That would mean, for instance, that a citizen in Minnesota could cross the border into Canada with a prescription and get it filled there, or a citizen in Texas or Arizona or New Mexico could cross the border and get a prescription filled there, and that would not be illegal. They could bring that back into the United States. That is the gist of the gentleman's amendment; is that correct?
Discussing the implications of an amendment related to prescription drug importation.
Share
More from Greg Ganske
The events of yesterday, September 11, are forever seared into our minds as with branding irons. We grieve for the victims and their families. We pray for them. Let the word go forth to our enemies. We are united in our resolve to avenge…
The underlying Ganske-Dingell bill does have access provisions that I think are bipartisan, for instance, 100 percent deductibility for the self-insured and other small business provisions to help increase access. There will be an…
As a physician in the earlier 1990s when I was taking care of Medicare patients, sometimes we would do a procedure where it might or might not be considered medically necessary by Medicare. All that we wanted was to know whether Medicare…
And would the gentleman say that the reason for that is that his bill is focusing primarily on the initial creation of this blastocyst or the equivalent of a fertilized egg and the problems that that would have because we would be…
Other voices in this conversation
