Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 12, 2018
Abuse Deterrent Access Act of 2018
(Sec. 2) This bill requires the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to report to Congress on the adequacy of access to abuse-deterrent opioid formulations for individuals with chronic pain enrolled in a prescription drug plan under Medicare or Medicare Advantage (MA). The report must account for any barriers preventing enrollees from accessing such formulations under Medicare or MA.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5061)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5061)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5582.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5061-5063)
Mr. Walden moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 556.
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-721, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-721, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.5582 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.5582 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.5582 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.5582 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.