vaccines

So one would think, Bruce, and in fact, at the very beginning of the bill it states that those parts marked "struck out" will be replaced by the following parts written in italics. Here's the italics for the part I quoted:

`(3) CERTAIN COST PRINCIPLES AND COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the cost principles set forth under part 31 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations, the cost accounting standards set forth under chapter 99 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations, and the requirement for the submission of certified cost and pricing information under section 304A of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 254b), shall not apply to any contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction entered into under the Project BioShield Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-276).'.

Looks the same to me.

[jinx]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Doesn't "struck out" mean it's been removed from the bill?

Jinx, post 40 has 4 quotes. They don't sound like they come from the bill. Where do they come from....who is saying this...er, that?

Did you go to the link? Is the entire bill removed from the bill then? That would be great...

[Struck out->]<code> SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS. </code>[<-Struck out]

• [Struck out->]<code> The table of contents of this Act is as follows: </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 1. Short title. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 2. Table of contents. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 3. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 4. Clarification of countermeasures covered by Project BioShield. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 5. Orphan drug market exclusivity for countermeasure products. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 6. Liability protections for pandemics, epidemics, and countermeasures. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 7. Compensation. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 8. Rebates and grants for research development, and manufacturing of vaccines, qualified countermeasures and pandemic or epidemic products. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 9. Technical assistance. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 10. Animal models for certain diseases. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 11. Animal Model/Research Tool Scientific Advisory Committee. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 12. Collaboration and coordination. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 13. Procurement. </code>[<-Struck out]

• • [Struck out->]<code> Sec. 14. National Pathology Center. </code>[<-Struck out]

Sorry Bruce, I was all over the place looking for info on this thing... NVIC, CNN, a white house press release.... I can look the links back up later if you want but I gotta head for school now.

I WISH the entire bill had been struck out - far from it. You have to scroll all the way down to the end and read the stuff in italics which is the revised bill as it now stands. Here's the italics for what you quoted, Jinx:

`(i) IN GENERAL- No cause of action shall exist against a person described in subsection (a) for claims for loss of property, personal injury, or death arising out of, reasonably relating to, or resulting from the design, development, clinical testing and investigation, manufacture, labeling, distribution, sale, purchase, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, or use of a security countermeasure or qualified pandemic or epidemic product distributed, sold, purchased, donated, dispensed, prescribed, administered, or used in anticipation of and preparation for, in defense against, or in response to, or recovery from an actual or potential public health emergency that is a designated security countermeasure or a qualified pandemic or epidemic product by the Secretary in a declaration described in paragraph (2).

`(ii) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- For purposes of this section, the phrase `arising out of, reasonably relating to, or resulting from' shall not be construed to apply to loss of property, personal injury, or death that has no alleged or potential causal relationship with the design, development, clinical testing and investigation, manufacture, labeling, distribution, sale, purchase, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, or use of a product described in clause (i).

Nope, this nasty little bill is still working its way through Congress.

[xoxoxoBruce]

No, that's not what she quoted. That's probably what the quotes were referring to but her quotes were not in the legalese of a bill(law).
That's why I asked who was being quoted.

[jinx]

Sorry again Bruce, my bad. Too late to edit so, 1 & 2 are from the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), the second is Barbara Loe Fisher, President. Fisher is a voting member of the FDA vaccines and related biological products advisory committee.
The third is George Bush.
The forth is from a CNN article.

The part I quoted from the actual bill appears to be the same with or without italics.

(f) INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN ACTS-

• • `(1) FACA- The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the duties, activities, working groups, and advisory boards of the BARDA.

• • `(2) FOIA- Information that relates to the activities, working groups, and advisory boards of the BARDA shall not be subject to disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code, unless the Secretary or Director determines that such disclosure would pose no threat to national security. Such a determination shall not be subject to judicial review.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Great, thanks Jinx. I wanted to pass it along but I was sure to be questioned on the sources. Many won't wade through and try to interpret the legalese of the bill itself, at least until they're fired up.