⚡️ NIMITZ HEALTH NEWS FLASH ⚡️ 

“A Review of the President’s FY26 Budget Request for the National Institutes of Health”

Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, HHS, Education, & Related Agencies

June 10th, 2025 (recording linked here)

WITNESS & TESTIMONY

• The Honorable Jayantha Bhattacharya, M.D., PhD.: Director, National Institutes of Health

HEARING HIGHLIGHTS

MEMBER OPENING STATEMENTS

• Chair Capito (R-WV) opened the hearing by emphasizing the importance of continuing investment in biomedical research. She highlighted the unique health challenges in West Virginia and praised the NIH’s IDeA program for supporting underserved states. Capito underscored the economic and scientific benefits of NIH funding, particularly in areas such as Alzheimer's, cancer, and addiction research. She expressed hope for bipartisan cooperation in sustaining NIH support despite budget constraints.

• Ranking Member Baldwin (D-WI) criticized the current administration for what she described as devastating cuts and politically motivated interference in NIH operations. She emphasized the vital role NIH has played in nearly all recent medical breakthroughs and warned that defunding research would harm millions of families. Baldwin cited specific examples of delayed or terminated grants in Alzheimer’s, cancer, and rare disease research. She pledged to work across party lines to protect the NIH and prevent the administration from dismantling decades of biomedical progress.

WITNESS OPENING STATEMENT

• Dr. Bhattacharya acknowledged public mistrust following the pandemic and emphasized the need for reform, transparency, and responsiveness to chronic disease burdens. Dr. Bhattacharya outlined a vision for advancing NIH through data science, improved oversight—especially of foreign-funded research—and ending high-risk gain-of-function experiments. He committed to enhancing reproducibility in science and fostering academic freedom, aiming to rebuild public trust and uphold scientific integrity.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SUMMARY

• Sen. Collins (R-ME) criticized the administration’s proposed 15% cap on research-related indirect costs, calling it harmful, arbitrary, and illegal under current law. She warned that the cap was causing scientists to leave the U.S. and clinical trials to be halted. She highlighted Dr. Calvin Droegemeier, who proposed alternative models. Dr. Bhattacharya stated he had preliminary discussions with Droegemeier, and agreed reforms are needed to support fair institutional funding without commenting further due to ongoing litigation.

• Ranking Member Baldwin interrogated the NIH’s delayed and reduced grant-making activity, demanding clarity on who was responsible for withholding funds. Dr. Bhattacharya explained that decisions varied by case, some made by him and others jointly with administration officials, while emphasizing they were temporary.

  Ranking Member Baldwin raised alarms over NIH’s new “forward funding” policy, arguing it masked deeper budget cuts by front-loading multi-year grants, which would significantly reduce near-term research activity. Dr. Bhattacharya contended the approach allowed long-term flexibility but admitted its implementation required careful congressional coordination.

• Chair Capito emphasized the importance of the IDeA program for geographically dispersed research and called for expanding National Cancer Institute (NCI) designations to underrepresented states. Dr. Bhattacharya agreed, stating current NIH investments are overly concentrated and should be more equitably distributed. He committed to supporting emerging NCI centers and highlighted the value of addiction research, citing NIH’s role in naloxone development and ongoing support for innovations like focused ultrasound therapy.

• Sen. Durbin (D-IL) expressed deep frustration over the proposed $18 billion cut, which he said would undo a decade of bipartisan NIH funding increases. He cited severe grant delays at Northwestern University and other Illinois institutions, and asked how NIH could justify dismantling hope-giving research. Dr. Bhattacharya acknowledged the disruptions, asserted many grant pauses predated his leadership, and said he was working toward resolutions with affected universities.

• Sen. Moran (R-KS) reflected on the personal and constituent value of NIH-supported research and asked how additional congressional funding should be prioritized. Dr. Bhattacharya highlighted the need to focus on real American health needs—such as Alzheimer’s, cancer, and diabetes—and to address systemic issues like the reproducibility crisis in science.

  Sen. Moran also advocated for increased support for the INCLUDE project studying Alzheimer’s in people with Down syndrome. Dr. Bhattacharya strongly endorsed the initiative and pledged continued support.

• Sen. Merkley (D-OR) voiced concern about delays in Alzheimer's research due to canceled advisory meetings and emphasized the crucial role of nurses in healthcare. He criticized the proposal to eliminate the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR). Dr. Bhattacharya agreed nurses are vital and affirmed the NIH’s commitment to continuing nursing-related research, clarifying that any restructuring would be done in collaboration with Congress.

• Sen. Kennedy (R-LA) challenged NIH’s spending on what he called politically controversial projects, such as gender-affirming care and DEI-related grants, while more critical health issues remained underfunded. He pointed to excessive indirect costs at wealthy universities and accused the NIH of insufficient oversight. Dr. Bhattacharya responded that NIH must remain politically neutral and that he supports efforts to ensure NIH funds address core health needs. He acknowledged the need for reforms to improve grant transparency and efficiency.

• Sen. Britt (R-AL) emphasized maternal mortality, particularly in rural Alabama, and advocated for multi-year funding commitments like those proposed in her NIH IMPROVE Act. She agreed on the need for accountability and competitive grant-making that prioritizes outcomes over legacy funding. Dr. Bhattacharya agreed, advocating for reforms to broaden access to funding and break cycles of institutional advantage. He supported introducing competition into indirect cost structures to empower more diverse institutions.

• Sen. Murray (D-WA) condemned the Trump administration’s NIH staffing cuts, terminated grants, and proposed 40% budget reduction. She demanded accountability for disrupted clinical trials, including one for HIV at Fred Hutchinson and others involving diabetes and ovarian cancer. Dr. Bhattacharya stated that appeals processes had been created and that he was committed to minimizing patient impact, but could not provide exact figures.

  Sen. Murray ended by insisting on detailed data for clinical trial impacts and NIH staff reductions.

• Sen. Rounds (R-SD) encouraged greater NIH collaboration with smaller institutions and noted potential cost advantages. He discussed using AI to address chronic illness and emphasized the importance of modernizing NIH’s data infrastructure. Dr. Bhattacharya praised the NCATS program and committed to preserving AI-related initiatives even if organizational restructuring occurred. Both agreed on the transformative potential of AI in accelerating biomedical breakthroughs and improving care delivery.

• Sen. Shaheen (D-NH) questioned the proposed defunding and consolidation of NIDDK, particularly given its vital role in diabetes research. She expressed alarm over politically motivated cuts and warned of long-term harm to patient populations and institutions. Dr. Bhattacharya reaffirmed his personal and professional commitment to diabetes research and emphasized that funding decisions would reflect Congressional input.

  Sen. Shaheen also raised concerns about addiction research; Dr. Bhattacharya reiterated NIH’s commitment to behavioral and biomedical approaches for substance use disorders.

• Sen. Schatz (D-HI) asked about the methodology used to terminate grants, claiming it was driven by simplistic keyword searches. He requested a process to systematically review and potentially reverse mistaken cancellations. Dr. Bhattacharya confirmed an appeals process was active and reversals were underway, pledging that decisions would be resolved in weeks, not years.

  Sen. Schatz also asked him to defend U.S. science to disillusioned young researchers; Dr. Bhattacharya argued NIH remains the global leader in biomedical funding and is committed to supporting new generations of scientists.