PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9853)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 24, 2009
Expresses the sense of Senate that: (1) enactment of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (commonly known as the Hatch-Waxman Act) served to create the modern generic pharmaceutical industry, which has provided consumers with access to affordable drugs, yielding significant health and economic benefits for the nation's health care system; (2) Senator Orrin Hatch and Representative Henry Waxman deserve the nation's gratitude for authoring and championing this landmark bipartisan legislation; and (3) Congress should enact legislation to create a pathway for approval by the Food and Drug Administration of safe and affordable generic versions of biologic medicines.
People & committees
Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9853)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9853-9854)
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 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 S.Res.287 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.Res.287 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.Res.287 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.Res.287 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.