PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 26, 2003
New Aid for Trustworthy, Affordable Drugs Act (NAFTA Drugs Act) - Directs the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to enter into agreements with other North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) countries (Canada and Mexico) to harmonize regulatory requirements such that drugs approved for commercial distribution in any NAFTA country may be imported or exported between NAFTA countries. Permits the USTR to enter into such an agreement only if the agreement provides for: (1) regulatory standards for drugs that are consistent with the requirements of this Act; (2) a seal, to be placed only by a registered pharmacy, certifying that a given drug meets the standards of the harmonization agreement and may be imported; (3) a unique system of tracking numbers identifying certain entities, including the drug manufacturer and the NAFTA county of origin; (4) the reimbursement by drug manufacturers of the Secretary of Health and Human Services for benefits derived from National Institutes of Health research.
Sets a sunset of one year after the passage of this Act for the authority of the USTR to enter into harmonization agreements under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Crowley, Joseph [D-NY-7] · D–NY
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 Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 18, 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.2629 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.2629 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.2629 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.2629 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.