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.
William H. Frist: “In response to my distinguished colleague, this issue of having a general agreement that we would work out technical…”
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
We began consideration of the very important port security bill on Thursday of last week, and earlier in the week we addressed the Department of Defense appropriations bill. We generally agreed as a body that we would address the security…
It is interesting, when you are around here at 2:30 in the morning... It is very important as we all work together to make the country a safer, healthier, and stronger place.
The reason I am turning around is, as the Democratic leader said, people have been working very aggressively since the agreement was reached. And every change, we have really tried to go to both sides--to the House, to the Senate, to the…
That is exactly where we are. I think the good news is both sides recognize this is a very important issue before this body and before the American people and that we have had a lot of work on this bill to where I think--speaking of the…





