The very able Senator from Illinois, in the course of debate in the Senate, offered a better bill, which I was very pleased to support. That bill would have been a very significant and substantial step forward. Among other things, it did not have this ``donut'' in coverage that is in this bill. As I understand this bill, at a certain point--I think $22.50 in drug cost--and beyond that, up to $3,600, the burden falls back on individuals; is that correct?
John Sarbanes: “The very able Senator from Illinois, in the course of debate in the Senate, offered a better bill, which I was very…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a proposed healthcare bill and its coverage issues during Senate debate.
Share
More from John Sarbanes
Without the strong and continued investment the EPA has requested for the Chesapeake Bay Program in fiscal year 2024, the risk is we could jeopardize decades of work in collaboration towards the Bay's restoration.
The health of the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed can only continue to improve through robust Federal, state, and local partnerships.
The goal was not to federalize elections across the country; the goal was to set some uniform standards.
It is important to be clear that EPA's proposed standards are reasonable, performance-based emissions standards and constitute neither a national electric vehicle mandate nor an internal combustion ban.





