PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-18.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 25, 1993
Makes technical corrections with respect to Federal provisions concerning the price of drugs purchased by the Department of Veterans Affairs and other Federal agencies. Provides for the determination of price of a drug of a manufacturer that was not available for inclusion under the original drug purchase contract at the time such contract went into effect. Amends the Social Security Act to establish the Medicaid (title XIX of such Act) prescription drug rebate limit for the last calendar quarter of 1992 as 50 percent of the average manufacturer price.
People & committees
Sen. Rockefeller, John D., IV [D-WV] · D–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-18.
Became Public Law No: 103-18.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
On motion to table the motion to reconsider the vote Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Frost moved to table the motion to reconsider the vote.
Mr. Volkmer moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 115).
House roll call 115 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 115).
House roll call 115 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1696)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until March 30.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1652-1654)
Mr. Montgomery moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S3762-3763)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S3762-3763)
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: 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 S.662 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.662 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.662 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.662 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.