Advanced Research Projects Agency-Health Act
Mr. Speaker, America is the envy of the world for our leadership in biomedical innovation. People from all over the world have an incredible amount of hope in the promise of our lifesaving, breakthrough research for more cures and…
Mr. Speaker, America is the envy of the world for our leadership in biomedical innovation. People from all over the world have an incredible amount of hope in the promise of our lifesaving, breakthrough research for more cures and treatments.
That is why I have been a longtime supporter of NIH and projects like the BRAIN Initiative intended to speed scientific research necessary to accelerate cures for neurologic diseases.
When the concept of ARPA-H was first proposed to me, I expressed a healthy dose of skepticism.
First, I was concerned about a clear and targeted strategic mission. I was concerned an unfocused agenda would not be a recipe for success.
The second was the issue of duplication. The Federal Government has several agencies that advance biomedical innovation. Within the National Institutes of Health alone, we already have the National Center for Advancing Translational Science, the Cures Acceleration Network, the Common Fund, and the Foundation for NIH's Accelerating Medicines Partnership Program, to name a few.
Third, I was concerned that the creation of a new agency would lack sufficient transparency and oversight. My questions to supporters of ARPA-H included:
How will projects be selected?
How will the public be kept informed of projects and project funding?
Who will be assessing for duplication of Federal programs, and how will it be managed?
What measure will be used to define success?
What are the guardrails to ensure that we are supporting American innovators?
These concerns were validated earlier this year when the administration began implementing the $1 billion that was appropriated to set up ARPA-H with little to no congressional direction. The Biden administration proposed 14 offices within ARPA-H. DARPA has six to eight. They also placed ARPA-H within NIH, which has its own issues in lacking transparency and accountability related to federally funded research and the origins of COVID-19.
We needed to ensure proper oversight and provide guardrails through congressional direction, so we plowed the hard ground necessary to legislate through the Energy and Commerce Committee. Chairman Frank Pallone and Health Subcommittee Chairwoman Anna Eshoo listened to my concerns. We had very productive negotiations to properly define ARPA- H's mission and place strong safeguards for transparency and accountability.
This bill defines ARPA-H's mission so that it is laser-focused on high-risk breakthrough technologies in health and medicine that are not being addressed by the private sector or current Federal programs.
This bill also prohibits Federal funding to China, Russia, and other recipients subject to malign foreign influence.
It moves the agency back outside of NIH.
We are also making sure ARPA-H sets the right priorities. The director must provide Congress with a strategic plan within 1 year of enactment and every 3 years on how ARPA-H will carry out projects. Projects will be evaluated every 18 months, and those not meeting milestones are expected to be terminated.
We placed guardrails on ARPA-H to prioritize projects that provide the greatest return on investment to improve human health and lower healthcare costs.
This bill also keeps the focus on lifesaving research. The director will have the power to hire and make appointments based on merit and expertise, not based on provisions that reward government bureaucrats.
We require those who receive ARPA-H funding to provide a public itemized report on indirect facilities and administrative costs.
To further cut down on duplication and mission creep, we limited the number of offices to 6, not the 14 proposed by the administration. Of those offices, at least four must be exclusively focused on R&D. In addition, not more than 15 percent of the total agency funding is allowed to go to administrative costs.
Mr. Speaker, I will close by thanking my colleagues for working together on this. I especially recognize the leadership of Chairman Pallone, Health Subcommittee Chairwoman Eshoo, Health Subcommittee Republican leader Brett Guthrie, as well as the 21st Century Cures leaders Fred Upton and Diana DeGette.
I am pleased we were able to come together. We put ARPA-H on the right path with a targeted mission, increased accountability and transparency, and a laser focus on promoting American innovators. It is a strong example of E&C's bipartisan record of success in moving legislation that will continue America's global leadership in biomedical research.
Mr. Speaker, before I close, I want to applaud and thank the members of my team: Grace Graham, Kristen Shatynski, Seth Gold, Kristin Flukey, and Kristin Ashford.
They say that Energy and Commerce has the best staff on the Hill, and that is certainly evident through their service to deliver hope and healing, both through this bill and through the package just before us with the mental health package. At every step of the way, I am grateful for their hard work and passion.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 5585, the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Health Act.