A package of bills to fight the opioid abuse epidemic is getting bipartisan support in the House, except for one major part over which Congress never seems to agree: new funding.
House Democrats are angry that the bills don’t include any new mandatory funding to help curb opioid and heroin abuse that kills 72 Americans a day. And they have been angry with the Republican-controlled House for its aversion to new funding, as Democrats have tried to get new funds for other public health priorities such as the Zika virus.
The House is expected to consider more than a dozen bills during “Opioid Week” when it returns from a weeklong recess on Monday. One of the major bills includes $500 million in new funding. But that money is offset from other sources.
“People who are complaining about, ‘There they go again spending money that we don’t have and increasing the national debt,’ do not have complaints about this bill because it is offset,” Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., the main sponsor of the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Reduction Act, said during a recent congressional briefing.
The lack of new funding has irked several Democrats who say that new resources are needed to fight opioid abuse. Some lawmakers used the markups to take aim at the House’s aversion to any new funding by abiding by the chamber’s cut-go rule that says spending increases can’t be offset by revenue increases, only by cuts.
“The American people don’t want us to choose one disease over another,” said Rep. Gene Green, D-Texas, during a markup in the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “They want us to provide the necessary investments to respond to current public health challenges, ensure that we stop epidemics in their tracks and prevent disease outbreaks from emerging again.”
An amendment to add $1 billion in mandatory new funding to one of the bills in the committee was shot down by a majority vote.
Other Democrats said the cut-go rule is unsustainable.
“By reducing authorizations for one program to authorize another, we’re not saving the government any money, but what we are doing is hampering our ability to respond to a public health crisis,” said Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif.
Rep. Ben Lujan, D-N.M., tacked on an amendment to one of the bills to add $1 billion in mandatory funding over two years, similar to what President Obama proposed in his latest budget.
The amendment was narrowly voted down, as some Republicans called it bad process.
“While we believe targeted new authorizations make sense, the committee should not adopt last-minute, hurried amendments that create a new $1 billion authorization,” said Rep. Joseph Pitts, R-Pa., who helped draft some of the legislation.
He said the committee is working to find new authorizations for treatment programs and naloxone, an antidote that can be used to save an overdosing opioid user. Pitts added he thinks the committee will provide new budget authorizations and pay for them.
It remains to be seen if Democrats will make a high-profile push to add mandatory funding to the package while on the House floor. Mandatory funding levels must be maintained year over year, while discretionary levels can be adjusted.
Republican lawmakers pushed back against adding any new funding, whether it be mandatory or discretionary.
Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., told the Washington Examiner that he might add an amendment with extra funding when the package comes before the House Rules Committee. The panel must clear any amendments before they head to the House floor.
“I wish that we have the mandatory funding, but I don’t know where we are going to be,” he said.
Senate Democrats pushed to add $700 million in new funding for recovery treatment to its Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act. However, that effort soon fell apart and Democrats backed the Senate bill that passed 94-1.
Some House Democrats were hesitant to say they would not support the House opioids package without new mandatory funding.
“I want to see what the package looks like,” Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., told the Washington Examiner recently.
He emphasized the importance of funding recovery options.
“Policy statements won’t get us there. We actually have to ensure that there is the ability to take the steps necessary to address this crisis and to fund this crisis.”
Democratic leaders have called for the House to approve emergency funding for opioids alongside other emergency funding for the Zika virus and the Flint, Mich., water crisis.
House leaders have criticized the GOP for not bringing up President Obama’s $1.9 billion emergency funding request for Zika, while GOP lawmakers say the need more answers on how the money would be spent.
