PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.For Previous Action See H.R.4.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 2007
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices that may be charged to prescription drug plan sponsors and Medicare Advantage organizations for covered part D drugs for part D eligible individuals enrolled under a prescription drug plan or under a Medicare Advantage prescription drug (MA-PD) plan.
People & committees
Rep. Dingell, John D. [D-MI-15] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
For Previous Action See H.R.4.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 255 - 170 (Roll no. 23). (text: CR H440)
House roll call 23 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 255 - 170 (Roll no. 23).(text: CR H440)
House roll call 23 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 196 - 229 (Roll no. 22).
House roll call 22 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H488)
Floor Summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Barton motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment inserting provisions assuring continued access to covered part D drugs and pharmacy networks and protection against increasing drug prices for veterans.
Mr. Barton (TX) moved to recommit with instructions to Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce. (consideration: CR H486-488; text: CR H486)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H486)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 6, the House proceeded with three hours of debate on H.R. 4.
Considered pursuant to H. Res. 6. (consideration: CR H440-489)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E50)
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.4 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.4 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.4 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.4 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.