are a large, Democrat-aligned green industry, you have nothing to worry 
about; paying your ``fair share'' of taxes is optional. But if you are 
a domestic textile or electronics manufacturer, prepare to be taxed 
into submission.
  This mindset is especially concerning given our increasingly fragile 
economy. Late last week, we learned our economy contracted for the 
second straight quarter, indicating, as we know, we are in a recession. 
The last thing businesses and families need right now are tax hikes and 
a rash of poorly vetted policies creating even more confusion and 
uncertainty in the economy. Nonpartisan analyses by the Joint Committee 
on Taxation and outside groups show this is exactly what Democrats are 
offering.
  During the election, Democrats promised not to raise taxes on anyone 
earning less than $400,000, but the Joint Committee on Taxation 
confirms their proposal does exactly the opposite. For 2023 alone, 
Democrats propose a $17 billion tax hike on families and individuals 
making less than $200,000.
  While Democrats' tax hikes hit Americans of all incomes, their 
proposed benefits are targeted at a privileged few, like helping 
wealthy Americans purchase $80,000 electric SUVs. According to the 
Joint Committee on Taxation, the original version of their bill had a 
whopping $155 billion tax hike on domestic manufacturing stemming from 
their so-called book minimum tax.
  The National Association of Manufacturers estimated that this tax 
hike would cost more than 200,000 jobs, reduce labor income by $17 
billion, and reduce GDP by nearly $70 billion.
  Now, I understand Senator Sinema has since secured changes to the 
book minimum tax that may lessen the burden on domestic manufacturers. 
However, even if we assume all the relief secured by Senator Sinema 
accrues to manufacturers, the best-case scenario is manufacturers will 
still see a $100-billion-plus tax hit.
  Democrats' inflation act still throws blue-collar workers overboard 
for their Green New Deal. The Democrats' war on manufacturing is mind-
boggling. Members of both parties have stressed a need to reshore 
manufacturing to address supply chain disruptions and delink from China 
for national security reasons. Saddling manufacturers with a giant tax 
bill will hurt, not help, our efforts. Targeting manufacturers for tax 
hikes makes even less sense in the face of our surging inflation.
  Democrat tax hikes will curtail investments necessary to increase the 
supply of goods needed to meet consumer demand. This mismatch between 
supply and demand is what is actually driving our inflation. The 
potential harm to our economy is underscored by Penn Wharton's analysis 
of the Democrats' reckless tax-and-spending spree. They called out the 
novelty and uncertainty surrounding Democrats' book minimum tax saying 
more work is needed to understand its impact on capital market 
efficiency and the economy.
  Penn Wharton's analysis also shows Democrats' proposals will do 
nothing to bring down inflation and are more likely to make inflation 
worse in the near term. Essentially, Democrats are gambling on untested 
and unproven policies while our economy is in a recession, real wages 
are falling, and inflation is soaring.
  The truth is, Democrats' reckless tax-and-spending spree is bad for 
jobs, bad for the economy, and won't do anything to address what Iowans 
care about the most: the rising cost of inflation.
  I urge my Democrats to rethink your approach. Stop gambling with our 
Nation's economy.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Warren). The Senator from Minnesota.

                          ____________________