Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Orders FDA to Reduce Drug Shortages (Executive Order)
FoxNews.com ^ | October 31, 2011 | unattributed

Posted on 10/31/2011 1:56:39 PM PDT by Hunton Peck

Acting once again without Congress, President Obama on Monday was directing the Food and Drug Administration to take steps to reduce drug shortages that administration officials say have placed patients at risk and led to price gouging.

The president signed an executive order -- his fifth in a week -- instructing the FDA to take action absent congressional approval.

Last year, the FDA reported 178 drug shortages -- mainly cancer drugs, anesthetics, electrolytes and emergency room drugs -- and the agency says it continues to see an increase in shortages this year. The White House also announced Obama's support for House and Senate legislation that would require drug makers to notify the FDA six months ahead of a potential shortage. Under current regulations, drug manufactures are only required to notify the FDA if medically necessary drugs are being discontinued. Notification of shortages is strictly voluntary.

In remarks before he signed the order, Obama said drug shortages have nearly tripled over the past five years while Congress has foundered.

"Even though the FDA has successfully prevented an actual crisis, this is one of those slow-rolling problems that could end up resulting in disaster for patients and health care facilities all across the country," he said. "Congress has been trying since February to do something about this. It has not yet been able to get it done. And it is the belief of this administration ... that we can't wait for action on the Hill."

The executive action is part of an overarching push by the White House to portray Obama, who is facing ...

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: drugshortages; executiveorder; fda; healthcare; obama; obamacare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-108 next last
To: Interesting Times
Yep. The best way to guarantee a shortage of anything, be it jobs, food, gas or drugs is to increase the government involvement in the production and delivery of that item.

You can look at the entire spectrum of socialist economic activity in history, or you can just look at the way the USA handled petroleum products with price controls in the Seventies.

No need to guess how it is going to work.

81 posted on 10/31/2011 8:23:05 PM PDT by rlmorel (The Rats won't be satisfied until every industry in the USA is in ruins and ripe for nationalization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Hunton Peck
I thought obamacare alone was supposed to create a medical utopia. You mean it ain't so, Barry?
82 posted on 10/31/2011 8:32:53 PM PDT by MichaelCorleone (Doesn't anyone love liberty anymore?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

It’s my view that pharmaceutical companies as well as defense cos, have an obligation to their customers as well as to shareholders to meet the demand without ever incurring life threatening shortages.

Firms that provide life saving drugs for society as well as materiel for the US military aren’t the same as providers of HDTV sets or movie DVDs or other non-essentials.

Their products just like electric utilities affect lives and if they fail to produce responsibly, they need to understand clearly that they will pay a heavy price. I have no problem seeing a corporation that abuses its position and attempts to fleece or hijack the public facing consequences.


83 posted on 10/31/2011 9:31:24 PM PDT by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Sorry failed to specifically answer your question. My answer in ( )

apoliticalone, is it your view that the government should be involved directly in mandating what drugs should be produced (Yes, under certain circumstances such as national interests and defense), in what quantity (Yes to meet national interests) and at what price (price setting and gouging are both undesirable, price gouging is a prosecutable offense during disasters, they decide it by juries).

The government regularly puts and claims national interests (security etc) ahead of our individual rights. Should a corporation be permitted to function outside and above the national interests? You tell me if your water or electric co should be permitted to price gouge or autonomously ration supply for only economic reasons.

Just an opinion.


84 posted on 10/31/2011 9:45:04 PM PDT by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Jackass party took over congress in 2007....

Will be difficult for them to blame Republicans for their malfeasance.

85 posted on 10/31/2011 9:45:37 PM PDT by RasterMaster ("To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men." - Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

The Dems will play the “it’s for the children” card...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-administration-ban-asthma-inhalers-over-environmental-concerns_594113.html

While keeping them from asthma inhalers...


86 posted on 10/31/2011 9:56:52 PM PDT by RasterMaster ("To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men." - Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

I actually believe him. We’re continually short of various meds. Not sure what this order is going to do to help that though.


87 posted on 11/01/2011 4:06:59 AM PDT by whershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

“The past five years? Well, who’s been running Congress for the past five year? Republicans have been running it for less than a year now. Who was running it before?”
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Actually Republicans haven’t “run congress” for many years now. They have had control of the house of representatives since January of this year but that is not running congress, it only gives them the clout to block legislation in the house. They cannot push anything through because the dims can block them in the Senate where they still have the majority.

