Peter Welch

I want to thank Commissioner LaFleur for coming to Vermont.

But I don't believe it should fairly fall on the shoulders of a consumer who shows up and is absolutely powerless and had nothing to do with creating the mess in the first place.

Vermont does have a law. Since 1987 it has banned balance billing in the emergency department settings only.

Protecting patients, however, must be put at the forefront of this discussion and I will continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do just that.

I am encouraged that our draft legislation lines up well with the principles the White House has set forth for a solution that could get the President's signature and become law.

We have to stop this. And it is why Chairman Pallone and I are moving forward with legislation to protect patients.

The challenge for consumers they are totally powerless--totally powerless.

It doesn't protect Vermonters who seek care in other states.

Since 1987 it has banned balance billing in the emergency department settings only.

This is a great bill, and it has got some of the provisions in the HOMES Act that I have cosponsored with Mr. McKinley.

I have indicated a willingness to support just about any revenue measure that will make this happen.

If we are going to stay competitive, if we are going to give our communities and the individuals in our communities the tools that they need to stay competitive domestically and internationally, we have to go big.

It is absolutely essential, as you know and I think many of us here know, that rural America is getting written off if we don't have the same high-speed internet that urban America has.

I would object to that. Can you think of any policy reason why what you found and what you reported shouldn't be made known to all of the American people so that they can judge for themselves, Mr. Hickey?

It is allowed to happen because there are no rules and there is no transparency either to the public to decide whether this is an appropriate use of a technology or not.

I just want to say thank you for the important work that you have done.

I think your idea of a moratorium makes a lot of sense.

Why not release the rest of the information for the benefit of the public?

Can you think of any policy reason why what you found and what you reported shouldn't be made known to all of the American people so that they can judge for themselves?

So your view is that even taking a random sample to do forensic analysis of the machines themselves was not important...

I have a question that I want to direct both to Mr. Krebs and Mr. Hickey...

The formularies we have now are not done on behalf of the public. They are done for the benefit of the PBMs.

Our Government is the only one in the Western industrialized democracies where we stand aside and let the consumer get hammered.

I want transparency when there is a claim that it justifies the price increases.

Sanofi increased the price of its drug Lantus by 171 percent from $99 in 2010 to $270 in 2018.