PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 2010
Compassionate Access Act of 2010 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to permit an investigational drug, biological product, or device to be made available for expanded access under a treatment investigational new drug application or treatment investigational device exemption if specified Compassionate Investigational Access requirements are met.
Gives immunity to the manufacturer, distributor, administrator, sponsor, or physician from suit or liability relating to products approved under this Act.
Establishes a procedure for accelerated approval of an investigational drug, biological product, or device that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit to a patient suffering from a serious or life-threatening condition.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to establish: (1) the Accelerated Approval Advisory Committee; (2) a new program to expand access to investigational treatments for individuals with serious or life threatening conditions and diseases; and (3) a demonstration project under the Medicare program to pay for drugs, biological, products, and devices approved under this Act.
Requires the Secretary to consider the clinical judgment and risks to the patient from the disease or condition in evaluating the safety and effectiveness of drugs, biological products, and devices that treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions, including the evaluation of nonstatistical information.
Requires any committee evaluating investigational drugs, devices, or biological product applications to have at least two patient representatives as voting members.
People & committees
Rep. Watson, Diane E. [D-CA-33] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to House Ways and Means
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Energy and Commerce
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4732 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4732 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4732 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4732 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.