Republicans have controlled one half of one third of the federal government for the past nine months and according to Obama that makes them at fault for everything that has ever gone wrong in the history of the world.


88 posted on 11/01/2011 5:32:12 AM PDT by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Soon there will be only one world, a world in rapid decline unless sanity can be restored somehow.


89 posted on 11/01/2011 5:34:10 AM PDT by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RasterMaster

“Will be difficult for them to blame Republicans for their malfeasance.”

Not at all. You’re forgetting that reality means nothing to liberals.


90 posted on 11/01/2011 5:37:04 AM PDT by Cato in PA (The Hermanator 2: Judgment Day 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Hunton Peck
Couldn't find any info in the article on how the FDA is supposed to do this, but I'm guessing it's not by any common-sense approach like reducing regulations, shortening approval times, or anything else that might actually be effective.

More likely, it's just another way to make noise about a supposed failure of capitalism.


From the EXECUTIVE ORDER REDUCING PRESCRIPTION DRUG SHORTAGES:

"The FDA shall communicate to the Department of Justice (DOJ) any findings that shortages have led market participants to stockpile the affected drugs or sell them at exorbitant prices. The DOJ shall then determine whether these activities are consistent with applicable law. Based on its determination, DOJ, in coordination with other State and Federal regulatory agencies as appropriate, should undertake whatever enforcement actions, if any, it deems appropriate."
91 posted on 11/01/2011 6:38:48 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: whershey
I actually believe him. We’re continually short of various meds.

I don't necessarily doubt we have a shortage of meds. It's just that I think The FDA has more to do with the shortage than anything. The FDA is nothing more than a political arm of The RAT Party and a make-work factory for The RAT Party's number one constituency; lawyers.

92 posted on 11/01/2011 6:58:11 AM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: RipSawyer
Actually Republicans haven’t “run congress” for many years now. They have had control of the house of representatives since January of this year but that is not running congress...

I stand corrected.

93 posted on 11/01/2011 7:00:52 AM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

The FDA is an example of the “hidden costs” principle of economics.

The cost, in lives and suffering, of withholding drugs from the market, is an invisible and unmeasurable “what if” game. “What if drug XYZ were approved earlier, how many lives would be better or saved?”

But, on the flip side, if a drug is approved “too early” and has some detrimental effects, these costs are visible and measurable.

Therefore, the incentive is to NOT approve drugs.


94 posted on 11/01/2011 7:03:51 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Research and development of drugs should be left to a private entity like Underwriters Labratory (UL) which has been testing and giving its seal of approval to new products for decades.

Yes, sometimes a defective product slips through and people are harmed. But that's when the legal system kicks in and serves the purpose it was designed to serve and that will keep UL on its toes.

As it stands, The FDA pays no price for any defective product it lets on the market. And, even if it did, as a government agency, we the people would pay the price.

The free market does everything better.

95 posted on 11/01/2011 7:13:52 AM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

The FDA also pays no price (and I believe this is MORE significant) for delaying release of lifesaving drugs.


96 posted on 11/01/2011 7:16:15 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy
Thanks for the chart. Interesting that the increase in shortages began in 2007.

I wonder what happened in 2007. Hm. On an unrelated question, when did Nanzi Pelosi take over The House?

97 posted on 11/01/2011 7:18:04 AM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Well, the threat of Obamacare certainly pushed some drug money into other areas. That’s not the whole problem, but certainly part of it.


98 posted on 11/01/2011 8:37:45 AM PDT by Pharmboy (Democrats lie because they must...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj

Thank you. So the bogeyman here is “stockpilers”, much as “speculators” are the all-purpose whipping boy for rationalizing the governmental interventions in other markets that just make matters worse.


99 posted on 11/01/2011 8:50:24 AM PDT by Hunton Peck (See my FR homepage for a list of businesses that support WI Gov. Scott Walker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Hunton Peck
Thank you. So the bogeyman here is “stockpilers”, much as “speculators” are the all-purpose whipping boy for rationalizing the governmental interventions in other markets that just make matters worse.

While I have my gripes with big international pharma, big international chemical companies, and crony capitalism (think replacing CFC inhalers with garbage HFA ones), I am also aware of the cost of developing new medications and manufacturing quality generics.

This all reminds me of Hillary's mandate to make vaccines more available by in essence regulating that manufacturers run at a loss.
100 posted on 11/01/2011 9:15:07 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-108 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson