[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 25 (Thursday, February 6, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H520-H533]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HALT ALL LETHAL TRAFFICKING OF FENTANYL ACT
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 93, I call up
the bill (H.R. 27) to amend the Controlled Substances Act with respect
to the scheduling of fentanyl-related substances, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 93, the
amendment printed in part A of House Report 119-2 shall be considered
as adopted. The bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 27
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 ``Halt All Lethal Trafficking
of Fentanyl Act'' or the ``HALT Fentanyl Act''.
SEC. 2. CLASS SCHEDULING OF FENTANYL-RELATED SUBSTANCES.
Section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
812(c)) is amended by adding at the end of schedule I the
following:
``(e)(1) Unless specifically exempted or unless listed in
another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or
preparation which contains any quantity of a fentanyl-related
substance, or which contains the salts, isomers, and salts of
isomers of a fentanyl-related substance whenever the
existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is
possible within the specific chemical designation.
``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), except as provided in
paragraph (3), the term `fentanyl-related substance' means
any substance that is structurally related to fentanyl by 1
or more of the following modifications:
``(A) By replacement of the phenyl portion of the phenethyl
group by any monocycle, whether or not further substituted in
or on the monocycle.
``(B) By substitution in or on the phenethyl group with
alkyl, alkenyl, alkoxyl, hydroxyl, halo, haloalkyl, amino, or
nitro groups.
``(C) By substitution in or on the piperidine ring with
alkyl, alkenyl, alkoxyl, ester, ether, hydroxyl, halo,
haloalkyl, amino, or nitro groups.
``(D) By replacement of the aniline ring with any aromatic
monocycle whether or not further substituted in or on the
aromatic monocycle.
``(E) By replacement of the N-propionyl group with another
acyl group.
``(3) A substance that satisfies the definition of the term
`fentanyl-related substance' in paragraph (2) shall
nonetheless not be treated as a fentanyl-related substance
subject to this schedule if the substance--
``(A) is controlled by action of the Attorney General under
section 201; or
``(B) is otherwise expressly listed in a schedule other
than this schedule.
``(4)(A) The Attorney General may by order publish in the
Federal Register a list of substances that satisfy the
definition of the term `fentanyl-related substance' in
paragraph (2).
``(B) The absence of a substance from a list published
under subparagraph (A) does not negate the control status of
the substance under this schedule if the substance satisfies
the definition of the term `fentanyl-related substance' in
paragraph (2).''.
SEC. 3. REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO RESEARCH.
(a) Alternative Registration Process for Schedule I
Research.--Section 303 of the Controlled Substances Act (21
U.S.C. 823) is amended--
(1) by redesignating the second subsection (l) (relating to
required training for prescribers) as subsection (m); and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(n) Special Provisions for Practitioners Conducting
Certain Research With Schedule I Controlled Substances.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (g), a
practitioner may conduct research described in paragraph (2)
of this subsection with 1 or more schedule I substances in
accordance with subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (3) of
this subsection.
``(2) Research subject to expedited procedures.--Research
described in this paragraph is research that--
``(A) is with respect to a drug that is the subject of an
investigational use exemption under section 505(i) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; or
``(B) is--
``(i) conducted by the Department of Health and Human
Services, the Department of Defense, or the Department of
Veterans Affairs; or
``(ii) funded partly or entirely by a grant, contract,
cooperative agreement, or other transaction from the
Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of
Defense, or the Department of Veterans Affairs.
``(3) Expedited procedures.--
``(A) Researcher with a current schedule i or ii research
registration.--
``(i) In general.--If a practitioner is registered to
conduct research with a controlled substance in schedule I or
II, the practitioner may conduct research under this
subsection on and after the date that is 30 days after the
date on which the practitioner sends a notice to the Attorney
General containing the following information, with respect to
each substance with which the practitioner will conduct the
research:
``(I) The chemical name of the substance.
``(II) The quantity of the substance to be used in the
research.
``(III) Demonstration that the research is in the category
described in paragraph (2), which demonstration may be
satisfied--
``(aa) in the case of a grant, contract, cooperative
agreement, or other transaction, or intramural research
project, by identifying the sponsoring agency and supplying
the number of the grant, contract, cooperative agreement,
other transaction, or project; or
``(bb) in the case of an application under section 505(i)
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, by supplying the
application number and the sponsor of record on the
application.
``(IV) Demonstration that the researcher is authorized to
conduct research with respect to the substance under the laws
of the State in which the research will take place.
``(ii) Verification of information by hhs or va.--Upon
request from the Attorney General, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, the Department of Defense, or the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, as appropriate, shall verify
information submitted by an applicant under clause (i)(III).
``(B) Researcher without a current schedule i or ii
research registration.--
``(i) In general.--If a practitioner is not registered to
conduct research with a controlled substance in schedule I or
II, the practitioner may send a notice to the Attorney
General containing the information listed in subparagraph
(A)(i), with respect to each substance with which the
practitioner will conduct the research.
``(ii) Attorney general action.--The Attorney General
shall--
``(I) treat notice received under clause (i) as a
sufficient application for a research registration; and
``(II) not later than 45 days of receiving such a notice
that contains all information required under subparagraph
(A)(i)--
``(aa) register the applicant; or
``(bb) serve an order to show cause upon the applicant in
accordance with section 304(c).
``(4) Electronic submissions.--The Attorney General shall
provide a means to permit a practitioner to submit a
notification under paragraph (3) electronically.
``(5) Limitation on amounts.--A practitioner conducting
research with a schedule I substance under this subsection
may only possess the amounts of schedule I substance
identified in--
``(A) the notification to the Attorney General under
paragraph (3); or
``(B) a supplemental notification that the practitioner may
send if the practitioner needs additional amounts for the
research, which supplemental notification shall include--
``(i) the name of the practitioner;
``(ii) the additional quantity needed of the substance; and
``(iii) an attestation that the research to be conducted
with the substance is consistent with the scope of the
research that was the subject of the notification under
paragraph (3).
``(6) Importation and exportation requirements not
affected.--Nothing in this
[[Page H521]]
subsection alters the requirements of part A of title III,
regarding the importation and exportation of controlled
substances.
``(7) Inspector general report.--Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Inspector
General of the Department of Justice shall complete a study,
and submit a report thereon, about research described in
paragraph (2) of this subsection with fentanyl.''.
(b) Separate Registrations Not Required for Additional
Researcher in Same Institution.--
(1) In general.--Section 302(c) of the Controlled
Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 822(c)) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(4) An agent or employee of a research institution that
is conducting research with a controlled substance if--
``(A) the agent or employee is acting within the scope of
the professional practice of the agent or employee;
``(B) another agent or employee of the institution is
registered to conduct research with a controlled substance in
the same schedule;
``(C) the researcher who is so registered--
``(i) informs the Attorney General of the name, position
title, and employing institution of the agent or employee who
is not separately registered;
``(ii) authorizes that agent or employee to perform
research under the registration of the registered researcher;
and
``(iii) affirms that any act taken by that agent or
employee involving a controlled substance shall be
attributable to the registered researcher, as if the
researcher had directly committed the act, for purposes of
any proceeding under section 304(a) to suspend or revoke the
registration of the registered researcher; and
``(D) the Attorney General does not, within 30 days of
receiving the information, authorization, and affirmation
described in subparagraph (C), refuse, for a reason listed in
section 304(a), to allow the agent or employee to possess the
substance without a separate registration.''.
(2) Technical correction.--Section 302(c)(3) of the
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 822(c)(3)) is amended by
striking ``(25)'' and inserting ``(27)''.
(c) Single Registration for Related Research Sites.--
Section 302(e) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
822(e)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(4)(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a person registered
to conduct research with a controlled substance under section
303(g) may conduct the research under a single registration
if--
``(i) the research occurs exclusively on sites all of which
are--
``(I) within the same city or county; and
``(II) under the control of the same institution,
organization, or agency; and
``(ii) before commencing the research, the researcher
notifies the Attorney General of each site where--
``(I) the research will be conducted; or
``(II) the controlled substance will be stored or
administered.
``(B) A site described in subparagraph (A) shall be
included in a registration described in that subparagraph
only if the researcher has notified the Attorney General of
the site--
``(i) in the application for the registration; or
``(ii) before the research is conducted, or before the
controlled substance is stored or administered, at the site.
``(C) The Attorney General may, in consultation with the
Secretary, issue regulations addressing, with respect to
research sites described in subparagraph (A)--
``(i) the manner in which controlled substances may be
delivered to the research sites;
``(ii) the storage and security of controlled substances at
the research sites;
``(iii) the maintenance of records for the research sites;
and
``(iv) any other matters necessary to ensure effective
controls against diversion at the research sites.''.
(d) New Inspection Not Required in Certain Situations.--
Section 302(f) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
822(f)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(f) The'' and inserting ``(f)(1) The'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2)(A) If a person is registered to conduct research with
a controlled substance and applies for a registration, or for
a modification of a registration, to conduct research with a
second controlled substance that is in the same schedule as
the first controlled substance, or is in a schedule with a
higher numerical designation than the schedule of the first
controlled substance, a new inspection by the Attorney
General of the registered location is not required.
``(B) Nothing in subparagraph (A) shall prohibit the
Attorney General from conducting an inspection that the
Attorney General determines necessary to ensure that a
registrant maintains effective controls against diversion.''.
(e) Continuation of Research on Substances Newly Added to
Schedule I.--Section 302 of the Controlled Substances Act (21
U.S.C. 822) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(h) Continuation of Research on Substances Newly Added to
Schedule I.--If a person is conducting research on a
substance when the substance is added to schedule I, and the
person is already registered to conduct research with a
controlled substance in schedule I--
``(1) not later than 90 days after the scheduling of the
newly scheduled substance, the person shall submit a
completed application for registration or modification of
existing registration, to conduct research on the substance,
in accordance with regulations issued by the Attorney General
for purposes of this paragraph;
``(2) the person may, notwithstanding subsections (a) and
(b), continue to conduct the research on the substance
until--
``(A) the person withdraws the application described in
paragraph (1) of this subsection; or
``(B) the Attorney General serves on the person an order to
show cause proposing the denial of the application under
section 304(c);
``(3) if the Attorney General serves an order to show cause
as described in paragraph (2)(B) and the person requests a
hearing, the hearing shall be held on an expedited basis and
not later than 45 days after the request is made, except that
the hearing may be held at a later time if so requested by
the person; and
``(4) if the person sends a copy of the application
described in paragraph (1) to a manufacturer or distributor
of the substance, receipt of the copy by the manufacturer or
distributor shall constitute sufficient evidence that the
person is authorized to receive the substance.''.
(f) Treatment of Certain Manufacturing Activities as
Coincident to Research.--Section 302 of the Controlled
Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 822), as amended by subsection (e),
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Treatment of Certain Manufacturing Activities as
Coincident to Research.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), a
person who is registered to perform research on a controlled
substance may perform manufacturing activities with small
quantities of that substance, including activities described
in paragraph (2), without being required to obtain a
manufacturing registration, if--
``(A) the activities are performed for the purpose of the
research; and
``(B) the activities and the quantities of the substance
involved in the activities are stated in--
``(i) a notification submitted to the Attorney General
under section 303(n);
``(ii) a research protocol filed with an application for
registration approval under section 303(g); or
``(iii) a notification to the Attorney General that
includes--
``(I) the name of the registrant; and
``(II) an attestation that the research to be conducted
with the small quantities of manufactured substance is
consistent with the scope of the research that is the basis
for the registration.
