PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 10, 2018
Opioid Advocacy Transparency Act of 2018
This bill expands reporting requirements related to the ownership and investment interests of certain patient-advocacy organizations.
Under current law, a manufacturer of drugs, devices, or medical supplies that are covered under Medicaid or Medicare must regularly report on any payment or transfer of value by the manufacturer to a "covered recipient," defined as either a physician who is not an employee of the manufacturer or a teaching hospital. The bill expands the definition of "covered recipient," for purposes of this requirement, to also include patient-advocacy organizations that advocate on issues related to opioids. Furthermore, with respect to transfers of value to such organizations, the bill subjects not only manufacturers but also pharmaceutical trade associations to the reporting requirement.
People & committees
Sen. McCaskill, Claire [D-MO] · D–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Introduced in Senate
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 11, 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 S.3565 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 S.3565 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 S.3565 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 S.3565 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.