Why do they have a monopoly on the product? Or is it another government scam and some congresscritters are getting kickbacks?
They don’t have a monopoly - just a majority share. As the items have expirations dates associated with them (due to sterilization requirements) no one holds beyond a certain amount of additional stock to offset when a major factory goes off line as occurred.
To offset it would require incentives similar to farm subsidies (which I would oppose) or government agencies holding a certain amount of stock for items which are considered critical. In the stock scenario - if the items aren’t used by a certain date they are required to be disposed of due to the expiration. (Yes - some durable products can be resterilized, but that would not be the case with IV bags described in the article.).
I’ve worked in the med device world for nearly 18 years. Other sources, already ok’d by the FDA as emergency alternatives, will pick up the slack. The market is tight but the article overhypes the issue and as always the market will correct itself.
The only regulation that might be considered by the government to prevent a similar situation is to state that no more than x% of a given critical product can be produced at any one location. Now... figure out how to calculate that and to define what generally and/or specifically enough what a critical product is considered to be. Someone will still be picking winners and losers in that situation.