``(2) Activities included.--Activities permitted under
paragraph (1) include--
``(A) processing the substance to create extracts,
tinctures, oils, solutions, derivatives, or other forms of
the substance consistent with--
``(i) the information provided as part of a notification
submitted to the Attorney General under section 303(n); or
``(ii) a research protocol filed with an application for
registration approval under section 303(g); and
``(B) dosage form development studies performed for the
purpose of requesting an investigational new drug exemption
under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i)).
``(3) Exception regarding marihuana.--The authority under
paragraph (1) to manufacture substances does not include the
authority to grow marihuana.''.
(g) Transparency Regarding Special Procedures.--Section 303
of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 823), as amended
by subsection (a), is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(o) Transparency Regarding Special Procedures.--
``(1) In general.--If the Attorney General determines, with
respect to a controlled substance, that an application by a
practitioner to conduct research with the substance should be
considered under a process, or subject to criteria, different
from the process or criteria applicable to applications to
conduct research with other controlled substances in the same
schedule, the Attorney General shall make public, including
by posting on the website of the Drug Enforcement
Administration--
``(A) the identities of all substances for which such
determinations have been made;
``(B) the process and criteria that shall be applied to
applications to conduct research with those substances; and
``(C) how the process and criteria described in
subparagraph (B) differ from the process and criteria
applicable to applications to conduct research with other
controlled substances in the same schedule.
``(2) Timing of posting.--The Attorney General shall make
information described in paragraph (1) public upon making a
determination described in that paragraph, regardless of
whether a practitioner has submitted such an application at
that time.''.
SEC. 4. TECHNICAL CORRECTION ON CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
DISPENSING.
Effective as if included in the enactment of Public Law
117-328--
(1) section 1252(a) of division FF of Public Law 117-328
(136 Stat. 5681) is amended, in the matter being inserted
into section 302(e) of
[[Page H522]]
the Controlled Substances Act, by striking ``303(g)'' and
inserting ``303(h)'';
(2) section 1262 of division FF of Public Law 117-328 (136
Stat. 5681) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``303(g)'' and inserting ``303(h)'';
(ii) in the matter being stricken by subsection (a)(2), by
striking ``(g)(1)'' and inserting ``(h)(1)''; and
(iii) in the matter being inserted by subsection (a)(2), by
striking ``(g) Practitioners'' and inserting ``(h)
Practitioners''; and
(B) in subsection (b)--
(i) in the matter being stricken by paragraph (1), by
striking ``303(g)(1)'' and inserting ``303(h)(1)'';
(ii) in the matter being inserted by paragraph (1), by
striking ``303(g)'' and inserting ``303(h)'';
(iii) in the matter being stricken by paragraph (2)(A), by
striking ``303(g)(2)'' and inserting ``303(h)(2)'';
(iv) in the matter being stricken by paragraph (3), by
striking ``303(g)(2)(B)'' and inserting ``303(h)(2)(B)'';
(v) in the matter being stricken by paragraph (5), by
striking ``303(g)'' and inserting ``303(h)''; and
(vi) in the matter being stricken by paragraph (6), by
striking ``303(g)'' and inserting ``303(h)''; and
(3) section 1263(b) of division FF of Public Law 117-328
(136 Stat. 5685) is amended--
(A) by striking ``303(g)(2)'' and inserting ``303(h)(2)'';
and
(B) by striking ``(21 U.S.C. 823(g)(2))'' and inserting
``(21 U.S.C. 823(h)(2))''.
SEC. 5. RULEMAKING.
(a) Interim Final Rules.--The Attorney General--
(1) shall, not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, issue rules to implement this Act and
the amendments made by this Act; and
(2) may issue the rules under paragraph (1) as interim
final rules.
(b) Procedure for Final Rule.--
(1) Effectiveness of interim final rules.--A rule issued by
the Attorney General as an interim final rule under
subsection (a) shall become immediately effective as an
interim final rule without requiring the Attorney General to
demonstrate good cause therefor, notwithstanding subparagraph
(B) of section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code.
(2) Opportunity for comment and hearing.--An interim final
rule issued under subsection (a) shall give interested
persons the opportunity to comment and to request a hearing.
(3) Final rule.--After the conclusion of such proceedings,
the Attorney General shall issue a final rule to implement
this Act and the amendments made by this Act in accordance
with section 553 of title 5, United States Code.
SEC. 6. PENALTIES.
(a) In General.--Section 401(b)(1) of the Controlled
Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)(vi), by inserting ``or a fentanyl-
related substance'' after ``any analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-
phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B)(vi), by inserting ``or a fentanyl-
related substance'' after ``any analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-
phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide''.
(b) Importation and Exportation.--Section 1010(b) of the
Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.
960(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(F), by inserting ``or a fentanyl-
related substance'' after ``any analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-
phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)(F), by inserting ``or a fentanyl-
related substance'' after ``any analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-
phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide''.
(c) Definition of Fentanyl-related Substance.--Section 102
of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(60) The term `fentanyl-related substance' has the
meaning given the term in subsection (e)(2) of schedule I of
section 202(c).''.
SEC. 7. APPLICABILITY; OTHER MATTERS.
(a) In General.--Irrespective of the date on which the
rules required by section 5 are finalized, the amendments
made by this Act apply beginning as of the enactment of this
Act.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in the amendments made
by this Act may be construed as evidence that, in applying
sections 401(b)(1) and 1010(b) of the Controlled Substances
Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1) and 960(b)) with respect to conduct
occurring before the date of the enactment of this Act, a
fentanyl-related substance (as defined by such amendments) is
not an analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-
piperidinyl] propanamide.
(c) Sense of Congress.--The Congress agrees with the
interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
801 et seq.) in United States v. McCray, 346 F. Supp. 3d 363
(2018).
The SPEAKER pro temore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective
designees.
After 1 hour of debate on the bill, as amended, it shall be in order
to consider the further amendment printed in part B of House Report
119-2, if offered by the Member designated in the report, which shall
be considered read, shall be separately debatable for the time
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent
and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of
the question.
The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) and the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.
General Leave
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the
legislation and to insert extraneous material into the Record on H.R.
27.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Kentucky?
There was no objection.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, illicit fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances remain
one of the greatest health threats this Nation faces. That is why both
Congress and the Trump administration are working to keep fentanyl out
of our communities across the country.
What we know about these lethal substances is that they are largely
created with chemicals sourced from China and trafficked into our
country and communities by Mexican drug cartels.
Part of making this Nation safer and more secure is empowering law
enforcement with the tools necessary to prosecute those who traffic
this poison into our communities. The HALT Fentanyl Act plays an
important role in that objective by permanently placing fentanyl-
related substances into schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act so
law enforcement can crack down on drug traffickers. This will help save
lives.
Last Congress, this bill passed the House with 289 votes, and I am
hopeful for a robust vote today. I am confident this bill can pass the
Senate and be signed into law.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in opposition to H.R. 27, the HALT Fentanyl Act.
Mr. Speaker, throughout this debate today, House Republicans will
claim that they are committed to tackling fentanyl, but their actions
show that simply is not true.
As the Trump administration illegally stole billions of dollars from
Federal programs dedicated to helping people who are fighting a
substance use disorder, House Republicans buried their heads in the
sand.
Last week, the Trump administration froze virtually all Federal
funding, stealing billions of dollars in funding for critical opioid
prevention, treatment, and recovery programs. Clinicians have been left
wondering if they would receive a paycheck for their work. Patients
have been left worrying about whether their access to treatment and
recovery had been cut off indefinitely.
Fortunately, several courts have already ruled in favor of parties
seeking to put a stop to this unconstitutional power grab. Make no
mistake, there are still real concerns about Federal funding not
getting out the door to help us combat the drug overdose epidemic.
Moreover, if this freeze is allowed to go forward, substance use and
mental health clinicians who dedicate their lives to helping those
experiencing substance use disorder would be forced to shut down, and
millions of Americans would lose access to care. This is not the way to
combat this epidemic.
House Republicans are now considering trillions of dollars in cuts to
Medicaid so they can give tax breaks to billionaires and big
corporations. Medicaid covers nearly 40 percent of all people with an
opioid use disorder. Republican plans to cut Medicaid will further
limit access to care for substance use disorders leading to more
deaths.
Again, Mr. Speaker, when you hear Republicans talk about their
commitment to fighting this epidemic, remember their actions over their
words.
Let's go to the bill before us today. Two years ago, my Democratic
colleagues and I shared deep concerns
[[Page H523]]
with the partisan approach Republicans were taking with this
legislation. Last Congress, Democrats offered a commonsense alternative
to achieve a shared goal of tackling fentanyl and offered solutions to
improve the HALT Fentanyl Act. Unfortunately, none of our priorities
were included in the legislation, and, again, we find ourselves
debating the same bill that stalled in the Senate and still exacerbates
inequities in our criminal justice system.
In 2018, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the DEA, first issued a
temporary class-wide scheduling order of fentanyl-related substances
under schedule I, which is the strictest classification for drugs.
Since that administrative action, Congress has voted to extend the
temporary order numerous times, most recently in the American Relief
Act where we voted to extend the scheduling until March 31 of this
year.
House Republicans know we cannot simply schedule our way out of this
crisis, but they have refused to pass bipartisan solutions that address
prevention, treatment, and recovery to help stop overdose deaths. This
is not just a criminal justice issue. We must combat this crisis
through a multipronged public health approach.
That is exactly what we did in an end-of-year bipartisan deal that
would have extended temporary fentanyl-related substances scheduling
for 2 years. However, it also reauthorized a wide range of prevention
and treatment programs to help address the opioid overdose crisis. The
deal has bipartisan support, but it was squashed by Speaker Johnson so
he could please Elon Musk, the unelected billionaire who is now
illegally stealing Americans' personal private information from inside
of Federal agencies.
Again, Mr. Speaker, actions speak louder than words, and Republicans
are not serious about combating this fentanyl crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill. I encourage my colleagues to oppose
it, as well, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I just want to note that the bill before us
today schedules illicit fentanyl. We had testimony to say this will
save lives. That is the vote before us today. Hopefully my colleagues
on both sides of the aisle will vote for it.
We can talk about criminal justice reform, but the people who are
putting the poison into our cities and our children deserve to go to
jail.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Griffith).
Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the committee for
yielding me time.
My colleagues on the other side cry: Action, action. However, in
February of 2025, there will be no action unless we pass H.R. 27, the
HALT Fentanyl Act.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this bill, H.R. 27, the HALT
Fentanyl Act, that I have championed along with my colleague and good
friend, Representative Latta from Ohio. We have worked on this bill for
4 years.
This bill is critical to stop the trafficking of fentanyl analogues
into our country by giving the law enforcement officers the tools they
need and also allowing streamlined research into these substances.
This bill has the support of multiple law enforcement agencies and
other groups to pass the bill as it is.
This week, the Trump administration released a statement in support
of the HALT Fentanyl Act. Last Congress, the Biden administration even
supported various provisions in the bill, specifically making fentanyl
analogues permanently schedule I and allowing more research into them.
The bill passed with wide bipartisan support last Congress. It wasn't
just one Member on the other side of the aisle who joined me, Mr.
Speaker. There were 74 Members who voted in favor of this bill.
This is one small step to solve the opioid crisis in this country. We
cannot let the temporary scheduling expire at the end of March.
To those who don't know, we have some law right now that helps
protect us, but at the end of March, it is gone. We can't do that.
