PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2003
Pharmaceutical Fiscal Accountability Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to treat certain subsequent certified abbreviated new drug applications as if they were the first such application and therefore entitled to a period of 180 day generic drug exclusivity. (Abbreviated new drug applications are filed where the new drugs uses or active ingredient(s) are the same as those for a previously approved drug, also known as a "listed drug.")Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Director of the National Institutes of Health to support qualifying clinical research on the development of new drugs at designated small public or private entities. Emphasizes drug research which has the potential to make a significant contribution for the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of a disease which has not received significant Federal funding. Entitles the Director to five percent of the profits from sales during the patent period.Requires the Comptroller General to study and report to Congress on the effects of: (1) Federal funding on the costs of research and the pricing of prescription drugs; and (2) pharmaceutical patent extensions and market exclusivity periods on delays in introducing generic versions.
People & committees
Rep. McCarthy, Carolyn [D-NY-4] · D–NY
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 the House Committee on 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 18, 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.828 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.828 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.828 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.828 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.