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 · Dec 10, 2014
Promise for Antibiotics and Therapeutics for Health Act or the PATH Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish a program to approve an antibacterial drug intended to treat a serious medical condition and address an unmet medical need within an identifiable limited population as a limited population antibacterial drug.
Requires the sponsor of a drug eligible for approval as a limited population antibacterial drug to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the drug for its intended use.
Requires an HHS determination of the safety and effectiveness of a limited population antibacterial drug to reflect the drug's benefit-risk profile in the intended limited population. Prohibits a lack of evidence of a favorable benefit-risk profile in a broader population from resulting in a denial of approval.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs HHS to require: (1) the labeling of a limited population antibacterial drug to indicate that the drug has been approved for use only in a limited population, and (2) submission of promotional materials related to the drug prior to dissemination.
Directs HHS to describe considerations for demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of limited population antibacterial drugs and how the limited population pathway can be expanded to other therapeutic areas.
Requires HHS to conduct postapproval monitoring programs to study how antibacterial drugs approved through the limited population pathway are used and to monitor changes in bacterial drug resistance.
Allows HHS to remove the labeling, marketing, and postapproval monitoring requirements of a limited population antibacterial drug if the drug is approved for broader use.
Allows the limited population pathway to be expanded to other drugs intended to treat serious illness beginning October 1, 2016.
People & committees
Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO] · D–CO
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 12, 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.2996 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.2996 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.2996 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.2996 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.