The Senate introduced an identical version of this bill with broad
bipartisan support. With the passage of this bill, I am hopeful that
H.R. 27 will quickly move through the Senate and get to the President's
desk to become law.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues to support this bill so
that we can actually have action and not rhetoric.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for his comments,
but I want to inform him that the Trump administration's funding freeze
could impact as much as $164 million in funding for substance abuse and
mental health services and research in the Commonwealth of Virginia
that his constituents rely on.
Cutting this vital funding will greatly hamper our response to the
opioid epidemic and result in more overdose deaths in Virginia.
I urge my colleagues to work together with Democrats to ensure that
the Trump administration end this illegal funding freeze and work
together to pass bipartisan, evidence-based legislation to address this
intractable crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms.
Castor), who is the chair and ranking member of our Energy
Subcommittee.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Pallone
for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 27. I am here to say
this is not business as usual right now in Washington, D.C., or all
across the country.
House Republicans are offering this bill as window dressing, Mr.
Speaker, to a lot of the illegality that is going on across the
agencies that is distracting from the White House's stop work orders
and payment freeze orders that have been deemed illegal and have been
restrained by Federal courts.
This is a window dressing bill to distract from what is happening to
payments with our partner States and nonprofit agencies like Head Start
centers, infrastructure projects, and medical research across the
country.
This is window dressing to distract us from the incursion into
Treasury and Medicare payment systems by an unelected billionaire, Elon
Musk, and based on some fake, made-up agency, a so-called Department of
Government Efficiency. This is a distraction from the illegal and
dangerous purge of law enforcement officers and intelligence agents in
other agencies.
Mr. Speaker, this is a way to distract and spin your wheels at a time
when Elon Musk has just decided to ride into a congressionally
appropriated agency in USAID and just say that we are closed for
business, which runs completely counter to the United States
Constitution.
Where are the Republicans? The American people are demanding answers.
Where are the House Republicans?
Mr. Speaker, your silence is deafening.
Federal courts have issued orders to stop this illegal and dangerous
activity, and we are not going to allow these illegal operators to run
amuck.
Instead, what are House Republicans doing here today? They are
offering a flawed bill to address opioid addiction.
I would say to my good friends and colleagues: Your record does not
match your rhetoric because there is a back story that belies what
House Republicans are bringing here today. First of all, this bill
doesn't get the job done. My providers back home say that this is
overbroad and really fails to meet the moment of our opioid addiction
crisis.
Here is the back story: The SUPPORT Act was adopted in a bipartisan
fashion in 2018. It was the largest congressional investment in
overdose prevention at the time, and it directed resources to
communities that need it to save lives through community-based
treatment and recovery. It required Medicaid to cover medications for
opioid use disorder. The SUPPORT Act and everything was broadly
successful and appreciated. It was working to help free people from
fentanyl addiction.
We have to do so much more, however. That is why in the last Congress
we worked together to pass a new and more robust SUPPORT Act to address
the third wave of the opioid crisis. However, when it came to the year-
end appropriations package that was crafted to include it, who shows up
but Elon Musk to throw a wrench into our year-end compromise between
Democrats
[[Page H524]]
and Republicans to address the opioid crisis through reauthorizing the
SUPPORT Act.
The Republicans let him do it. You are allowing it to happen again,
Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, why didn't Republicans bring the SUPPORT Act
to the floor, something that really meaningfully helps families and
communities address the opioid addiction crisis and the fentanyl
crisis?
Second, by standing by and allowing the White House and the Justice
Department to purge FBI agents and CIA personnel, Mr. Speaker,
Republicans are taking the cops off the beat who are tracking the drug
traffickers who are trying to break up the fentanyl cartels. So
Republicans are making us less safe and are heaping a lot of costs on
families that just don't need this chaos.
Third, Mr. Speaker, Republicans have this sneaky and chaotic halt to
the flow of healthcare dollars back home, medical research and NIH.
Medicaid, we know from all of the reporting, is on Republicans'
chopping block. Medicaid is the backbone to providing healthcare and
substance abuse treatment for people all across America. Mr. Speaker,
Republicans have that in their sights, too.
Tell me whose record doesn't match their rhetoric. I would say it is
the House Republicans. No one has the legal authority to turn Treasury
payments into means of political retribution. No one in the executive
branch has the authority to cancel or ignore congressional
appropriations. That is a basic constitutional precept.
Why do Republicans serve in Congress if they want to be a royal
subject to a king rather than a Representative of the Article I branch?
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, we are going to work on the SUPPORT Act,
but the vote before us today that people are going to put their names
to, a yes or no: Do we want to make illegal derivatives of fentanyl
produced and conceived in China sent to Mexico and across our border to
kill our people?
That is what the vote is going to be today.
{time} 1245
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Latta).
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the full committee
for yielding to me.
For 4 years, I have worked tirelessly with my colleague and friend,
the gentleman from the Ninth Congressional District of Virginia (Mr.
Griffith), to pass the HALT Fentanyl Act to permanently label fentanyl-
related substances as a schedule I narcotic.
During this time, we have seen heartbreaking numbers of fentanyl
poisonings across our country. There were 73,000 deaths reported in
just 1 year alone.
If the current classwide scheduling were to expire, which is a little
less than 2 months away, I can assure Members that drug traffickers
would push deadlier drugs, and more Americans will die.
I am proud today that this House is finally stopping the temporary
delay and permanently scheduling fentanyl-related substances as a
schedule I. We owe it to our communities, our constituents, our
families, and, most of all, the victims.
Cartels are literally killing Americans for 10 cents a pill. Illicit
fentanyl poisoning among teens accounted for an average of 22 deaths
each week in 2022 from drug poisoning, raising the death rate for teens
to 5.2 deaths per 100,000, driven by fentanyl in counterfeit pills,
thus making fentanyl the number one cause of death among adults aged 18
to 49. That is more than cancer, more than heart disease, and more than
car accidents.
This isn't about criminal justice reform. This is about victims
getting justice.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the
gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, currently, to trigger a 10-year mandatory
minimum, an offense must involve 100 or more grams of a mixture
containing a fentanyl analogue. Since the average lethal dose of
fentanyl or a fentanyl analogue can be as small as 2 milligrams, the
offense would need to contain roughly 50,000 lethal doses in order to
trigger the 10-year mandatory minimum.
Mr. Speaker, I ask this House to approve this legislation, and let's
start saving lives here in the United States.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) but inform
him that the Trump administration's funding freeze could impact as much
as $304 million in funding for substance abuse and mental health
services and research in the State of Ohio that his constituents rely
on. Cutting this vital funding will greatly hamper our response to the
opioid epidemic and result in more overdose deaths.
I urge my colleagues to work together with Democrats to ensure that
the Trump administration ends this illegal funding freeze and work
together to pass bipartisan, evidence-based legislation to address this
intractable crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Gillen).
Ms. GILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of H.R.
27, the HALT Fentanyl Act.
The epidemic of illicit fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances has
ravaged countless communities across our country. Families throughout
my district have experienced unimaginable pain and suffering from
losing their loved ones to this deadly drug.
Just 1 year ago, a family in my district dropped off their precious
child to college and went back a week later to pick up their child's
body because of fentanyl.
We must get fentanyl off of our streets and away from our kids. The
crisis has killed Americans of every age, every background, and every
walk of life.
A single ounce of fentanyl can have a devastating effect upon a
community. It is time we take on the cartels and hold traffickers
accountable.
The DEA, the Fraternal Order of Police, and countless other law
enforcement groups have said the HALT Fentanyl Act will save lives and
improve public safety.
It shouldn't take more overdose deaths, more grieving families, and
more criminals skirting prosecution to take action. It is time.
Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. I am proud to support this bipartisan
bill today, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join
me in that.
I also urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to find ways
that we can work together to make better bills.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce), the vice chair of the Energy and Commerce
Committee and my good friend.
Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for
yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give my emphatic support for H.R. 27,
the HALT Fentanyl Act. This commonsense solution is exactly what our
Nation needs to effectively crack down on the illicit fentanyl flowing
across our borders.
For years, the Mexican drug cartels have recruited college chemistry
majors to chemically alter the fentanyl precursors that come from the
Chinese Communist Party right into Mexico to make more deadly and less-
illegal fentanyl analogues.
Classifying these fentanyl analogues as schedule I drugs will allow
our law enforcement officers and our Border Patrol agents the ability
to effectively seize these substances and will result in harsher
penalties for the criminals who make, traffic, and sell these poisons.
In 2023, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, an individual died
every 2 hours from an overdose. More than three-fourths of those
overdose deaths were the result of fentanyl.
The future generations of our great Nation cannot afford to wait any
longer. The time is right now to stop this scourge on our society and
to pass the HALT Fentanyl Act, which will allow us to do just that.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
to help save American lives, starting today with their vote to pass the
HALT Fentanyl Act.
This is critical legislation. It does not care which party the
individuals
[[Page H525]]
who are dying from these fentanyl overdoses belong to. This poison must
be stopped, and this important legislation will allow that to occur.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).
Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Speaker, I want to be honest. This legislation is
literally breaking my heart because I am a New Mexican, born and
raised, and there is not a single family in the State of New Mexico who
has not been touched by the addiction crisis--the opioid crisis,
fentanyl, alcoholism. There is not a single family that I know who has
not lost somebody to this crisis, including my own.
What I can tell Members about this crisis is that the way that we
address it is that we stop the flow of fentanyl coming into our
communities, and we make sure that our family members and our friends
who are struggling with addiction can get the help that they need.
They are not criminals. They are our brothers, sisters, parents,
grandparents, and children.
Do my colleagues know what it is like to have their child disappear
to the streets due to addiction?
We do not need to incarcerate these people. They need help, and the
way that they get help is to actually get with an addiction recovery
doctor, peer support, clinic, or somewhere where they can get sober.
Mr. Speaker, if my colleagues want to actually solve this crisis, we
need to stop fentanyl from coming into the United States, to make sure
that our communities can access care, and to save lives and help the
members of our families and communities who are trying to reclaim their
lives from this crisis. That is how we solve this crisis.
That is why I cannot vote for this bill because the way that this
bill tries to address the crisis is through the exact same playbook
that was used in the 1980s and 1990s that led to the mass incarceration
of our families and community members who were struggling with
addiction.
While Republicans are standing here trying to pass this bill,
literally across town the President and an unelected billionaire are
gutting funding for our Federal agencies. They are doing a purge of the
FBI.
Do my colleagues know who stops fentanyl from coming across the
border? The FBI.
Do Members want to solve the fentanyl crisis? We have to go to the
heart of the matter and not mass incarcerate the people who are
actually addicted.
That is why I introduced the STOP Act. The STOP Act would actually
empower the Federal Government to stop fentanyl at the border. It is
why I am investing millions of dollars in my State, local, and Tribal
law enforcement, to make sure that they can actually stop fentanyl in
our communities. It is why I have invested millions of dollars in my
community in behavioral health centers and addiction recovery and to
help peer support programs so that we can save lives.
That is how the fentanyl crisis is stopped. That is how we do it.
I can say that the way that we don't do it is by empowering a
billionaire, who is not even an elected or a vetted official, to gut
our Federal agencies. I want to take a moment to talk about that.
Yesterday, in the Oversight Committee, in the guise of trying to
promote government efficiency, my colleagues across the aisle called a
hearing. When we asked for Elon Musk to come to our hearing and
actually answer for what he is doing, they went out of their way to
shut it down.
What is going on in this country right now? They are gutting our
agencies, defunding our agencies, and holding up payments. Last week,
as was said by the ranking member, they stopped payment for the very
health clinics that will actually help to stop the fentanyl crisis.
