this noninterference language that we have been talking about, that has been in legislative proposals for both Democrats and Republicans for the last decade, actually stops the Secretary of Health and Human Services from negotiating drug prices. And the reason that this has been part of bipartisan legislation for so long and was actually a part of the motion to recommit in 2000 that more than 200 Democrats voted for is because it was important to structure a plan that allowed beneficiaries to work with their doctors, not with the government, to determine the best access to treatment and the best treatment that worked for them. That is why you have seen so many coalitions come out against this proposal, particularly those that work with the most vulnerable of the Medicare beneficiaries. I would urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 4.
Dave Camp: “this noninterference language that we have been talking about, that has been in legislative proposals for both Democrats…”
Editor's note · Context
Opposing H.R. 4 and discussing the implications of noninterference language in drug price negotiations.
Share
More from Dave Camp
At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings), the gentleman from the Natural Resources Committee.
I withdraw my point of order and seek time in opposition to the motion. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation is withdrawn. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5 minutes.
I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding. Madam Speaker, the House passed their version of highway funding more than 2 weeks ago. The Senate acted last night. Because of their rush, there was actually a drafting error in the Senate…
I object, Mr. Speaker, and I reserve a point of order against the motion to recommit. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard. A point of order is reserved. The Clerk will read. The Clerk continued to read. Mr. CAMP (during the…





