PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 27, 2018
Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act of 2018
This bill amends the Clayton Act with respect to notice to a state by the Department of Justice (DOJ) about federal actions brought for violations of antitrust laws.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) shall exercise the same authority and procedures as DOJ under the Clayton Act if the FTC has brought an action under such Act with respect to the prohibition against acquisition by one corporation of the stock of another (merger) that may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.
The Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA) is amended to exclude proposed mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, or similar transactions from ordinary FTC proceedings, except in cases where the FTC approves an agreement with the parties to the transaction that contains a consent order.
U.S. district courts shall have jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus commanding compliance with the FTCA or any FTC order, if the FTC applies to such courts with respect to any activity related to consummation of a merger, acquisition, joint venture, or similar transaction that may result in an unfair method of competition.
People & committees
Rep. Handel, Karen C. [R-GA-6] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 230 - 185 (Roll no. 177).
House roll call 177 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 230 - 185 (Roll no. 177).
House roll call 177 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 193 - 220 (Roll no. 176).
House roll call 176 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3865-3866)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Doggett motion to recommit with instructions, the Chair put the question on adoption of the motion and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Doggett demanded the yeas and nays, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption until later in the legislative day.
The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
Floor summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Doggett motion to recommit. The instructions contained in the motion seek to report the bill back to the House forthwith with an amendment to add a section relating to protecting consumers against high prescription drug costs.
Mr. Doggett moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H3857)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 872, the House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Goodlatte amendment No. 1.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 5645.
ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Goodlattte asked unanimous consent that the question of adopting the amendment to H.R. 5645 may be subject to postponement as though under clause 8 of rule 20. Agreed to without objection.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5645, H.R. 2152 and S.J. Res. 57. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5645 under a structured rule, with one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2152 under a closed rule, with one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Rule also provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 57 under a closed rule with one motion to commit.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 872. (consideration: CR H5645; text of measure as reported in House: CR H3851)
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 872 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5645, H.R. 2152 and S.J. Res. 57. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5645 under a structured rule, with one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2152 under a closed rule, with one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Rule also provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 57 under a closed rule with one motion to commit.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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.5645 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.5645 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.5645 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.5645 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.