Tagged

No state has been spared from the scourge of the opioid epidemic. In 2016 alone, 42,000 Americans died due to opioid-related overdoses– or about 115 Americans per day.

Our state of Utah has also been badly hit: nearly 6 Utahns die per week from opioid-related overdoses and three rural Utah counties were identified recently by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as being among the most vulnerable nationwide.

We cannot let this tragic epidemic continue without a fight. And thankfully, Utahns have already been stepping up to the plate.

For years, groups like the Utah Coalition for Opioid Overdose Prevention and the Utah Department of Health have worked diligently to combat this crisis. And since last year, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes and DEA District Agent Brian Besser have complemented their efforts by forming the Utah Opioid Task Force, which I have been honored to serve on as Co-Chair.

Task Force Members have traveled across the state educating citizens on the perils of opioid dependency and the importance of treating addiction as a disease. They have promoted Naloxone use by first responders, a powerful medication that can often reverse an opioid overdose. They have backed successful DEA and attorney general prosecutions of drug cartel players, and supported various treatment and recovery services.

Furthermore, the Task Force also has worked with physicians to change prescribing practices. As a result, opioid prescriptions have been on the decline.

These initiatives have yielded real results around our state. Similar efforts can work in every state in the union, if given time and space to tailor themselves to specific local needs. But just as we know the opioids crisis has many sources, we know it’s going to have at least as many solutions.

And we also know – from common sense and hard experience – that unaccountable federal grant programs aren’t going to help. Unfortunately, the opioid legislation recently passed in Washington features just that: dozens of grant programs with little accountability for how these dollars will be spent and minimal measurement of their effectiveness.

To be sure, I am not opposed to the entirety of the bill. There are some good measures that could produce real results. For example:

The bill strengthens the Customs and Border Protection’s authority to discover and destroy packages containing illegal controlled substances;

It establishes a system to identify and stop suspicious orders of opioids from drug manufacturers and distributors;

And it requires the FDA to review challenges and barriers of developing non-addictive pain medications, and to update its processes to ensure it is capable of assessing the safety and effectiveness of novel drugs before approving them.

Unfortunately, these measures did not come to the Senate floor for us to consider individually. Instead, they were lumped together with dozens of other bills in this 350-page package. And each Senator was forced to either support or oppose the entire package.

It is crucial to recognize that there is no single opioids crisis. There are dozens. There is a rural crisis, and an urban one that is different. There is a crisis hitting poorly educated Americans and one hitting the highly educated. There’s one that’s hitting adults, and another that’s hitting kids.

And all of these vary by region. In some states overdoses are caused more by prescription drugs, while in others they are caused more from illicit drugs like fentanyl. In some cases, deaths are caused primarily from a combination of drugs.

As findings from the Social Capital Project at the Joint Economic Committee show, there is also a strong social component to this crisis. Individuals who either never married or are divorced—and especially those with only a high school education—represent a higher share of those who have died from opioid-related causes.

These factors cannot be ignored. We must find ways to reach these individuals and reintegrate them into our communities.

Utah’s efforts and results are reason to hope. Our state was one of just 14 where opioid deaths actually fell last year.

We need to continue this local focus here in Utah – where we can best tailor our solutions and effectively reach people succumbing to the grip of the opioid crisis. American lives depend upon it.

Mr. President,

I am a Republican because I am a conservative. And I am a conservative because I believe the Constitution and the ideals it asserts in behalf of all Americans are worth protecting. Even when they are untimely. Even when they are unpopular. And especially, for the vulnerable, the marginalized, the forgotten among us.

Equal rights. Equal opportunity. Equal justice under law. Equal dignity under God.

We fail as Americans when we violate these ideals. When we exclude some number of our neighbors from their God-given share of our common inheritance.
When we declare, in the interests of expedience and in defiance of our national creed, that some people are less equal than others.

Such was the cruelty our nation - through our laws – long visited on African Americans, American Indians, immigrants and ethnic minorities; women; religious minorities like my own forebears in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; the disabled.

Happily, this is no longer the case. All of these groups – who taken together comprise the vast majority of all Americans – were at different times in our history affirmatively brought under the protection of the laws.

This work of inclusion, of expanding the circle of legal and constitutional protection, was not a natural, evolutionary process.
It was the work of vigilant lawmakers advancing the cause of justice at every opportunity, against the entrenched forces of the political status quo.

Republicans in this Congress have undertaken such efforts on behalf of certain priorities: in particular the tax relief and spending increases that are poised to yield a budget deficit of nearly $1 trillion this year.

But no such legislative progress has been achieved advancing the right to life nor the plight of those denied it.

For the second straight year of unified Republican governance – unified pro-life governance – Congress’s annual spending bills will include no new reforms protecting unborn children, or getting federal taxpayers out of the abortion business.