My colleagues refuse to do their most basic constitutional duty,
which is to bring in an unelected and unvetted official who is stealing
their personal data and undermining the fundamental fabric of our
democracy, our Constitution, and our institutions, to hold them to
account.
That is why Ranking Member Jamie Raskin and I will be introducing
legislation to hold Elon Musk accountable because nobody elected Elon
Musk and because we, the taxpayers, are going to be left holding the
bag when he gets bored and moves on to his billionaire buddies. We are
going to be the ones left in the wake of this crisis. We are the ones
who are going to have our communities and families decimated, and we
will not stand for it.
Respectfully, I will vote against this legislation, and we will
continue to hold the majority to account.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments.
Mr. Speaker, I just will say that, if someone is trafficking in
illicit fentanyl, they belong in jail. I understand the argument that
people who are addicted need help and support, but if someone is
trafficking in illicit fentanyl, they belong in jail. If someone is
trafficking in a fentanyl derivative that is not scheduled, they don't
go to jail. That is what we are here to do today.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr.
Evans), my good friend.
Mr. EVANS of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the
HALT Fentanyl Act.
This critical bill would enable law enforcement to get dangerous drug
traffickers off of our streets by permanently and responsibly
classifying fentanyl analogues as schedule I narcotics.
Last year, DEA's Rocky Mountain Division seized a record 2.7 million
fentanyl pills, enough to kill everyone in my district 1\1/2\ times, or
1.3 million people. We must do more to stop this drug from infiltrating
our communities, and that starts with empowering law enforcement.
As a Colorado cop for 10 years, I witnessed firsthand how not
supporting law enforcement enables traffickers and the flow of fentanyl
into our communities.
This bill, of which I am a proud original cosponsor, gives cops the
tools that they need to bring traffickers of this poison to justice.
Since 2020, illegal drugs like fentanyl have claimed over 7,000 lives
in Colorado, twice the death toll of September 11.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Mrs. Hayes).
Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, the HALT Fentanyl Act would put us on a
pathway to adopting the ill-informed practices of the past.
The 1994 crime bill decimated generations by expanding harsh criminal
punishment that fell hardest on Black and Brown communities. The bill
expanded the school-to-prison pipeline and increased racial disparities
in juvenile justice involvement while also contributing to the mass
incarceration problem in this Nation.
Individuals convicted under this bill lost access to public housing,
Pell grants, and any chance at being rehabilitated in order to become
productive members of society, making it even more difficult for them
to be integrated back into their communities and perpetuating a cycle
of violence.
{time} 1300
Mr. Speaker, I grew up in a community like that, plagued by these
cycles.
My community was suffering from a public health crisis and Congress
abandoned us. There is a difference between a teenager and a
trafficker. We cannot make those same mistakes today.
I believe that those trafficking and distributing should be
prosecuted. Those poisoning our communities and our kids should be
jailed, but addiction is a medical issue. We must include provisions
for treatment and harm reduction in any legislation we pass.
This legislation would force the implementation of steep mandatory
minimum sentences with no discretion for judges to consider individual
cases. There would be no distinction.
The HALT Fentanyl Act also does nothing to provide prevention,
treatment, recovery, harm reduction, or even money for law enforcement
to do what they are asking them to do in this bill.
We cannot incarcerate our way out of a public health crisis. For this
reason, I will be voting ``no.'' I implore my colleagues across the
aisle to support a long-term public safety solution that
[[Page H526]]
makes meaningful investments to protecting our communities and
addressing the public health crisis that we are all faced with right
now.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, derivatives of illicit fentanyl have to be
scheduled for traffickers to be prosecuted.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Allen), my good friend and member of the committee.
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 27, the HALT Fentanyl
Act, a commonsense bill to stop the flow of deadly fentanyl from
pouring across our southern border.
During the 4 years of the Biden administration, our border was wide
open, allowing the cartels and drug traffickers to transport fentanyl
and fentanyl-related substances into our country.
Let's be clear: The Democrats failed to address this issue and so did
the administration. Why in the world would we allow that to happen? We
have all heard the heart-wrenching stories from families who have lost
loved ones.
Illicit fentanyl poisonings are now the number one cause of death
among adults 18 to 49. This is more than just a statistic. Under the
Republican-controlled House, Senate, and White House, this crisis will
come to an end.
The HALT Fentanyl Act would make the temporary classwide scheduling
order for fentanyl-related substances permanent and ensure law
enforcement have the tools they need to keep this dangerous drug off
our streets.
This legislation, combined with President Trump's latest border
security wins and his team at the White House, will make our
communities safer and save lives. They mean business.
Mr. Speaker, we are going to get the job done, and I urge my
colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Castor).
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, this simply is not business as
usual today. They bring a bill, H.R. 27, in an effort to paper over the
crisis that is going on out there.
Mr. Speaker, I just have to ask my Republican colleagues, because we
have so few opportunities to do it in public officially, where is your
backbone? Where is your backbone to stand up for Article I and tell the
executive branch they are not allowed to destroy agencies that have
been constitutionally and congressionally funded?
The Republicans can't allow some made-up department to come in and
steal away an agency that we have authorized. Where is your courage?
This bill is also such a diversion from what we should be doing,
which is funding opioid-use addiction. They can bring H.R. 27 and say
it is the be-all and end-all, but everyone has weighed in to say it
doesn't get the job done.
Don't take it from me. Take it from the American Society of Addiction
Medicine, the doctors and counselors who treat our neighbors who suffer
from addiction. They say, on behalf of the American Society of
Addiction Medicine, which is a national medical specialty representing
more than 8,000 physicians and associated health professionals who
specialize in the prevention and treatment of addiction, they write to
urge that the amendments to mitigate the unintended negative
consequences be added.
In the end, though, they said, if you are not going to allow us to
offer real amendments to fix the bill, they recommend not passing the
HALT Fentanyl Act. They say it just preserves the deadly status quo.
However, what do they say in the end? They say they support the
SUPPORT Act for patients and communities. That was the agreement at
year-end, which Republicans let Elon Musk pull out of the year-end
appropriations package.
Republicans shouldn't come today and say, oh, we are solving this
problem when they are now complicit in doing it.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the American
Society of Addiction Medicine.
American Society of
Addiction Medicine,
February 3, 2025.
RE Halt Lethal Trafficking (HALT) Fentanyl Act
Hon. Chuck Grassley,
Chairman, Judiciary Committee,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Richard Durbin,
Ranking Member, Judiciary Committee,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Buddy Carter,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Health Energy and Commerce
Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Diana DeGette,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Health Energy and Commerce
Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Durbin, Chairman
Carter, and Ranking Member DeGette: On behalf of the American
Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM), a national medical
specialty society representing more than 8,000 physicians and
associated health professionals who specialize in the
prevention and treatment of addiction, I write to urge
amendments to the Halt Lethal Trafficking (HALT) Fentanyl Act
to mitigate unintended negative consequences and encourage
further Congressional action to address the demand side of
our national addiction and overdose crisis.
Opioid overdose deaths are always tragic, especially
because they are preventable with evidence-based addiction
prevention, treatment, and overdose reversal medications.
Even through drug overdose deaths dropped last year, the
United States (US) has far to go in ending our national
addiction and overdose crisis. We still rank highest in drug
overdose deaths per capita in the world.
Illicitly manufactured, high-potency synthetic opiods,
including fentanyl, are key drivers of overdose deaths in the
US. Therefore, policies aiming to decrease their illegal
importation and distribution are critically important.
However, we are concerned that some of the policies proposed
in the HALT Fentanyl Act may have unintended consequences.
Some minor adjustments may support a better return on
investment. Enacting smart legislation is critical to saving
more American lives.
Specifically, ASAM urges the following amendments to The
HALT Fentanyl Act:
Revise its definition of ``fentanyl-related substances'' to
consider potency and mu opioid receptor activity in the
brain, rather than simply specifying the precise structures
of drugs that would qualify for Schedule I. Strict structural
specification provides a blueprint for drug cartels and
chemists to modify substances to avoid detection or
conviction. Unfortunately, this can lead to more dangerous
substances being manufactured and distributed across the US--
resulting in higher potency substances on the streets and
more severe addictions involving substances for which
existing treatments may not work. Additionally, prosecutions
need to focus on the trafficking and distribution of
fentanyl-related substances that pose a danger to humans; the
bill's current definition may include substances that do not
have ``abuse'' potential;
Expand the federal mandatory minimum safety valve across
all substances to end the practice of low-level drug
offenders with substance use disorders receiving excessive
and expensive sentences. Redirecting associated savings
toward evidence-based addiction treatments would be more
effective;
Refine the expedited research procedures to reference
``substance(s)'' instead of ``substance'' throughout to
clarify that researchers can submit one application for
multiple substances;
Amend the expedited research procedures to remove the
requirement to demonstrate that the researcher is authorized
to conduct research with respect to the substance(s) under
the laws of the State in which the research will take place.
This often creates a catch-22 for researchers. A State won't
approve the research until the researchers can demonstrate
that is approved federally, and the DEA won't approve it
until the researchers can demonstrate that it is approved at
the state level. We recommend deferring to the States to
include the requirement to demonstrate federal approval; and
Express a sense of Congress that, while the legislation may
facilitate prosecutions and seizures of fentanyl-related
substances, increased and sustained Congressional efforts are
needed to address the demand side of our national addiction
and overdose crisis if the primary goal is to save lives.
the halt lethal trafficking (halt) fentanyl act
ASAM agrees with the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA)'s assessment that the current scheduling framework
under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) does not offer
necessary flexibility to combat the threat posed by emerging
synthetic substances. Chemists can constantly adjust their
formulations to evade US scheduling, and law enforcement
faces significant challenges staying ahead of these threats.
In 2018, the DEA exercised its authority to place non-
scheduled fentanyl-related substances into Schedule I for two
years. Congress has extended this temporary class-wide
scheduling on several occasions. While this approach has had
success in reducing law enforcement encounters with new
fentanyl-related substances in the illicit market, it has
been unable to curb the overall flow of illicitly
manufactured fentanyl into the US. Drug cartels have
continued large-scale production and distribution of high-
potency synthetic opioids.
Between 2017 and 2023, the number of illicit fentanyl
seizures in the U.S. skyrocketed by
[[Page H527]]
more than 1,700 percent. Concurrently, the proportion of
fentanyl seizures involving counterfeit prescription pills--
that further exacerbate the risk of overdose by misleading
Americans as to what substance they are ingesting--increased
fourfold. Sadly, overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids
other than methadone (primarily illicitly manufactured
fentanyl) have climbed since 2018 to more than 73,000 in
2022.
In short, the HALT Fentanyl Act merely preserves a deadly
status quo.
Additionally, the legislation would continue (1) imposing
mandatory minimum sentences for quantity-based offenses
involving fentanyl-related substances and (2) defining the
class by chemical structure, regardless of potency or actual
impact on opioid receptors and related risks. Unfortunately,
mandatory minimum sentences are a terrible return on
investment when used to punish low-level drug dealers.
These sentences are expensive, needlessly requiring
thousands of dollars per individual per year. Research has
shown that mandatory minimum sentences do not deter drug
use--either before or after incarceration--and can spend tax
dollars with little to no impact on drug use, drug-related
arrests, or overdose rates. Moreover, a meta-analysis of
research studies found that incarceration not only fails to
prevent drug use, it may even increase the likelihood of
reoffending.
