Congressional lobbying to keep funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative at $300 million has apparently paid off.

On Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Tom Reed, R-Corning, said through advocacy members of Congress, including himself, have changed President Donald Trump’s original appropriation for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative from eliminating the funding to restoring the $300 million.

“The president had proposed reduction, removal in Great Lakes money, but working with the White House … he has restored the funding in the budget agreement, which puts us in a good spot,” Reed said.

All three budgets that Trump has submitted to Congress since entering the White House called for significant cuts to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, which provides money to clean up and protect the world’s largest system of freshwater lakes. Trump had originally proposed eliminating funding for the program in his first budget proposal. In his second and third proposals, Trump proposed providing $30 million for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Each year, Congress overruled Trump and provided $300 million for the initiative.

“The president publicly switched and now supports the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative,” Reed said. “It’s a very positive position to go into (negotiations) with.”

The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative has been working since 2010 to make the lakes healthier and more sustainable. Its goals are to make its fish safe to eat and its water safe to drink, keep invasive species out and keep native species happy.

In other business, Reed also discussed the Stopping the Pharmaceutical Industry from Keeping Drugs Expensive (SPIKE) Act of 2019. Wednesday, Reed and Steven Horsford, D-NV, introduced legislation to rein in the skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs.

Reed said the SPIKE Act would require drug manufacturers to publicly justify large price increases and launch prices for high-cost drugs. The legislation would require manufacturers to report detailed information to the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services for certain drugs if their prices exceed certain thresholds. Beginning in 2021, if a drug price increases by more than 10 percent or $10,000 during one year, 25 percent or $25,000 during three years or has a launch price higher than $26,000, the manufacturer would be required to submit a justification to the secretary. Drug manufacturers would be required to submit a justification that explains the causes of a price increase or high launch price, which could include information on expenses pertaining to developing, manufacturing, licensing and marketing the drug.

Reed said the bill would start raising questions that need to be raised to shine a light on drug companies so they can no longer deal in “darkness.”

“Transparency will drive change,” he said.

During recent years, a number of widely used drugs have spiked in price, including insulin, which has increased 197 percent from 2002 to 2013.

In 2015, Mylan increased the price of the EpiPen from about $57 for a single dose to $415 for a dual pack.

Valeant Pharmaceuticals increased the prices of cardiac drugs Isuprel and Nitropress by 525 percent and 212 percent, respectively.

Turing Pharmaceutical increased the price of Daraprim, a drug used for HIV and cancer treatments, by 5,000 percent in a single day.

Vimovo and Duexis, both of which are combinations of low-cost over-the-counter drugs, skyrocketed in price over a short period: A 60-pill bottle of Vimovo that cost $138 in 2013 cost $2,979 in 2018, a more than 2,000 percent increase. Duexis similarly cost $140 in 2011 and soared to $2,979 for 90 pills by 2018.