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 · Oct 13, 2011
Medical Device Regulatory Improvement Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), in determining the least burdensome appropriate means of evaluating device effectiveness, to: (1) not request information unrelated or irrelevant to demonstration of reasonable assurance of device safety and effectiveness; (2) consider alternative approaches to evaluating device safety and effectiveness; (3) use all reasonable mechanisms to lessen review times and render regulatory decisions; (4) determine whether pre-clinical data can meet the statutory threshold for approval; and (5) utilize, whenever practicable, alternatives to randomized, controlled clinical trials if clinical data are needed.
Requires the Secretary, in determining the least burdensome means of determining substantial equivalence, to: (1) focus on whether the device has the same intended use as the predicate device and is as safe and effective as a legally marketed device, (2) not request or accept information unrelated or irrelevant to the substantial equivalence evaluation, (3) review the labeling of the device to assess the intended use of the device and not evaluate issues that do not present a major impact on the intended use as set forth in the labeling, (4) consider alternative approaches to evaluating substantial equivalence, and (5) use all reasonable mechanisms to lessen review times and render regulatory decisions.
Repeals conflict-of-interest provisions that are specific to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and provides for the continued applicability of conflict-of-interest provisions otherwise applicable to advisory committees, federal employees, and special government employees.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to contract with an eligible entity for a review of the management and regulatory processes at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
People & committees
Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN] · D–MN
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: 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 S.1700 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.1700 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.1700 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.1700 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.