The largest return on criminal justice costs may come from
targeting cartel leaders or high-level drug dealers. Unlike
low-level dealers, they are responsible for the movement of
large quantities of fentanyl-related substances at any given
time. Yet, the highest-level drug traffickers represent only
11% of federal drug offenders across substances. In other
words, the US currently wastes a significant amount of money
incarcerating low-level drug offenders with lengthy
sentences.
a better ROI: investing in addiction medicine innovation and treatment
Carefully tailored drug scheduling decisions can play a
useful role in a supply-side approach to addressing an
overdose crisis, but increased and sustained efforts on the
demand side present an opportunity for greater progress.
While many people reduce or stop using drugs without
treatment, those who consume most drugs distributed by drug
cartels frequently have moderate to severe substance use
disorders that necessitate medical treatment. Threats of
punishment are unlikely to deter these Americans, because
their disorder has already negatively affected their
motivation and judgment regarding their drug use. Instead,
effective addiction treatment reduces drug use and improves
health and wellbeing.
Addiction treatment is an excellent return on investment,
including for low-level drug dealers who are distributing
drugs to support their own addiction. Every dollar spent on
addiction treatment saves $4 to $7 in criminal justice and
other costs. Therefore, rather than inefficiently using
taxpayers' money incarcerating low-level dealers of fentanyl-
related or other substances, the government can realize
positive effects from treating substance use disorders of
low-level dealers, including through drug courts that utilize
evidence-based practices and other alternatives to
incarceration.
Congress can lead the way in promoting helpful addiction
treatments. While highly effective medications exist for
opioid use disorder, many people are using stimulants, like
cocaine and methamphetamine, as well as alcohol. No
medications have been approved for stimulant use disorder,
and new treatments are urgently needed for all substance use
disorders to increase their uptake by both prescribers and
patients. Unfortunately, innovation in the addiction field
has lagged other medical fields due to limited financial
investment and misunderstanding of addiction as a moral
rather than a medical condition. Congress could consider
establishing incentives for the pharmaceutical industry to
enter the under-tapped addiction medicine field. The recent
case of GLP-1 medications demonstrates how new medications
can change millions of lives, spur economic growth, and
provide renewed hope for people suffering from stigmatized
medical conditions.
While new treatments are being developed and tested, the US
must also quickly expand access to existing evidence-based
treatments--including methadone, buprenorphine, and
contingency management. Few clinicians offer these
treatments, and they are unlikely to do so without increased
reimbursement rates from insurers and less red tape around
methadone for the treatment of opioid use disorder. For
example, Congress could explicitly amend federal law to state
that contingency management--the most effective treatment for
stimulant use disorder--does not violate federal anti-
kickback laws and patient inducement laws. For too long,
contingency management has been underused by clinicians who
fear prosecution under federal statutes that were not created
to address contingency management. Similarly, many pharmacies
fear that stocking effective medications, like buprenorphine,
will lead to Department of Justice investigations.
Recognizing this, Congress could clarify federal statute to
ensure that pharmacies' stocking of addiction medications is
not an indicator of suspicious activity.
Additionally, Congress could close the dangerous Medicare
coverage gap for evidence-based residential addiction
treatment. At a minimum, Congress could reauthorize, and
update key programs first created by the SUPPORT for Patients
and Communities Act in 2018, after unfortunately letting them
lapse in 2024.
conclusion
Thank you for considering these recommendations. ASAM
remains committed to working with you to promote remission
and recovery from addiction, ensuring that all communities
are safe, and more Americans can lead healthy, productive
lives. For any questions or to discuss, please contact Kelly
Corredor, ASAM's Chief Advocacy Officer.
Sincerely,
Brian Hurley, MD, MBA, FAPA, DFASAM,
President,
American Society of Addiction Medicine.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record another
letter from 190 national, State, and local public health, criminal
justice, and civil rights organizations that also write today to urge
us to reject and vote ``no'' on the HALT Fentanyl Act.
February 3, 2025.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Speaker Mike Johnson,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
RE Vote NO on the HALT Fentanyl Act (H.R. 27/S. 331)
Dear Majority Leader Thune, Speaker Johnson, Minority
Leader Schumer, Minority Leader Jeffries, and Honorable
Members of the U.S. Congress: The undersigned 190 national,
state, and local public health, criminal justice, and civil
rights organizations write today to urge you to reject and
vote NO on the Halt All Lethal Trafficking of Fentanyl (HALT)
Act (H.R. 27/S. 331). This bill permanently schedules
fentanyl-related substances (FRS) on schedule I of the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA) based on a flawed class
definition, imposes mandatory minimums, and fails to provide
an offramp for removing inert or harmless substances from the
drug schedule.
The classwide scheduling approach endorsed in the HALT
Fentanyl Act classifies all FRS as schedule I drugs, reserved
for substances with no currently accepted medical use and a
high potential for abuse. This class definition, however, is
a radical departure from drug scheduling practices as it
relies exclusively on chemical structure without accounting
for pharmacological effect based on the unproven hypothesis
of chemical structure-function relationships. Contrary to
this hypothesis, structurally related substances can often
have complementary therapeutic values. In fact, the National
Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has already acknowledged that
some FRS are inert and that at least one may be an opioid
antagonist that behaves like naloxone, which is itself an
opium derivative that counteracts the effects of opioid
drugs. Classifying all FRS in schedule I places undue
restrictions on research for therapeutic potential of FRS.
This means that researchers and scientists are not able to
study these substances at a time when the U.S. is
experiencing unprecedented overdose deaths.
The HALT Fentanyl Act also enshrines mandatory minimums for
distribution of FRS under the Controlled Substances Act, an
inappropriate mandate that criminalizes possibly inert or
harmless substances. While some proponents of the HALT
Fentanyl Act claim that the bill is not intended to interact
with the criminal justice system and that mandatory minimums
are primarily a deterrent against foreign import of FRS, this
is simply inaccurate. The HALT Fentanyl Act expands mandatory
minimums for both foreign importation crimes and domestic
drug distribution offenses, including nonviolent drug
distribution involving small quantities of drugs. What's
more, by automatically scheduling a huge swathe of substances
in one fell swoop, the HALT Fentanyl Act would lead to very
real criminal justice consequences, posing an unacceptable
risk of unnecessary incarceration for substances that carry
no potential for abuse. Such miscarriages of justice have
already occurred. For instance, Todd Coleman was sentenced to
a mandatory minimum of 10 years for sale of cocaine that a
crime laboratory said was laced with three fentanyl
analogues, only to discover, years later, that the detected
adulterants were not illegal fentanyl analogues and most were
not even controlled substances.
Our country is repeating past missteps when it comes to
policy responses to fentanyl and its analogues. In the 1980s,
policymakers enacted severe mandatory minimums for small
amounts of crack cocaine in response to media headlines and
law enforcement warnings that perpetuated mythology and fear.
These laws imposed harsher penalties for crack--a substance
associated with Black people--than for cocaine--a substance
associated with white people--even though the two substances
are chemically similar. In the ensuing decades, people of
color have been disproportionately incarcerated and sentenced
to mandatory minimum sentences for small amounts of crack.
This trend of racial disparity also can be seen in
prosecutions for offenses involving fentanyl and
[[Page H528]]
fentanyl analogues, as Sentencing Commission data from fiscal
years 2021 to 2023 provides strong evidence that these
prosecutions disproportionately target people of color. Among
the 8,048 people convicted in trafficking cases where
fentanyl or fentanyl analogues were the primary drug type,
Black and Hispanic individuals comprised 78% of all
convictions (41% and 37%, respectively). These percentages
represent a massive disparity relative to demographic
patterns in the general population. Moreover, the emergence
of fentanyl-related substances in recent years has fueled
similar waves of alarmist media and law enforcement headlines
that are informed by mythology rather than science. Any
further extension of the classwide scheduling policy
threatens to repeat past missteps with crack cocaine that
policymakers are still working to rectify.
The classwide scheduling policy expands the application of
existing severe mandatory minimum sentencing laws enacted by
Congress in the 1980s to a newly scheduled class of fentanyl-
related compounds. For example, just a trace amount of a
fentanyl analogue in a mixture with a combined weight of 10
grams--10 paper clips--can translate into a five-year
mandatory minimum with no evidence needed that the seller
even knew it contained fentanyl. In addition, current laws
impose a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years for just a
trace amount of a fentanyl analogue in a mixture with a
combined weight of less than 10 grams. The truth of the
matter is that lawmakers do not need to impose new mandatory
minimums in order to prosecute fentanyl analogue cases
because law enforcement officials already have the ability to
prosecute these cases pursuant to the Controlled Substance
Analogue Enforcement Act of 1986, which requires that
prosecutors show the substances in question are harmful.
Despite the threat of grave injustices in the criminal
legal system, the current lack of research on FRS, and
indications that some FRS are harmless or hold therapeutic
potential, the HALT Fentanyl Act does not include an offramp
to reschedule or remove FRS that research has proven to be
pharmacologically inactive or do not meet schedule I
criteria. Though it includes some research reforms for
schedule I substances, the bill excludes the possibility of
such research impacting the criminalization of FRS. Without a
rescheduling process, the HALT Fentanyl Act may unjustly
promote criminalization of harmless or inert substances.
The HALT Fentanyl Act and other bills proposing the
permanent classwide scheduling of FRS are yet another
iteration of the drug war's ineffective and punitive
strategies. To prevent overdose, Congress must invest in
public health solutions to mitigate the harms of illicit
fentanyl. We urge Congress to support bills that increase
access to health services and substance use disorder
treatment, improve data collection, and provide funding for
FRS research, offering alternative, effective strategies to
simultaneously address the opioid epidemic while preventing
backsliding on criminal justice reform.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Please contact Maritza Perez Medina, Director of Federal
Affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, for questions about
this letter or to further discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
ACLU of Nevada (NV), ACR Health (NY), AIDS Alabama (AL),
AIDS Foundation Chicago (IL), AIDS United, Alianza for
Opportunity, Alliance for Positive Change (NY), Alliance for
Positive Health (NY), American Civil Liberties Union,
American Friends Service Committee, Appalachian Learning
Initiative (WV), Association of Black Social Workers
(Virginia Union University) (VA), Autistic Self Advocacy
Network.
Battle Born Progress (NV), Beacon House Aftercare,
Louisville (KY), Beauty After the Bars (NC), Bend the Arc:
Jewish Action, Better Organizing to Win Legalization, BLM
Louisville (KY), Brave Technology Co-Op, Bronx Movil (NY).
C-UR Recovery Services, LLC (MI), Celebrate Recovery (KY),
Center for Criminal Justice Reform, University of Baltimore
(MD), Center for Disability Rights, Center for Housing &
Health (IL), Center for Popular Democracy, Citizen Action of
Wisconsin (WI), Clergy for a New Drug Policy, Coalition on
Human Needs, Color of Change, Communities United for Status &
Protection (CUSP).
Community Catalyst, Community Health Project Los Angeles
(CA), Cosmovisiones Ancestrales (CA), CURE (Citizens United
for Rehabilitation of Errants), Dream.org, Drug Policy
Alliance, Drug Policy Forum of Hawai`i (HI), Due Process
Institute, E5 Enterprise (NY/PA), Elephant Circle (CO),
EngageWell IPA (NY), Equal Justice USA, Evergreen Health
(NY), Exchanging Pathways (MS).
Fair and Just Prosecution, Faith in Harm Reduction, Family
Services Network of New York (NY), FAMM, Federal Public &
Community Defenders, Feed Louisville (KY), Filling The Gaps
Outreach, Inc. (GA), Florida Harm Reduction Collective (FL),
Freedom BLOC (OH), Fruit of Labor Action Research & Technical
Assistance, LLC (NC), Full Circle Youth Empowerment, Inc.
