PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 27, 2000
Directs the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to enter into negotiations with the Governments of the other G-8 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the United States) in order to achieve their agreement to eliminate price controls on innovative medicines and the unfair trade practices that result from the application of price controls.Declares that, if within 12 months negotiations have not achieved such objectives, the USTR shall recommend to Congress the most effective measures (including those specified by the Trade Act of 1974) for eliminating the disparity between the price of prescription drugs in the United States and the price of prescription drugs in the other G-8 countries, with the goal of reducing the price of prescription drugs for U.S. consumers.Requires recommended measures to be of a nature and amount that fully reflect the economic harm inflicted on patients and health care in the United States, and the harm inflicted on the U.S. economy when countries pay the country specific marginal costs of prescription drugs and let the United States cover the research and development costs of innovative prescription drugs.
People & committees
Rep. Ewing, Thomas W. [R-IL-15] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
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: Jan 2, 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.4764 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.4764 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.4764 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.4764 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.