CONGRESS FOR VOTERS

Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV)

To create a point of order against legislation that would increase drug costs for seniors and people with disabilities on Medicare.

S.Amdt. 1690 · Senate amendment to an amendment

A Democratic amendment with 16 Democratic cosponsors · See all 16 cosponsors

Changes S.Amdt. 1717, an amendment to H.Con.Res. 14 — Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034.

Last activity — Amendment SA 1690 ruled out of order by the chair.

Ruled out of order

The presiding officer ruled that this amendment could not be offered here, so it was never voted on.

Its path through Congress

  1. Introduced
  2. Ruled out of order by the chair

What this amendment would do

Ms. Cortez Masto and several other senators submitted this amendment, labeled SA 1690, to the budget resolution H. Con. Res. 14.

The main purpose of this amendment is to create a new rule in the Senate. This rule stops the Senate from considering any legislation, bill, joint resolution, motion, amendment, or conference report that would increase cost-sharing or out-of-pocket expenses for seniors and people with disabilities who rely on Medicare for their prescription drug coverage.

If someone tries to pass a measure that raises these drug costs, a point of order can be raised against it. To bypass this new rule and allow the legislation to move forward anyway, it would take a large three-fifths vote of all sworn Senators to waive or suspend it. It also takes a three-fifths vote to win an appeal against the Chair's ruling on the matter.

What Congress actually voted on

One recorded vote has been taken on this amendment.

  • The Senate: a vote to set aside an objection that the measure breaks a budget rule A senator objected that the measure spends or cuts more than the budget allows. Sixty votes set that objection aside; fewer, and the measure is stopped by the objection without a vote on what it would do. Blocked 49 yes · 50 no

    See who voted how →

    04/05/2025 · Roll call 185 · recorded as “On the Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690)”