(CT), FWD.us.
G. Williams & Associates, Inc. (IL), Giving Others Dreams
G.O.D. Inc (IL), GLIDE (CA), Hawai`i Health & Harm Reduction
Center (HI), HEAL Ohio (OH), Hepatitis C Mentor and Support
Group (HCMSG) (NY), Hep Free Hawai`i (HI), Hey Joe Media
(AZ), Hip Hop Caucus, HIPS (DC), HomeRise (CA), Hoosier
Action (IN), Housing Works (NY), Human Rights Watch.
Illinois Alliance for Reentry and Justice (IL), Illinois
Harm Reduction & Recovery Coalition (IL), Immigrant Legal
Resource Center, Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR)
(DC) (MD) (VA), Indiana Recovery Alliance (IN), IOAD NC
Raleigh Memorial Event (NC), Isaiah House Inc (KY),
Interfaith Action for Human Rights, Justice Strategies,
JustLeadershipUSA, Juvenile Law Center.
Lacey's Legacy (KY), LatinoJustice PRLDEF, Law Enforcement
Action Partnership, Law Office of the Cook County Public
Defender (IL), The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human
Rights, Legal Action Center, Life Coach Each One Teach One
Reentry Fellowship (KY), Lighthouse Consultants Colorado, LLC
(CO), Local Progress, Los Angeles Community Action Network
(CA), Michigan People's Campaign (MI), Minorities for Medical
Marijuana, Mississippi Prison Reform Coalition (MS), Moms for
All Paths to Recovery (CA), Monetwork (MO), My Brothers
Keeper NEO (OH), My Meta ReEntry Services, Inc. (NC).
NASTAD, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,
National Coalition for the Homeless, National Council of
Churches, National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence-
Maryland Chapter (MD), National Employment Law Project,
National Harm Reduction Coalition, National Health Law
Program, National Homelessness Law Center, National Immigrant
Justice Center, National Immigration Project (NIPNLG),
National Legal Aid & Defender Association, National
Organization for Women, National Pain Advocacy Center (CO),
NC Harm Reduction Coalition (NC).
Nelsonville Voices/Showing Up for Racial Justice (OH),
NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, New Jersey
Organizing Project (NJ), New York State Harm Reduction
Association (NY), NEXT Distro, OhioCAN/Newark Homeless
Outreach (OH), On The Bright Side LLC (NC), ONE Northside
(IL), Overdose Crisis Response Fund, PA Stands Up (PA),
Parabola Center for Law and Policy, Parole Preparation
Project, Pennsylvania Harm Reduction Network (PA), People
Advocating Recovery (KY), People's Action, Progressive
Leadership Alliance of Nevada (NV), Progressive Maryland
(MD), Psychotherapy Services DBA (KY).
QLatinx (FL), R Street Institute, REACH-NEO (OH), Reentry
Advocacy Project (TX), Reframe Health and Justice, Renew A
New, Inc (CA), Revolve Impact, Rights & Democracy (NH/VT),
River Valley Organizing (OH), Sana Healing Collective (IL),
Smoky Mountain Harm Reduction (NC), Sojourners, Source Corp
LLC (OH), South Carolina For Restorative Justice (SC), South
Louisville Community Ministries (KY), Southern Tier AIDS
Program (NY).
StoptheDrugWar.org, Students for Sensible Drug Policy,
Sunita Jain Anti-Trafficking Policy Initiative, Loyola Law
School, T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, Tacoma
Healing Awareness Community (WA), TakeAction Minnesota (MN),
TCRC Community Healing Center (PA), Texas Harm Reduction
Alliance (TX), The Action Lab, Center for Health Policy and
Law, Northeastern University School of Law (MA), The
Advocates for Human Rights (MN), The AIDS Institute (TAI),
The Daniel Initiative.
The Festival Center, The Freedom BLOC (OH), The Gathering
for Justice, The Georgia Survivor Defense Project (GA), The
Gubbio Project (CA), The Hepatitis C Mentor and Support Group
(HCMSG) (NY), The Matrix Consulting, LLC, The Porchlight
Collective SAP (IL), The Sentencing Project, The Steady
Collective (NC), Transform Network, Treatment Action Group
(TAG) (NY), Treatment on Demand Coalition-SF (CA), Truth
Pharm Inc. (NY).
United Vision for Idaho (ID), Vera Institute of Justice,
Vilomah Foundation (PA), Vital Strategies, Vivent Health,
VOCAL-KY (KY), VOCAL-NY (NY), VOCAL-WA (WA), VT Citizens
United for the Rehabilitation of Errant(s) (VT), Washington
Office on Latin America, Why Not Prosper (PA), Wilkes
Recovery Revolution, Inc. (NC), Women on the Rise (GA), Worth
Rises, Young People in Recovery.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter
from the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights on behalf of
this large and diverse coalition of 240 national organizations.
The Leadership Conference
on Civil and Human Rights,
February 4, 2025.
Hon. Mike Johnson,
Speaker of the House,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Hakeem Jeffries,
House Minority Leader,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Johnson and Minority Leader Jeffries: On
behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human
Rights, a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more
than 240 national organizations to promote and protect civil
and human rights in the United States, we write to express
our strong opposition to H.R. 27, the Halt All Lethal
Trafficking (HALT) of Fentanyl Act, and to urge the House to
reject this bill. The Leadership Conference will score the
House's vote in our Voting Record for the 119th Congress.
[[Page H529]]
This bill permanently schedules fentanyl-related substances
(FRS) on schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA)
based on a flawed class definition. Additionally, it imposes
mandatory minimums and fails to provide an offramp for
removing inert or harmless substances from the drug schedule.
The classwide scheduling that this bill would impose would
exacerbate pretrial detention, mass incarceration, and racial
disparities in the prison system, doubling down on a fear-
based, enforcement-first response to a public health
challenge.
Under the classwide control, any offense involving a
``fentanyl-related substance'' is subject to federal criminal
prosecution, even if the substance in question is helpful or
has no potential for abuse. The case of Todd Coleman is
instructive. Mr. Coleman was sentenced to a mandatory minimum
of 10 years for selling 30 grams of cocaine--about two
tablespoons--because a local lab said that they were laced
with three illegal fentanyl analogues. But none of the
substances were illegal fentanyl analogues, and one was a
substance called ``Benzyl Fentanyl'' that the Drug
Enforcement Administration has long known is not dangerous or
illegal.
Moreover, the HALT Fentanyl Act enshrines mandatory
minimums for distribution of FRS under the Controlled
Substances Act, which could criminalize inert or harmless
substances. This bill expands mandatory minimums for both
foreign importation crimes and domestic drug distribution
offenses, including nonviolent drug distribution involving
small quantities of drugs. As mandatory minimums eliminate
judicial discretion, judges are prevented from tailoring
punishment to a particular defendant by taking into account
an individual's background and the circumstances of their
offenses when determining the sentence. Mandatory minimums
instead place more power in the hands of prosecutors and
their charging decisions, which is particularly concerning
given that prosecutors are more likely to charge Black people
with a crime that carries a mandatory minimum than a White
person. The HALT Fentanyl Act threats to replicate this
pattern and deepen these disparities.
This Congress should not repeat its past mistakes when it
comes to policy responses to fentanyl and its analogues.
Beginning in the 1980s, draconian drug laws with harsh
mandatory minimums and their resulting enforcement under the
banner of the ``war on drugs'' fueled skyrocketing prison
populations. In the ensuing decades, Black people have been
disproportionately incarcerated and sentenced to mandatory
minimum sentences for small amounts of crack cocaine, despite
the fact that White people are more likely than Black people
to use crack cocaine in their lifetimes. Similar trends for
FRS are emerging: Between 2015 and 2019, prosecutions for
fentanyl-analogue offenses increased by more than 5,000
percent, with no corresponding decrease in the use of FRS or
in overdose deaths. In 2019, 58.9 percent of those sentenced
in fentanyl-analogue cases were Black. Any further extension
of the classwide scheduling policy threatens to repeat past
missteps with crack cocaine that policymakers are still
working to rectify.
Harsh federal drug laws and mandatory minimums have caused
the federal prison population to explode. The Urban Institute
has found that increases in expected time served for drug
offenses was the largest contributor to growth in the federal
prison population between 1998 and 2010. Currently, people
convicted of drug offenses make up 43.9 percent of the Bureau
of Prisons (BOP) population. There is no indication that
overly punitive sentences or mass incarceration deter crime,
protect public safety, or decrease drug use or trafficking.
We share your concerns about fentanyl-related deaths and
support effective health-based approaches to mitigating this
public health crisis, but classwide scheduling and mandatory
minimums merely repeat the mistakes of the past by
exacerbating our incarceration problem. We welcome continued
dialogue with you about how to move forward on this important
topic. However, we must reiterate our firm opposition to
classwide emergency scheduling and to mandatory minimum
sentencing.
We strongly urge Congress to take bold steps on these
issues and transform our criminal-legal system into one that
delivers true justice and equality. For this reason, we ask
you to vote NO on the HALT Fentanyl Act. Thank you for your
time and attention to this matter. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact Chloe White, senior policy
counsel, justice.
Sincerely,
Jesselyn McCurdy,
Executive Vice President
of Government Affairs.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, they are going to score this for
voting records. The majority has to do something and stand up for their
Article I constitutional duty and say: We are going to protect
Medicaid; We are not going to listen to billionaires; We are going to
bring the SUPPORT Act; and We are not going to pull the rug out from
under the counselors and providers back home who are doing it.
Mr. Speaker, I just read online that community health centers are
being forced to close in Virginia. All over this country, this is what
is going on, and you can't paper over it with some fake legislation
like this.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak), a member of the Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Mrs. FEDORCHAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the
HALT Fentanyl Act.
In North Dakota, my State, we are known for our tight-knit
communities where people look out for one another, but even in my
State, illicit fentanyl is smuggled in, stealing innocent lives and
leaving families shattered.
North Dakota law enforcement says record amounts of fentanyl are
pouring into our State. What is most disturbing is how traffickers are
targeting our kids. They are poisoning our children. We must pass the
HALT Fentanyl Act to permanently give law enforcement the tools they
need.
This will punish traffickers who play a dangerous game of tweaking
formulas to stay one step ahead of the law.
The American people have trusted us to fix the mess created by the
Biden administration's open-border policies. For every devastated
family and every community on the front lines of this crisis, we must
act.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a partisan issue. It is an important part of
the solution, and it is the right thing to do. Let's pass H.R. 27.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Dexter).
Ms. DEXTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this
bill because it is abundantly clear it is not a serious effort to
address the drug overdose epidemic in this country.
It is, in fact, partisan. Treatment is not partisan, but this bill
is.
Before coming to Congress, I was a practicing physician. In 2022, I
took care of a young person in the ICU who had unintentionally
overdosed on what was thought to be a pain pill but turned out to be a
counterfeit oxycodone pill laced with fentanyl.
I worked all night to save this young man's life, but his brain never
woke up. I was the one who had to tell his mother and extended family
that he was never going to come home.
This tragic story is all too familiar for Oregonians. In Congress, I
am laser-focused on getting my community the resources it needs to
ensure that no parent or family ever has to experience the pain of
losing a loved one to an overdose.
That is why I am disgusted by the administration's current illegal
freezing of all Federal funds, including over $8.6 billion in grant
funding for Federal programs to combat the opioid crisis.
