PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2013
Patients' Access to Treatments Act of 2013 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to establish cost-sharing limits for health plans that cover prescription drugs and use a formulary or other tiered cost-sharing structure. Prohibits such a health plan from imposing cost-sharing requirements, including co-payment and co-insurance, applicable to prescription drugs in a specialty drug tier that exceed the dollar amount of cost-sharing requirements applicable to prescription drugs in a non-preferred brand drug tier. Applies the non-preferred brand drug tier for which beneficiary cost-sharing is lowest, if a formulary used by the health plan contains more than one non-preferred brand drug tier.
Defines: (1) "non-preferred brand drug tier" as a category of prescription drugs within a tier in a formulary for which beneficiary cost-sharing is greater than tiers for generic drugs or preferred brand drugs, and that are not included within a specialty drug tier; and (2) "specialty drug tier" as a category of prescription drugs within a tier in a formulary for which beneficiary cost-sharing is greater than tiers for generic drugs, preferred brand drugs, or non-preferred drugs in the plan's formulary.
People & committees
Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1] · R–WV
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 House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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.460 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.460 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.460 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.460 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.