The ADAPT Act, Fire Hydrants, and the NSA
The ADAPT Act
Regular readers of this column are aware of my ongoing efforts to improve the quality and safety of our health care system and increase patient choice and control. We have numerous bills that have been introduced, and that the various committees are working on. Among those committees that are working on improvements to our health care systems is the Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee, on which I serve.
Among my efforts are the bipartisan Drug Quality and Security Act (H.R. 3089) to clarify oversight of the compounding drug manufacturing system (which was signed into law) and the Patient Choice Act (H.R. 2090), bipartisan legislation to speed up Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of drugs and give certain patients the option to buy new, innovative, experimental drugs and therapies at their own expense.
Last week, I joined with several of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, in introducing H.R. 3742, the Antibiotic Development to Advance Patient Treatment (ADAPT) Act. The ADAPT Act seeks to advance drug development with the end goal of combating the growing public health threat of “superbugs,” which are resistant to antibiotics. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or drug-resistant Salmonella are examples of these superbugs.
I believe strongly, when battling deadly diseases, patients and their physicians need more choices. Our nation boasts an array of entities that are working hard to develop new treatments and therapies. The ADAPT Act is a critical next step in working to address antibiotic resistance. This bill develops a new, accelerated pathway for antibiotics and antifungals in limited and specific patient populations. It will further innovation and ultimately will provide new, antibiotic options in the fight against superbugs.
I will continue working with my colleagues to improve our health care system and increase the options and control you and your loved ones have over treatment. Further, I will keep you updated on any advancements with the ADAPT Act and our other efforts as well.
Update on Fire Hydrants
In last week’s column, I wrote about a new bill I introduced that would cut the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) workforce by a reasonable 15 percent over a realistic three- to four-year period. When discussing that bill – H.R. 3641, the EPA Maximum Achievable Contraction of Technocrats Act – I mentioned recent EPA guidance that would require fire hydrants installed after January 4, 2014 to be lead-free.
Senator Charles (Chuck) Schumer (D-NY) said in a prepared statement, “The EPA’s absurd interpretation of the reduced lead standards will force municipalities to throw out and replace their current stockpile of hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of fire hydrants without any discernible safety benefit.” On this, Senator Schumer and I agree.
Over the weekend, I came across a story in which EPA spokeswoman Julia Valentine said, “...the guidance should be revised to exclude fire hydrants if Congress doesn't take action to do so before the January deadline.”
It seems that the EPA in this instance may have seen the light. But I must ask: Why even propose these “absurd” regulations in the first place? Maybe they have too many people looking for solutions to problems that are either miniscule or don’t exist.
The House of Representatives recently passed legislation that would add fire hydrants to the list of items exempt from this guidance. I would urge Senator Schumer and his colleagues in the Senate to take action as well.
NSA
The first court opinion of what I believe will be more has ruled that the National Security Agency (NSA) program that collects the phone data of law-abiding American citizens appears to violate the Constitution. In the case of Klayman v. Obama, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that collecting such metadata is likely unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, and, in ruling in favor of an injunction against the NSA, found that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on the merits and will suffer irreparable harm absent injunctive relief. Judge Leon also found that the public interest and potential injury to other interested parties also weigh in favor of injunctive relief. Notwithstanding his concerns, he stayed the injunction pending appeal by the government.
I do not know what the appellate courts will do, but I agree with the reasoning of Judge Leon in this case. Liberty and freedom are worth our attention.
As always, if you have concerns or comments or wish to inquire about legislative issues, feel free to contact my offices. You can call my Abingdon office at 276-525-1405 or my Christiansburg office at 540-381-5671. To reach my office via email, please visit my website at www.morgangriffith.house.gov.
###
