PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 388.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Mar 14, 2016
Medical Countermeasure Innovation Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to ensure the issuance of timely and accurate guidelines regarding the use of medical products for countering public health emergencies or material threats. HHS must report on funding for procurement of medical countermeasures when available funds are below a specified amount.
(Sec. 3) The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority's (BARDA's) contracting authority for procurement of medical countermeasures under Project BioShield is codified.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 4) The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response must annually publish its budget plan for medical countermeasures.
(Sec. 5) BARDA may enter an agreement with an independent, nongovernmental nonprofit to foster and accelerate the development and innovation of medical countermeasures and related technologies. BARDA must direct and oversee the nonprofit's work and ensure transparency and accountability.
(Sec. 6) BARDA's procurement of medical countermeasures no longer requires Presidential approval or an agreement between HHS and the Department of Homeland Security.
(Sec. 7) This bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to award, upon approval, a priority review voucher to the sponsor of a drug or biological product that: (1) is a significant improvement in the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of a serious condition; and (2) can be used as a medical countermeasure to a material threat. The transferable voucher entitles the holder to have an application for a new medication acted upon by the FDA within six months.
The sponsor of a medication that is subject to a voucher must pay a user fee based on the FDA's cost for the priority review process.
The FDA must publish a notice each time it issues a voucher or a voucher is used.
(Sec. 8) The Government Accountability Office must report on the effectiveness of this priority review voucher program in providing incentives for the development of material threat medical countermeasures.
People & committees
Sen. Burr, Richard [R-NC] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 388.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Alexander with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Alexander with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute 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: 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.2055 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.2055 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.2055 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.2055 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.