PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 10, 2003
Greater Access to Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to: (1) limit a brand name drug manufacturer to one Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 30-month stay of competition in a patent infringement suit against a generic drug applicant; (2) permit a generic applicant being sued to file a counterclaim to correct or delete patent information; (3) limit damages that a brand name manufacturer may recover in an instance where such manufacturer failed to file certain patent information; (4) permit a generic drug applicant to seek declaratory judgment regarding patent infringement prior to marketing a drug; (5) forfeit the180-day market exclusivity period for a first generic drug applicant to a subsequent generic applicant if the first applicant engages in certain activities which impede such drug's timely marketing; and (6) permit alternative means to determine bioequivalence for drugs that are not absorbed into the bloodstream.
People & committees
Sen. Gregg, Judd [R-NH] · R–NH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
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.
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 S.1225 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.1225 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.1225 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.1225 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.