On the recordJuly 27, 2005
what is a provision protecting the drug companies doing in a bill that is supposed to be about doctors' malpractice premiums? How does this provision ever get into this bill in the first place? My guess is that many of my colleagues who support this bill have been asking the same question and would vote to strike it from the bill if they were given the opportunity. But because of this closed rule, the House will not have the opportunity to strike this embarrassing sop to the pharmaceutical industry from this legislation. Defeating the previous question will give Members a chance to vote on what has now been dubbed the ``Merck loophole.'' This section is not just bad policy, Mr. Speaker, it is almost criminal. Every day we read about more evidence that the pharmaceutical company Merck concealed information about the risks of its FDA-approved drug Vioxx. I do not think any of my colleagues want to find themselves in the position of defending people who hid information about this drug that could have saved someone's life. Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can debate this important amendment. I want to make it very clear that a ``no'' vote will not stop us from considering this legislation. We will still be able to consider the medical malpractice legislation on the floor today. However, a ``yes'' vote will prevent us from considering the Emanuel amendment to strike this ill-conceived language. Again, vote ``no'' on the previous question. Mr.…
Source
govinfo.gov




