Antitrust Abuses and the FDA Approval Process: Statement Before the Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial, and Antitrust Law US House of Representatives
Posted by Social Science Research Network
Antitrust Abuses and the FDA Approval Process: Statement Before the Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial, and Antitrust Law US House of Representatives
By Erika Fisher Lietzan (University of Missouri)
Abstract: Various scholars and policymakers have voiced concern over the years that pharmaceutical companies often operate in ways that are inconsistent with norms of fair competition and may violate antitrust law — in particular that, despite complying with the regulatory framework and the intellectual property framework, these companies invoke or employ these frameworks inappropriately. I was asked by subcommittee staff to provide my perspective on three aspects of the regulatory paradigm of particular interest: citizen petitions, use and distribution restrictions, and FDA’s unapproved drugs initiative.
The written statement concludes with a page of concrete recommendations, which reflect four core values. The first value is the public health mandate embodied in FDA’s statutory mission: promotion of the public health through prompt and efficient review of clinical research and timely appropriate action on marketing of regulated products, and protection of the public health by ensuring that drugs are safe and effective. The second value is the open government principle embodied in the petition clause of the First Amendment, the agency’s mission statement, the APA, and other federal statutes: transparency, access, and accountability. The third value is the importance of the patent property right to continued innovation in medicine, and the final value is the importance of evidence-based policymaking, both in the legislature and in administrative agencies.
Featured News
Malaysia Grants Licenses to WeChat and TikTok Under New Social Media Law
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Axinn Announces Promotions of Antitrust Experts
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Federal Competition Office to Scrutinize High Electricity Prices in Germany
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Mexican Lawmakers Advance Controversial Plan to Dissolve Independent Oversight Bodies
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Motorola Accuses UK of Antitrust Breach Over Terminated Emergency Services Contract
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand