PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 1, 2006
Medicare Prescription Drug Emergency Guarantee Act of 2006 - Amends part D (Voluntary Prescription Drug Benefit Program) of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act (SSA) to assure uninterrupted access to medicines under the Medicare prescription drug program.
Requires each prescription drug plan sponsor offering a prescription drug plan, and each Medicare Advantage organization offering an Medicare Advantage-Prescription Drug Plan (MA-PD plan), to: (1) provide minimum standard transition coverage; (2) furnish each enrollee with annual notices of any changes in formulary or other restrictions or drug coverage limitations; and (3) require application of intermediate sanctions to protect against fraud and abuse.
Amends SSA: (1) title XVIII part C (Medicare+Choice) to allow changes of enrollment in prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans to be made once each year outside the annual coordinated election period, or twice a year; and (2) title XIX (Medicaid) to prohibit conditioning Medicaid eligibility on enrollment in Medicare part D or any other creditable coverage.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MEDPAC) to study and report to Congress on the extent to which full-benefit dual eligible individuals were enrolled (by assignment or otherwise) in the most appropriate part D prescription drug plans.
Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to reimburse covered third parties during 2006 for 100% of covered part D drugs which a prescription drug plan or MA-PD plan enrollee reasonably expected would have been covered but were not because the enrollee was unable to access on a timely basis prescription drug benefits to which he or she was entitled. Directs the Secretary to establish a process for recovering such reimbursed costs from prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans if they should have incurred them.
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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E55-56)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.4685 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.4685 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.4685 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.4685 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.