Michael Burgess actually said...

"And it seems to me it would be contrary to the policy you are proposing in the Part D proposed rule."

"So in my mind, there is some confusion as to why, after 10 years, your agency felt that it must now reinterpret the noninterference clause."

"We need, the committee needs that."

"Not only has Part D come in at 45 percent under budget, the Congressional Budget Office has reduced its 10-year projections for Part D by over $100 billion for each of the last 3 years."