I offered a simple amendment to this bill before us today. That
amendment stated that this bill could not take effect until we get
confirmation that last week's funding freeze and any future freeze does
not jeopardize Americans' access to substance use prevention,
treatment, and recovery services.
The Republicans claim to care about addressing this crisis, but they
refused to bring that amendment up for a vote. It is shocking to me
what we have come to. My Republican colleagues are so afraid to stand
up that they will rip essential healthcare services away from our most
vulnerable.
We must take a stand, and I am going to take a stand. For those who
are watching who are suffering, please know that we will not stop
fighting. We cannot arrest our way out of this.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Fitzgerald), my friend.
Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 27, the HALT
Fentanyl Act.
I will share two stories of constituents from Wisconsin's Fifth
District. Lauri Badura of Oconomowoc lost her eldest son, Archie, in
2014 due to an accidental overdose.
Since then, she has dedicated herself to advocate on behalf of those
struggling with mental health and substance abuse and started a
grassroots organization called Saving Others for Archie to help fight
the opioid epidemic on the local, State, and national level.
Erin and Rick Rachwal of Pewaukee lost their son, Logan, to an
overdose in 2021. The results of that toxicology report indicated three
different forms of fentanyl were present.
In response, Erin and Rick started the Love, Logan Foundation to end
the stigma surrounding mental health and substance abuse disorders.
[[Page H530]]
Mr. Speaker, we need strong congressional action on fentanyl, and we
need the permanent designation of fentanyl-related substances to
schedule I.
One of the first pieces of legislation I introduced in Congress was
Stopping Overdoses of Fentanyl Analogues Act to address the very issue
we are considering today.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think you have heard many statements on the Democrat
side of the aisle about how this legislation that is before us today
only looks at one aspect of the fentanyl crisis and ignores funding, if
you will, for treatment.
Right now, Medicaid cuts could and actually would seriously undermine
our ability to address the opioid epidemic so they can give tax breaks
to billionaires and big corporations.
What I want to emphasize is that not only is there nothing in this
legislation to deal with treatment, but in addition to that, what we
assume is going to happen, based on statements that have been put out
by Republicans, is they are going to cut the Medicaid program in order
to pay for their tax cuts for corporations and the very wealthy.
Last week, in case anyone doubts it, the Trump administration
temporarily suspended Federal Medicaid payments, and now we are hearing
that congressional Republicans are considering up to $2.5 trillion in
Medicaid cuts.
Keep in mind that Medicaid is the single largest payer for behavioral
health services in the United States and covers nearly 40 percent of
all individuals with opioid use disorder. Medicaid covers a full array
of services and supports for people with behavioral health needs,
including services and supports that typically are not covered by other
health programs.
As the opioid crisis continues, States can draw down Federal funds to
cover medication-assisted treatment, MAT, medications and therapy,
expand coverage of community-based benefits to support treatment and
recovery, and to integrate behavioral health services into primary care
and other settings. All that will stop with the Medicaid cuts that we
are hearing that the Republicans want to implement.
Republican plans to cut Medicaid will further limit access to care
for substance use disorders, jeopardize treatment for Medicaid
beneficiaries, and lead to more deaths as a result of termination of
treatment.
Again, I understand that the Republicans are talking today about law
enforcement and penalties, but they are completely ignoring the fact
that for many people this crisis is really dependent upon the fact that
people continue to seek out fentanyl, and if they don't get treatment,
then there are going to be more people that are doing the same.
Part of the reason that we are opposed to this bill today is because
it doesn't say anything about treatment, which is one of the major
aspects of this crisis. What we hear is cuts, cuts, cuts on all these
treatment programs, which are totally unacceptable if you actually want
to deal with this epidemic.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1315
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Obernolte), a member of the Energy and Commerce
Committee and my friend.
Mr. OBERNOLTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 27, the
HALT Fentanyl Act.
This bill would permanently classify fentanyl and its analogues as
schedule I controlled substances, which will give our law enforcement
officers more tools to use in tracking down and stopping the dealers
who are trafficking this substance into our communities.
Mr. Speaker, this is a deeply personal issue for me. I represent
parts of Los Angeles County, which has experienced an over 1,000
percent increase in fentanyl deaths in the last few years.
Mr. Speaker, the most difficult day in my 19 years in elected office
was several years ago when I tried to console a constituent, a grieving
mother who had lost both of her sons in the same day to fentanyl
poisoning. As the father of two boys myself who were about the same age
at the time, I can't imagine how devastating that must have been.
This bill would give our law enforcement agencies more tools to help
stop this problem. That is why I am proud to be a cosponsor of it, and
I strongly urge its passage.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Fry), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee
and my friend.
Mr. FRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for allowing me to speak.
I rise in strong favor of the HALT Fentanyl Act to combat the deadliest
drug crisis our Nation has ever faced.
Fentanyl-related substances are wreaking havoc in our communities all
across this country, with illicit fentanyl poisoning now the leading
cause of death among young adults from 18-49. Last year alone, 109,000
Americans died of an overdose, the overwhelming majority of that
related to fentanyl.
Drug traffickers exploit loopholes in our law, tweaking fentanyl's
chemical structure just enough to create new, unregulated substances
that are equally as deadly.
To be clear, Democrats have already voted for this. They have voted
for the temporary extension of this with a continuing resolution, and
this has never come up. This is a bipartisan bill. If this goes away,
that is a win for the cartels, criminals, and Chinese Communist Party.
The HALT Fentanyl Act permanently classifies all fentanyl-related
substances, analogues, and derivatives as schedule I drugs, ensuring
that law enforcement has those necessary tools to do their jobs.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. McDowell), a new member of the Republican
Conference, a new Member of Congress, and my good friend.
Mr. McDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, this is the first time that I have had the
honor of speaking on the floor of this great body, and it isn't by
chance. It is because of how important this legislation is and how
personal it is to my family and me.
In 2017, we lost my little brother, Luke, to fentanyl poisoning. He
was only 20 years old. It changed everything for our family, and there
is not a day that goes by that we don't feel the pain of that loss.
Days like tomorrow, February 7, which would have been his 29th
birthday, will always come with an especially painful reminder that he
should be here.
Unfortunately, the pain that we feel is not unique to my family
because tens of thousands of American families are being shattered by
this crisis each year.
Today, fentanyl is the leading cause of death among young adults.
Enough is enough, Mr. Speaker. Enough is enough.
This legislation before us today would make important changes. Right
now, because of an emergency order, fentanyl and fentanyl-related
substances are considered a schedule I drug, but this order is set to
expire at the end of March. If it expires, it means that law
enforcement will have no authority to seize many of these deadly drugs,
that drug traffickers will be empowered to push deadlier drugs on our
streets, and that our Border Patrol officials will lose the authority
to seize these drugs coming across our border.
This bipartisan legislation is simple. It is not window dressing, Mr.
Speaker. It is simple. It would make this emergency order permanent.
However, let's never mistake simple for insignificant. We have before
us the opportunity to save many lives.
Mr. Speaker, we lost my little brother to fentanyl, and I will not
stop until we ensure that others don't lose theirs.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Iowa (Mrs. Miller-Meeks), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee
and my good friend.
Mrs. MILLER-MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, what you see next to me is a tiny
speck of fentanyl, just a few milligrams, a dose so small it could fit
on the ear of Lincoln on a penny, yet that speck is enough to take a
life and destroy a family.
[[Page H531]]
In 2023, over 107,000 Americans died from drug overdoses or
poisoning, with fentanyl responsible for nearly 75 percent of those
deaths.
As a State senator, I eliminated preauthorization for medicated
assisted treatment for substance use disorder. In Congress, I have the
Alternatives to PAIN Act. I have also helped veterans to get access to
substance use disorder treatment.
This poison is flooding our streets and killing our children,
parents, and neighbors. It is killing my constituents in Iowa. That is
why we must pass the HALT Fentanyl Act. This bill would make the
temporary classwide scheduling order for fentanyl-related substances
permanent, ensuring law enforcement has the authority to seize these
deadly drugs before they destroy more lives.
If we fail to act, traffickers will continue to exploit loopholes,
pushing even deadlier drugs onto our streets.
The time for action is now. Lives are on the line. We must pass this
bill to protect our families and stop this crisis.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Iowa for her comments, but
I want to inform her that the Trump administration's funding freeze can
impact as much as $57 million in funding for substance abuse and mental
health services and research in the State of Iowa that her constituents
rely on. Cutting this vital funding will greatly hamper our response to
the opioid epidemic and result in more overdose deaths.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Crenshaw), my good friend and a member of the Energy
and Commerce Committee.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the HALT
Fentanyl Act because it is the most obvious thing in the world to be in
support of.
Hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost their lives to fentanyl.
Fentanyl is supposed to be used in the operating room and on the
battlefield. It is not meant to be laced into street drugs and sold
online to kids. Due to its street use, it has killed hundreds of
thousands of Americans--75,000 deaths a year. It is the Nation's
biggest mass poisoning in our history.
There is a supply-side element to that. It is the Mexican drug
cartels.
It is also worth mentioning the counterarguments to this. Everyone
says, well, if we schedule this as a schedule I drug, then we are going
to go right back to the old days of the 1980s and 1990s of mass
incarceration.
There is a really big problem with that argument, and it is this:
This has been temporarily scheduled since 2018. I would love my
colleagues who are making that claim to show me the data on how this
has hurt minority communities over the last 7 years. You can't because
it doesn't exist. It has been schedule I for 7 years.
We cannot let that expire because then we take away the tools that
our prosecutors and law enforcement need to stop this deadly threat.
I hate to break it to everybody, but incentives matter, behaviors
matter. You need higher penalties for dealing fentanyl, a heck of a lot
higher than the mandatory minimums we are even talking about here, if
we actually care about saving kids' lives.
Mr. Speaker, we should stop playing politics. Let's do what is right.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Murphy), my good friend.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I have sat here and listened to some of the
arguments from the other side, and I feel like we are back in bizarro
world again.
The election last time told us that people don't want crime,
fentanyl, and the things that come with it. We are merely trying to get
this off the streets.
Let me give a good example of what this means in the HALT Fentanyl
Act. Let's say I am from the Pepsi company, and let's say people don't
like Coke. Well, we have to get rid of Coke. We not only have to get
rid of Coke, but that means we also have to get rid of vanilla Coke,
lemon Coke, and all the other Cokes. In this case, we get rid of the
derivatives, the basic element of fentanyl.
That is all that we are doing. We are not trying to protect our
criminals. We are not going to hurt our physicians. We are not going to
hurt any particular segment of society. We are trying to bring back
what Americans wanted during the election, and that was law and order--
very simple.
I have known nine young men who have died from fentanyl overdoses.
There is not a single person in this Chamber who doesn't know somebody
who has died from this. This is the scourge of folks under age 50. It
is the number one cause of death. Anything we can do to move that
barrier is critical.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stop the partisan nonsense and
shenanigans and let everybody get back on board to understanding that
this is a scourge upon our Nation. We just want it scheduled correctly,
as in schedule I. It will save lives, no matter what you look like or
where you live.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the HALT Fentanyl Act and urge my
colleagues to do the same.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Fong).
Mr. FONG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 27, the
HALT Fentanyl Act.
Fentanyl is destroying lives across America, and my district is no
exception. Traffickers have been cutting fentanyl with additional
uncontrolled substances, such as xylazine-cut fentanyl, making
overdoses even harder to reverse. We cannot allow drug traffickers to
push deadlier mixtures that are poisoning our youth.
