On the recordJuly 22, 2020
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to this amendment to H.R. 2486. The majority is actually playing procedural games here by including a nongermane provision to satisfy certain requirements. The two immigration bills that we are considering today are expensive, make no doubt about it. According to the CBO, the NO BAN Act will increase direct spending by $290 million over the next 10 years and increase deficits by $307 million over the same period. And a preliminary estimate from CBO notes that the Access to Counsel Act, which we will debate later today, will increase discretionary spending by at least $1 billion over the next 5 years. So the majority had to come up with a pay-for. They opted for prescription drug legislation, but chose to discard bipartisan committee past text to instead include a flawed prescription bill that will stifle investment and research, prevent new medications from coming to market, block truthful advertising, and disincentivize improvements in patient care. This Congress has unanimously passed six bipartisan bills out of committee to address the costs of prescription drugs. But today, instead of using bipartisan-negotiated text, my colleagues across the aisle have made prescription drugs a partisan issue in an effort to pass partisan immigration bills. Our President has consistently taken decisive action to help ensure the security of our immigration programs and, thus, the safety of our country.…





