Fraud and Shortages in the PPE Market and the Failures of the Trump Administration
June 19, 2020Archives . Authors . Blog News . Certified Review . Feature . Feature Img . Issue Spotters . Policy/Contributor Blogs . Recent Stories . Student Blogs Article(Source)
It has been five months since the first COVID-19 case was reported in Seattle, the epicenter of the outbreak in the US. As the virus spread, patients flooded into hospitals as hundreds of people got sick. The US soon realized that hospitals, healthcare facilities, nursing homes, and the government alike were short of the gear that would keep the healthcare workers at the frontline of the pandemic alive and healthy. At a time when their expertise and care were paramount, their lives were put at risk in a way that was unprecedented in recent history. Suddenly, the government and healthcare facilities across the nation were in a frenzy, hurrying to find personal protective equipment (“PPE”) for healthcare workers. What they faced were empty warehouses, factories at capacity, and a market ridden with fraud.
This supply chain shortage and fraud in the PPE market is unrelenting and has left practitioners finding alternative means to protect themselves. In March, nurses at Mount Sinai hospital were spotted wearing trash bags fashioned as protective gear. Medical practitioners around the country were forced to reuse PPE, even though the FDA has reported that “protective capabilities of [reused] single-use PPE cannot be assured.” One doctor in Colorado was given an N95 mask and told she should keep it until it breaks. These masks, like gloves and gowns, are good for one use—ideally, the doctor is supposed to see the patient and then throw the equipment away to avoid the spread of the virus. Other hospitals have been attempting to decontaminate masks that have been used prior, which does not guarantee protection from cross-contamination. The CDC has advised that this approach should only be practiced when there is no alternative as “there are no manufacturer authorized methods for [mask] decontamination before reuse.” Furthermore, decontamination can potentially affect the efficiency of the N95 mask filters, thus putting the healthcare workers further at risk when reused.
The question remains—why wasn’t the US prepared for a pandemic? The US knew that COVID-19 was making its way across the globe. Even though the first death was not reported in the US until January, news of the virus was spreading through China as early as December 2019. As reported by Daniel M. Gerstein, “[b]iosurveillance data on the scope of the outbreak wasn’t being heeded. Disease tests and vital medical equipment were not being supplied. The network of officials and offices related to emergency management that had trained together on how to respond to a pandemic had been superseded by an ad hoc White House task force.” Meanwhile, top healthcare officials were warning that there were not enough stockpiles of PPE, but this fell on deaf ears.
When the administration started to take concerns seriously in mid-March, it was met with chaos. Dysfunction at the federal level percolated to state and local governments, exacerbating nation-wide PPE shortages and overall confusion. First, the Strategic National Stockpile, designed to fill gaps in PPE shortages during a pandemic, did not have enough stock to meet the needs during a crisis of COVID-19’s magnitude. Therefore, states were left to their own devices and were scouring the open market. However, this was not a typical open market, as the normal distribution channels did not work as usual. Across states, PPE contracts were left unfulfilled, sparking criminal investigations. State governments across the country were left in bidding wars with other states and the federal governments to secure the highly coveted PPE.
While the US stockpile was depleted a few weeks into the pandemic, state and federal governments were left looking abroad for foreign production. In any usual environment, this approach would be sufficient to meet needs, but these were unusual times. Gowns, gloves, and N95 masks are manufactured in China, and testing swabs in Italy—two places hardest hit by the pandemic. When those countries were hit, it inevitably led to a decrease in their ability to meet manufacturing demands due to the stay-at-home orders that forced the workforce out of the factories. Furthermore, xenophobia led to an overall reluctance to purchase medical supplies from China.
What arose in the midst of this medical supply shortage was alarming. An ecosystem of profiteers, fraudsters, and untested suppliers entered and plagued the market. The profiteering and fraud came in many forms. For one, untested suppliers with no experience in the medical supply market obtained million-dollar contracts to provide PPE but failed to procure the supplies. Other profiteers purchased supplies of scarce and critical supplies simply to hoard them, driving up prices and widening their profit margins during a global health crisis. Some suppliers falsely claimed to have business ties with 3M to drive up prices and sales. Other fraudulent activity included wire fraud and advance-fee schemes whereby supposed suppliers would request an upfront payment of nonexistent supplies. By the time the purchasing agencies became suspicious of the transactions, many of the funds had been transferred to accounts outside the US and were unrecoverable. Furthermore, of those who did have supplies, some were expired or counterfeit and did not meet FDA requirements, which are critical of PPE especially during a global pandemic. They assure that the protective equipment properly protects users from virus contamination.
