A Quiet Bipartisan Push to Fix Drug Shortages
It’s likely that most Americans won’t be discussing the topic of compounding pharmacies over Thanksgiving Dinner this year, but it sits at the center of one of the most important healthcare challenges in the country which is drug-shortages. These pharmacies, many of which are small, and some of which are industrial in size, are often treated as a footnote in policy debates, yet they have become an essential pressure valve when hospitals and patients cannot obtain medications from traditional manufacturers.1
That troubling dynamic helps explain why Congress is giving serious attention to the issue, and why the bipartisan bill, the Patient Access to Urgent-Use Pharmacy Compounding Act of 2023 (H.R. 167), matters, and why it’s gaining traction in talks on the Hill. The bill’s lead sponsor is Representative H. Morgan Griffith (R-VA-9).2 Among the cosponsors are Democrats including Henry Cuellar (D-TX-28) and Mark Pocan (D-WI-2), as well as Republicans such as Jeff Duncan (R-SC-3) and Diana Harshbarger (R-TN-1). According to the bill’s official listing, there are nine Republicans and three Democrats among the cosponsors.
This kind of cross-party sponsorship is worth highlighting, especially in today’s hyper-polarized political environment. It’s a signal that the issue is really an American issue, not just a tribalistic political issue. Republicans and Democrats alike see the problem for what it is, which is that when commercial drug supply fails, patients and providers suffer. And that’s not acceptable in America.
On its face, H.R. 167 looks technical, but its impact is intended to be a meaningful needle-mover in the pharmaceutical landscape.3 For example, legislation allows state-licensed compounding pharmacies, even those not registered with the FDA as large outsourcing facilities, to compound limited quantities of medications when there is an urgent medical need and standard supply channels have failed. The bill also includes safeguards including the provision that a prescriber must certify attempts were made to obtain the approved drug, the compounded product must be clearly labeled “for urgent use,” and the pharmacy must maintain patient records.
Party Affiliation Takes a Backseat
Putting names and party affiliations aside, one of the biggest takeaways is that elected officials from both sides of the aisle are saying out loud that the old regulatory model for drug supply isn’t working the way it should. And they are offering a constructive fix. and that matters for two reasons. First, when policymakers from different parties align on a practical solution, the chances of real change improve. And second, for providers and patients facing delays and shortages, even a modest policy shift translates into tangible benefits. And in this case, benefits that might save lives.
It is not a silver-bullet fix. H.R. 167 by itself won’t resolve all drug-supply issues. But it marks a moment when Congress recognized the urgency, identified a specific bottleneck, and delivered a policy response. We should give a little credit where it’s due.4
The next steps will determine how meaningful this becomes: committee hearings, pressure testing the language, tracking implementation. If the law passes and the safeguards hold, it could offer a model for how the system adapts to 21st-century demands.
For now, the names attached and the bipartisan nature of support show that this is not business-as-usual. It is a shift toward responsiveness. And in a space too often defined by delay, that is a welcome change.
https://www.pharmtech.com/view/compounding-overview-primary-considerations-for-the-workplace
https://morgangriffith.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=402798&utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net/09_14_23_Public_Memo_Drug_Shortages_Leg_Hearing_Updated_3caf04c5ba.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://energycommerce.house.gov/posts/chairs-rodgers-and-guthrie-announce-legislative-hearing-on-drug-shortages?utm_source=chatgpt.com