PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 14, 2013
Preserving Our Hometown Independent Pharmacies Act of 2013 - Treats independent pharmacies negotiating contract terms with a health plan for the provision of health care items or services, but only in connection with such negotiations, the same under the antitrust laws as an employee engaged in concerted activities, and not as an employer, independent contractor, managerial employee, or supervisor.
Exempts actions taken in good faith reliance on this Act from being subject to criminal sanctions or civil penalties beyond actual damages incurred.
Declares that this Act does not exempt from application of antitrust laws any agreement or unlawful conspiracy that: (1) would have the effect of boycotting any independent pharmacy; (2) would exclude, limit the participation or reimbursement of, or otherwise limit the scope of services to be provided by any independent pharmacy or group of independent pharmacies with respect to the performance of services within their scope of practice as defined or permitted by relevant law or regulation; (3) allocates a market among competitors; (4) unlawfully ties the sale or purchase of one product or service to the sale or purchase of another product or service; or (5) monopolizes or attempts to monopolize a market.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Makes this Act inapplicable to negotiations between pharmacies and health plans regarding benefits provided under specified federal programs, including Medicaid, veterans' medical care, and the federal employees' health benefits program.
Requires the Comptroller General to study the impact of this Act after five years.
States that this Act does not preclude the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or the Department of Justice (DOJ) from overseeing the conduct of independent pharmacies covered under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Marino, Tom [R-PA-10] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1188 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1188 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1188 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1188 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.