PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 30, 2023
Improved Access to Affordable Medications Act
This bill modifies provisions relating to the ability of generic drug manufacturers to obtain samples of brand-name drugs for purposes of generic drug development.
Under current law, brand-name drug manufacturers must provide sufficient quantities of their products on commercially reasonable, market-based terms to generic drug manufacturers upon request for purposes of generic drug development. Brand-name drug manufacturers are subject to civil actions if they fail to do so. The bill modifies provisions relating to this requirement and the criteria needed for related civil actions, such as specifying that generic drug manufacturers may use certain delivery services to make their requests.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, under current law, generic drug manufacturers must obtain authorization from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in order to request sufficient quantities of brand-name drugs that are subject to a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) with elements to ensure safe use (ETASU). The bill requires the FDA to approve an authorization request within 60 days (rather than 120 days), if testing and development does not involve human clinical trials. (The FDA sometimes requires a REMS program for certain drugs with safety risks, which may include restrictions on a drug's distribution through ETASU, such as special requirements for pharmacies that dispense the drug.)
The bill also requires brand-name drug manufacturers to post their policies on evaluating and responding to requests from generic drug manufacturers for their products, including relevant contact information and procedures.
People & committees
Sen. Hassan, Margaret Wood [D-NH] · D–NH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
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: Apr 21, 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 S.1120 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 S.1120 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 S.1120 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 S.1120 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.