Congressional Report Critical of FDA Enforcement Protocol
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.20.12
On June 15th, 2012, the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, led by Chairman Darrel Issa, released a sharply worded staff report entitled "FDA's Contribution to the Drug Shortage Crisis." The report's harsh criticism of FDA, which comes on the heels of an Executive Order, Government Accounting Office report, FDA draft Guidance, and proposed legislation that all address the growing problem of drug shortages, underscores that this topic will continue to be a political hot potato for the foreseeable future.
The House report attributes the rise in drug shortages to caps imposed on drug reimbursements by the Medicare Modernization Act, signed into law in 2003 by President Bush, and FDA's more aggressive enforcement posture toward drug manufacturers, particularly manufacturers of generic injectable medications. It finds that such manufacturers, undertaking efforts to upgrade facilities in the face of threatened FDA enforcement actions, have reduced their manufacturing capacity by 30%, thereby restricting the supply of critical cancer and other life-saving drugs. The report criticizes FDA for not taking into account the substantial impact of heightened enforcement activity on the supply of critical drugs.
All drug manufacturers should be aware if drugs in their product portfolio are in shortage or at risk of being in shortage. In addition to possible future reporting obligations, companies should consider what a shortage might mean if confronted with an FDA enforcement action. If the agency moves to take control of compliance problems before shortages becomes acute, manufacturers of drugs in shortage could find themselves targets of even more aggressive enforcement actions. Agency-proposed consent decrees for manufacturers of drugs in shortage could include more onerous terms, requiring disgorgement of profits or compelling manufacturers to prioritize less profitable, or even unprofitable, product lines. Alternatively, manufacturers of drugs in shortage may hold more leverage in negotiations with the agency to limit or even avoid temporary shut-downs.
Given the partisan tone of the report, it is unlikely to have meaningful impact on current FDA enforcement activity. We are advising our clients to continue to be vigilant about their compliance efforts in this environment. We are also developing innovative strategies for responding to FDA concerns that are tailored to the agency's current compliance expectations.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.25.26
NAIC Intensifies AI Regulatory Focus: What Health Insurance Payors Need to Know
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) is intensifying its oversight of how insurers use AI — and the pace of regulatory activity shows no signs of slowing. Over the past several months, the NAIC has published a formal Issue Brief staking out its position on federal AI legislation, launched a multistate AI Evaluation Tool pilot aimed at examining insurers’ AI governance programs, and continued to expand adoption of its AI Model Bulletin across state lines. These developments continue a trend towards enhancing regulation; the NAIC adopted AI Principles in 2020 and a Model Bulletin in 2023 clarifying that existing insurance laws apply to AI systems and establishing expectations for governance, documentation, testing, and third-party oversight. That Model Bulletin has now been adopted in approximately 24 states.
Client Alert | 11 min read | 03.25.26
White House National AI Policy Framework Calls for Preempting State Laws, Protecting Children
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.24.26
California Considering A Massive Expansion of Its Antitrust Laws
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.23.26