The House version of this Health-and-Human-Services spending bill included multiple reforms:

It denied taxpayer funds to the largest abortion provider in the country, Planned Parenthood;

It eliminated Title X family planning grants, which cross-subsidize abortion providers;

It prohibited federal funding of research on aborted fetal tissue;

It included the Conscience Protection Act protecting pro-life people and groups from funding discrimination.

None of these modest, common-sense spending reforms survived the House-Senate negotiations.
None was made a priority by the people empowered to set the priorities. The authors of this bill defend their 1.3 trillion dollar compromise.

And of course, this being Washington, I know it could always be worse.

But Mr. President, before this bill passes with overwhelming bipartisan support, despite being mostly unread by its supporters, someone ought to speak up for the Americans this legislation leaves behind.

The best measure of any government – of any policy or proposal – is its impact on “the least among us.”

Too often today, Washington acts as though “the least among us” refers to our most vulnerable incumbents rather than our most vulnerable constituents.

This $1.3 trillion spending bill exemplifies that confusion and fails that test. Under this bill, neither the unborn nor taxpayers are any more protected from the abortion industry than they were under President Obama and a unified Democratic Congress.

I understand that fighting on contentious issues comes with a cost. But so does not fighting on them, especially in the rare moments when we could win.

This bill is an opportunity missed – and missed at a time when we can’t be sure how many more we will be given going forward.

Some causes are worth fighting for, even in defeat - the God-given, equal rights and dignity of all human beings paramount among them.

The arc of history may, as I hope, bend toward life. But only if we bend it, Mr. President. I must oppose this legislation, but neither in anger nor sadness.

Rather, in hope, looking forward to another bill, another time – one that stands up for those Americans who ask nothing more than the chance to one day stand up for themselves.

As prepared for delivery 

WASHINGTON – Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement after voting against the Opioid Crisis Response Act of 2018.

“There are some very good elements in this opioid response bill, including strengthening U.S. Customs and Border Protection authority to discover and destroy packages containing illegal controlled substances. Unfortunately, the bill also includes dozens of new grant programs with little accountability for how the dollars will be spent and minimal measurement or analysis on their effectiveness. Good intentions are not enough. In the face of a crisis such as this, we cannot afford to waste precious funds on programs which likely won’t work.”

“What we ought to do is focus our efforts on the state and local level – where we can best tailor our solutions and effectively reach people succumbing to the grip of the opioid crisis. American lives depend upon it.”

The American food industry has seen incredible innovation over the last several decades. Not only is healthier, safer food more accessible and affordable than ever, but whole new foods are being offered. Safe, tasty alternatives to meat, dairy, gluten, and eggs are now ubiquitous, especially plant-based dairy alternatives like almond, soy, and coconut milks.

This should be the kind of story Americans celebrate, an example of American entrepreneurship and innovation at its best. It should be – but isn’t. Consumers may like milk alternatives, but politicians seem opposed.

According to a proposed rule from the Food and Drug Administration, these products don’t “count” as milk and must either be renamed or pulled from grocery store shelves.

Under an antiquated 1938 law, the FDA has the power to set “standards of identity,” rules defining what does and does not qualify as a particular food product. And according to the FDA, the word “milk” can only describe “lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows.”

And so, the FDA wants to crack down on milk alternatives. They say it’s for consumer safety. The facts suggest otherwise.

First, standards of identity have a history of non-enforcement. To start picking and choosing which of the 280 outdated definitions to enforce now would seem arbitrary, or worse.

Part of the reason these rules haven’t been fully enforced is that the regulations themselves haven’t kept pace with many of the modern food innovations over the years. Furthermore, today food products are required to include ingredients on the label. Consumers know what they’re buying and eating.

So what is the real reason for the sudden crackdown? As with so many things in Washington, follow the money.

Dairy sales have been falling since the 1970s and dramatically over the past seven years, while the market for plant-based alternatives has only grown. Between 2011 and 2015, the total milk market shrunk by more than $1 billion; and almond milk sales alone grew by 250%.

Proponents of the FDA’s proposed rule call these products an “attack” on dairy farmers. And therein lies the real motive: to stifle competition and prop up the dairy industry.

The FDA crackdown is just a classic example of cronyism – big business conspiring with big government to rig the economy for them and against their customers.

A few weeks ago, I introduced legislation that would protect standards of identity regulations from this kind of abuse. My amendment to the farm bill would have prevented the FDA from enforcing these rules against products simply because of their use of a common compound name, and so protect everything from “almond milk” to “cashew butter” and “gluten-free bread” from silly accusations of illegal labeling.

Unfortunately, 84 Senators voted against this common-sense reform – Republicans who preach fealty to the free market, and Democrats who insist they fight for the “little guy” against Big Business. In a few months, when the Feds yank soy milk from the shelves, or force you to buy a delicious quart or “liquid legume excretion,” you’ll have them to thank.