Trump’s Proposed Research Rule Sparks Broad Opposition

Numerous groups, including patient organizations, scientists, and lawmakers from both parties, have expressed strong opposition to a proposed rule by the Trump administration. These stakeholders argue that the rule would politicize the funding of scientific grants and weaken America’s leadership in biomedical research.

The proposed rule from the White House Office of Management and Budget has attracted close to 342,000 comments. The majority of these comments oppose the changes. The agency plans to finalize the rule by October 1.

The rule aims to enforce several policies attempted through executive orders and individual agency directives. It mandates that senior administration officials review all discretionary federal awards, allowing them to deny awards that conflict with the president’s objectives. Existing awards could be canceled at any time without explanation.

Moreover, the rule would prohibit research on diversity, equity, inclusion, and gender in grant conditions. It would also broadly restrict international scientific collaborations. These measures come at a time when China’s rapid advancements threaten America’s position as a global leader in biomedical research.

It would lead to America ceding the role of global scientific leader to other countries, including China.

According to the White House, the rule is intended to increase transparency and reduce waste, fraud, and abuse across government.

On Monday, 57 patient advocacy groups representing millions of Americans with chronic and acute diseases urged congressional leaders to persuade the OMB to retract the rule before implementation. This coalition, known as United for Cures, expressed deep concerns about the potential loss of global scientific leadership.

Their statement highlighted that the rule “would leave patients participating in clinical trials without further treatment, potentially wasting millions in federal funding and stripping hope from individuals benefiting from innovative treatments.”

Welcome to The Hill’s Healthcare newsletter. Nathaniel Weixel and Joseph bring you weekly updates on how Washington’s decisions affect your health.

Essential Reads

The healthcare sector faces significant policy impacts this week:

• The HHS Office of Inspector General reported $5.56 billion in expected recoveries and savings over six months. It barred over 1,200 individuals and companies from federal programs.
• Senator Lindsey Graham’s passing at age 71 was due to an aortic dissection, a rare and often fatal condition.
• A second U.S. citizen with Ebola was transferred to Germany for treatment.

On Our Radar

Upcoming news themes and events include:

• The Senate HELP Committee will hold a confirmation hearing for key CDC and HHS nominees.

In Other News

State attorneys general are suing the Department of Education over proposed cuts to school mental health grants. A federal judge had previously issued an injunction against the plan to terminate grants for public school students.

Around the Nation

Local and state healthcare headlines include:

• California Governor Newsom supports Medicaid spending on housing and food despite fraud accusations.
• Federal funding issues lead to the closure of eight school-based health clinics in Southwest Virginia.
• Missouri Governor signs a bipartisan healthcare bill into law.

What We’re Reading

Highlighted health news from other outlets:

• The Trump administration’s HHS withdraws its threat to withhold funding for transgender care.
• Bayer aims to end federal litigation over Roundup after a Supreme Court victory.
• State Medicaid funding cuts impact family caregivers financially.

You’re all caught up. See you tomorrow!