in response to my distinguished colleague, this issue of having a general agreement that we would work out technical language, and then after 48 hours or 72 hours have the bill come to the floor without the opportunity, in a bipartisan way, to be able to access experts in the field, is what concerns me most. You can take an initial bill and improve it a little bit, and then you can leave something out and not reach bioequivalency. In response to the question is a particular instance where during the discussion, the mark-up, we said let's get together and make absolutely sure that we address it in a way so that standards are not being loosened; yet, the bill that comes to the floor does not have that guarantee in it.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about the legislative process and the importance of expert input on a bill.
Share
More from William H. Frist
about 2 months ago, late Sunday afternoon, when no one was around, I came into this Chamber to carry out a time-honored tradition, nearly as old as the institution itself. I came over to this desk and I opened the drawer and the tradition…
I wish to briefly comment on health care policy which we have been able to accomplish over the last several years. As most people know, for 20 years before I entered politics, I devoted my life to healing and to helping people one-on-one…
I do want to add my congratulations to the managers, Senators Warner and Levin. They have done a tremendous job on the Defense authorization bill, a very important bill. We had several pauses over the course of today that we were able to…
We have this promise of a new relationship between our Nation and India, which is the world's largest democracy, and it is a relationship President Bush has begun to construct. That can only grow if Congress delivers on the commitment the…





