congress

Biosecure makes the cut

The House included the Biosecure Act in must-pass defense budget legislation, according to Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), chair of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, making Biosecure’s passage likely. 

The Biosecure Act would restrict U.S. pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies from doing business with certain Chinese companies, but it’s been watered down from its original form. The Senate in October added it to the National Defense Authorization Act, but it wasn’t part of the House’s version of the NDAA until now.

The House tweaked the bill to ensure that American biotechs that do business with Chinese “companies of concern” are not banned from participating in Medicare.   

The House is expected to vote on the bill this week, and a Senate vote is expected by the end of December – Congress has passed the NDAA every year for several decades. 

Also this week, the Senate is scheduled to vote on Democrats’ bill to extend the pandemic-era ACA tax credits. The bill seeks a three-year extension, which is not likely to win over moderate Republicans. The Center for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the Democrats’ bill would add nearly $300 billion to deficits.

Republicans on Monday introduced a competing bill that would convert the extra premium subsidies into funds for health savings accounts, which could be used for deductibles and other cost sharing, but not premiums. The bill includes another measure that, starting in 2027, would likely increase premium payments for cheaper "bronze" and more expensive "gold" plans, while having little impact on what people pay for popular "silver" plans. Additional coverage restrictions for undocumented immigrants and gender transition services also are part of the bill.  

research

The boundaries of 'The Endless Frontier'

A team of STAT reporters took stock of the crisis in the research enterprise from the past 10 months and considered where the country might be headed. 

A 1945 report, “Science: The Endless Frontier,” laid the foundation for the past eight decades of technological achievements, from health care breakthroughs to the internet, GPS, and artificial intelligence. STAT reviewed the debate from 80 years ago over the approach to research, the Nixon administration’s efforts to politicize government-funded research, and the Trump administration’s initiative to run with Nixon’s approach. All that history could inform where we go next. 

It’s a long, worthwhile read that sets up this 10-part series looking at how the Trump administration  disrupted labs, upended lives, and delayed discoveries. Other stories in the series tell the stories of individuals affected by the administration’s cuts to research funding, from a West Virginia teen fighting smoking to a pioneering Harvard biologist taking on cancer.

For the scene-setting story, Megan Molteni and Ani Oza interviewed more than two dozen researchers, science policy experts, historians, and current and former health officials. J. Emory Parker analyzed 10 years of grants in an NIH database.

Read more.