Action has been taken on several fronts to combat this. In an attempt to crackdown on fraudulent activity, the government has teamed up with corporations including 3M, Amazon, Merck, Pfizer, Citi and Alibaba to stem the flow of counterfeit face masks, coronavirus tests, and other PPE. In an attempt to stop price gouging, 3M has filed several lawsuits against suppliers engaging in price gouging and fraud in the sales of its N95 masks. Federal courts have issued preliminary injunctions against parties selling unproven and potentially dangerous medical supplies. State officials are reporting to 3M and the FDA directly when they detect suspicious activity. 3M, the CDC, and the FDA have each issued detailed guidance with regard to fraudulent activity, price gouging, and counterfeit products in the market. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has even gotten involved and is pursuing “any company, individual, or entity whose intention it is to unlawfully take advantage of the current pandemic.”
While the PPE market is rife with fraud, the federal government has taken measures to meet PPE and medical supply demands in the US, all of which have proven ineffective. In May, after weeks of mounting pressure, President Trump invoked the Defend Production Act (“DPA”) to compel 3M and six major medical device companies to produce protective masks and ventilators. The DPA empowers the federal government to ramp up the manufacturing and distribution of critically needed medical supplies and PPE. However, it is moot without meaningful deployment. Trump issued a memorandum demanding increased production, but thereafter, companies announced that the “memorandum had no effect on its already-announced plans.” The most consequential order of the DPA was to freeze shipments of PPE overseas. However, this blocked companies from fulfilling overseas contracts and may cause international backlash down the line.
One seemingly effective measure was the passage of legislation providing US manufacturers with protection against PPE-related lawsuits. The legislation meant that 3M could sell 420 million masks a year to US buyers. Additionally, Honeywell mask production could increase by 120 million per year. Moldex, another N95 mask provider, could produce up to eight million masks a month to equip healthcare workers. However, these numbers fall short of the estimated 3.5 billions masks needed in a year in the US. Additionally, there are concerns that many of these products purchased by states from 3M, Honeywell, and Moldex may be diverted by DHS and FEMA due to the unwarranted competition between federal agencies and state governments in procuring PPE. As reported by CNBC, “[l]acking supplies from the federal government, states and localities have had to find their own. That’s created a market with many bidders, including the federal, state and local governments along with individual consumers.” While FEMA, HSA, and other federal organizations could buy and disseminate all PPE to the states, they are choosing not to use those disaster relief powers and eliminate this issue.
The nation has entered a new stage in the era of COVID-19. The country has surpassed 100,000 deaths, but the rate of the spread has been decreasing. As such, states have begun loosening restrictions and strategically opening up their respective economies. Alas, the need for PPE is still alive and well. Efforts to mitigate the continued spread of the virus have called for not only healthcare practitioners to be equipped with face masks, but other professionals as well, such as retail workers, bus drivers, construction workers, and service providers. Beyond immediate demands, many Americans and medical experts have concerns of a second wave of the virus, which has called into question the nation’s preparedness to respond. Given that the confusion in the market has still not been entirely cleared up and fraud has not been entirely curtailed, this concern is valid.
About the Author: Stephanie McIntyre graduated from Cornell Law School in May 2020. She obtained a Bachelor’s Degree in economics from the University of Pennsylvania and worked in consulting prior to law school. She will be joining Akin Gump in New York.
Suggested Citation: Stephanie McIntyre, Fraud and Shortages in the PPE Market and the Failures of the Trump Administration, Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, The Issue Spotter, (June 19, 2020), https://live-journal-of-law-and-public-policy.pantheonsite.io/fraud-and-shortages-in-the-ppe-market-and-the-failures-of-the-trump-administration/.
You may also like
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- October 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- August 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- June 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010