This bill is a critical part in combating the fentanyl crisis in
America. It will ensure that these deadly substances are classified
permanently so law enforcement has the ability to seize these lethal
drugs.
Law enforcement is on the front lines, fighting this crisis every
single day, as drugs flow across the southern border. It is our job in
this Chamber to ensure that they have the tools they need to stay ahead
of drug traffickers,
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to protect our communities by
voting ``yes'' on H.R. 27.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Let me be clear, what the Trump funding freeze does is to pause any
funding to go to opioid prevention, treatment, and recovery programs.
Fortunately, several Federal courts have enjoined this funding freeze
from going into immediate effect, but make no mistake, if this freeze
is allowed to go forward, substance use and mental health clinicians
who dedicate their lives to helping those experiencing substance use
disorder would go without their paychecks and close their doors.
Clinics and programs such as certified community behavioral health
clinics and the Drug-Free Communities Support Program funded by the CDC
would be cut off from Federal funding.
We just learned yesterday of community health centers closing in the
State of Virginia, so it is already happening that some of the
community health centers are closing. The millions of Americans who
depend on these programs will be losing access to their care across the
country.
The HALT Fentanyl Act is a bill that is opposed by over 190
organizations. It is a box to check rather than having the hard,
collaborative conversations that must be done to address a longstanding
problem.
Let me be clear again: The fentanyl-related substances do, in fact,
pose a danger to public health. There is no question about it. That is
why the DEA enacted a temporary classwide scheduling order in 2018, and
we have voted to extend it over nine times since, most recently in
December of last year. We included and supported it as part of a
bipartisan end-of-year agreement to continue the temporary status for
actually another 2 years.
Don't be fooled by the majority's fear-mongering. The upcoming
expiration of the temporary order on March 31 is a crisis of their own
making. If they had adopted the bipartisan agreement at the end of the
year, we wouldn't be facing this deadline.
[[Page H532]]
I hope that we can all agree that the substance use and overdose
crisis impacts all of our districts. Those who are suffering deserve
bipartisan solutions that protect public safety, support public health,
and don't perpetuate criminal justice bias.
As I said before, Democratic opposition is primarily based on the
fact that there is nothing here to help with support and treatment. If
anybody on the other side of the aisle thinks we are just going to
criminalize ourselves out of this fentanyl crisis, they are just
kidding themselves.
A larger part of this problem is the fact that we need a lot more
funding for support and treatment, so that the demand, if you will, for
fentanyl is significantly decreased. Right now, the demand is so great,
and that is a big part of why we have such a crisis.
If we don't do something about treatment and behavioral health, we
are never going to deal effectively with this crisis.
For all of those reasons, I oppose this bill, and I ask my colleagues
to vote ``no.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1330
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, speaking as the primary sponsor on the Republican side
of the bipartisan bill, the SUPPORT Act, we do need treatment. We have
worked on treatment. We have record treatment that has happened since
the SUPPORT Act first passed, and we will work on it again this
Congress.
We know it is going to expire by the end of March. What is happening
is the scheduling of illicit fentanyl. What that means is, fentanyl is
scheduled. What the people in China do who send their recipes for
fentanyl to Mexico to be manufactured and sent across the border is if
they could slightly change the molecule just enough that it is no
longer fentanyl, it is no longer scheduled.
Our police officers have to find it and get it tested. Once they get
it tested, they have to go back and say, okay, that is fentanyl. It is
deadly. Let's go to Congress and get Congress to put that on the
schedule. Then we put that on the schedule. Then they start to process
and slightly change it again.
That is the reason we put this in an emergency order to begin with.
That is why we want to put it in permanently because we know that it is
effective.
We have had testimony to say that it is effective. We had my friend
from New York (Ms. Gillen) come and say that she read that the DEA says
this will save lives. Other groups say this will save lives. We have
testimony that this will save lives. There is so much we need to do in
helping people with their substance use disorders and struggles. There
is no doubt there is a lot we need to do.
What we need to do today, what we are going to put our name on and
record our vote on, yes or no, is: Do we believe that derivatives of
fentanyl that are being trafficked from China to Mexico across our
border, do we believe that should be schedule I and give the tools to
our law enforcement officers to fight it?
That is what we are voting on today. I urge my colleagues to vote
``yes'' on this bill. We had Mr. Cullen from Pennsylvania testify this
morning in a hearing on the Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Subcommittee for Health, who lost his son.
We all know people who suffer from this. We need to keep up the
fight. This is important for us to do, and I encourage a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BALDERSON. Mr. Speaker, fentanyl has ravaged communities in my
district and across Ohio.
In 2023, our state saw more than 3,500 fentanyl overdoses,
representing 98 percent of all opioid deaths.
Families are being torn apart and law enforcement is fighting an
uphill battle to keep this poison off our streets.
That's why I proudly support the HALT Fentanyl Act, which gives law
enforcement the certainty and stability they need to crack down on
traffickers and prevent illicit fentanyl from entering our country.
We cannot allow this crisis to continue unchecked. And we must act
now to protect our communities, support law enforcement, and save
lives.
I urge my House colleagues to support this bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bost). All time for debate on the bill
has expired.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in part B of
House Report 119-2.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mrs. Trahan
The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment No.
2 printed in part B of House Report 119-2.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, as the designee of Congresswoman Pettersen,
I have an amendment at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 23, strike lines 13 through 16 and insert the
following:
(a) In General.--This Act, and the amendments made by this
Act, shall take effect on the date that the Secretary of
Health and Human Services and the Attorney General certify
jointly in the Federal Register that this Act will lead to a
reduction in overdose deaths.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 93, the
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer amendment 2 on behalf of my
colleague, Congresswoman Brittany Pettersen, who welcomed her second
son, Sam, last week.
Unfortunately, outdated House rules prevent Congresswoman Pettersen
from voting remotely while she recovers and cares for her newborn. I am
proud to stand here today to advance the critical amendment that she
authored, one that ensures the legislation before us does what it is
intended to do: Save lives.
This amendment adds a straightforward but essential guardrail. Before
this bill can take effect, the Secretary of Health and Human Services
and the Attorney General must certify that it will actually reduce
overdose deaths.
Mr. Speaker, we are at a pivotal point in the fight against the
opioid crisis. For the first time since 2018, overdose deaths have
declined over a 12-month period. That is not by chance. It is because
of evidence-based strategies, including many championed by the
Bipartisan Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Task Force.
The investments we have made to disrupt the illicit drug trade,
expand access to treatment and recovery support, and make naloxone
widely available, they are working. We should be building on this
progress, not undermining it.
That is what this amendment ensures. While we have made real strides
in this fight, the reality is still devastating: More than 80,000
Americans lost their lives to overdoses in 2024. This crisis remains a
national emergency, one that demands a public health response, not a
return to failed policies that devastated communities for generations.
Everyone in this Chamber agrees that we must keep fentanyl and other
illicit substances out of our neighborhoods, and we have to do it in a
way that actually reduces overdose deaths. That is why I urge my
colleagues to support this amendment because it guarantees that this
bill will save lives. We cannot afford to go backward. Let's keep
moving forward.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, we know that if this emergency declaration
expires, that illicit fentanyl will no longer be scheduled and
individuals will no longer be subject to arrest and prosecution.
I don't believe we need to study this. That is why we have the
emergency in place because of the problem. Putting this off until a
study comes back, people are going to die. I don't think we need to
certify that people are going to die. I think that is self-evident.
Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
[[Page H533]]
THE SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Massachusetts has 3
minutes remaining.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Dexter).
Ms. DEXTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak, and I
rise to strongly support this amendment. If we want to save lives, if
that is truly what we are all here to do, let's make sure that is the
outcome before we move forward.
As I stated, I am a physician. I am a lung doctor. I have taken care
of people with addiction for 20 years. I know, Mr. Speaker, that people
have to fail before they succeed most times when they struggle with
addiction.
Criminalizing all use of fentanyl derivatives means that people will
be driven into the shadows because they fear going to jail should they
have an addiction. This is a chronic disease.
If we believe criminalization is the path to helping save lives, I
want to see that because that has not been our experience in Oregon
where it has been nationally recognized that we have struggled.
The other point I will make is that the scheduling of all fentanyl
derivatives ties our hands. We cannot develop treatments that are
derivatives of fentanyl if we criminalize all fentanyl-related
derivatives.
Mr. Speaker, not only do we deny ourselves the opportunity for
treatment upstream, but downstream, we criminalize people into the
shadows where they are more likely to die of overdose.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Bresnahan).
Mr. BRESNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 27, the
HALT Fentanyl Act, and oppose the amendment.
It takes only 2 milligrams of fentanyl to kill a person. That is the
weight of a single grain of sand. In fact, on average, one
Pennsylvanian dies from a drug overdose every 2 hours. These aren't
strangers.
The fentanyl that has poured in across our borders during the past
few years has wreaked havoc on our families, neighbors, and
communities. This includes me. My 16-year-old cousin lost her life to
this crisis.
No race, no gender, no ZIP Code is immune from the fentanyl epidemic.
This is why I am proud that we are wasting no time in bringing the HALT
Fentanyl Act to the floor.
This bill should have passed both Chambers in the last Congress. It
should have passed with unanimous support, but here with are. Let's
show the American people we are prepared to fight for them and address
this crisis. Let's deliver a tangible victory for our families and
neighbors back home.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).
Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I am totally focused on codifying President
Trump's executive actions to Make America Great Again. This bill will
do just that, permanently solidifying President Trump's decision to
classify fentanyl-related substances and fentanyl as schedule I drugs.
Really, maybe it doesn't go far enough. I think fentanyl should be a
weapon of mass destruction. I have a bill to do exactly that. Maybe
that will be the next bill that we are debating on the floor this
Congress.
In Colorado, I can't even go into the grocery store, the gas station,
or the local firearms store without meeting someone who has had a loved
one die from fentanyl.
According to the CDC in 2022 alone, fentanyl was responsible for over
73,000 deaths. That is like losing seven of my rural communities in
just 1 year. Guess what? Now, it is the leading cause of death for
Americans aged 18 to 45. It is a shame because it didn't have to be
this way.
The Biden-Harris regime sacrificed American lives at the altar of
open borders. Shame on them. Enough is enough. It is time we put an end
to this crisis that was completely preventable and wasn't happening
until Democrats enabled China and cartels with wide-open border
policies.
Let's pass the HALT Fentanyl Act. Let's codify President Trump's
executive orders, and let's put American lives ahead of open-border
extremist policies.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, it is a very spirited debate on the other
side, but this is on the amendment. This amendment would just make sure
that the underlying bill actually does what it is intended to do, which
is save lives simply by ensuring that the Secretary of Health and Human
Services and the Attorney General certify that this bill will reduce
overdose deaths.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues, in order to make this legislation
effective, vote ``yes'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, all I will say is that we know, and we have
had testimony. We have had testimony from so many people who have come
before our committee. We know that if we have illicit fentanyl that is
no longer illegal, it is not going to save lives. It is going to cost
lives.
We know this emergency order is expiring at the end of March. This
needs to be done. It has to go to the Senate. Somebody mentioned
earlier on the other side that it lingered in the Senate. We now have a
Senate that will take this up. We have a President that will sign it.
We need to get this done so we can protect children and not delay
this until we have another study when we know what is going on in our
neighborhoods, our homes, our communities, and our country.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the defeat of this amendment and support the
underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time.
THE SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the previous question
is ordered on the bill, as amended, and on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan).
The question is on the amendment by the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________