February 12, 2025 – Washington, D.C.
During this morning’s House floor speeches, Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) delivered a forceful denunciation of the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) decision to cap indirect cost recapture rates at 15%, arguing that the move threatens America’s biomedical research infrastructure and hands a victory to China. He called on Republicans to oppose the Trump administration’s policy and warned of severe economic and scientific consequences if the change is implemented.
Key Concerns Raised by Auchincloss
1. NIH Policy Change is “Illegal” and Breaks Bipartisan Commitments
Auchincloss blasted the administration’s move, saying it violates longstanding agreements on research funding.
- In 2017, the Trump administration attempted to lower NIH indirect cost rates to 10%, but a bipartisan congressional vote blocked the effort.
- Since then, the Appropriations Committee has reauthorized the existing rate structure every year, ensuring research institutions could recoup necessary infrastructure costs.
- Auchincloss challenged Republicans, stating:“You voted for this. They are breaking that law you voted for. What are you going to do about it?”
He accused the administration of ignoring legal precedents and acting without congressional approval, setting a dangerous precedent for long-term scientific funding.
2. The Cuts Will Cripple Research Institutions
Auchincloss explained how the NIH’s new policy will devastate research institutions, particularly universities and hospitals that rely on indirect cost recovery to fund critical operations.
- Indirect costs cover essential research infrastructure, including:
- Lab space, equipment, and energy costs
- Support personnel and data management systems
- Technology needed for genetic engineering, drug development, and clinical trials
- He warned that without adequate funding, research institutions will refuse NIH grants because they cannot afford to take on projects without sufficient operational support.
“We are not in an era of beakers in backyards. We are in an era of cutting-edge genetic engineering, and the equipment costs money.”
If institutions decline NIH grants, the pipeline of new medical discoveries and biotechnology advancements will slow dramatically.
3. Impact on Massachusetts and National Innovation
Auchincloss highlighted the direct economic and medical consequences for Massachusetts, a global leader in biomedical research, stating that the policy amounts to a $2 billion attack on the state’s research infrastructure.
- Massachusetts’ “Meds & Eds” sector drives billions in economic activity and supports hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs.
- He underscored breakthroughs that have resulted from NIH-funded research, including:
- Advances in Alzheimer’s treatment
- Gestational diabetes therapies
- A new non-opioid painkiller developed in Massachusetts, offering an alternative to highly addictive substances fueling the opioid crisis.
“The work we do in Massachusetts changes lives.”
However, Auchincloss warned Republicans that these cuts won’t just hurt blue states—they will impact hospitals, universities, and biotech hubs across the country.
“Go back to your districts. Talk to your universities, your hospitals. They don’t want to see this policy go into effect.”
He challenged Republican lawmakers to explain to their own constituents why they are supporting a policy that will undercut research and economic growth in their home states.
4. China is the Big Winner if the U.S. Cuts Research Funding
Auchincloss issued a stark warning that America’s biotechnology leadership is at risk, citing China’s aggressive investment in biomedical research.
- At the recent JPMorgan Healthcare Conference, two key themes dominated:
- Artificial intelligence in biotech, which requires cutting-edge research investment.
- China’s rapid rise as a biotech superpower, with tens of billions being poured into life sciences.
Auchincloss warned that China’s biotech sector is celebrating the U.S.’s self-imposed research cuts, saying:
“They cannot believe their luck. We are cutting our own research infrastructure at a time when they are investing tens of billions of dollars.”
This move, he argued, would allow China to outpace the U.S. in medical innovation, leading to lost economic opportunities, weakened global competitiveness, and fewer medical breakthroughs for Americans.
Auchincloss to GOP: “Wake Up and Stand Up for Science”
Auchincloss urged Republicans to take action, calling on them to push back against the Trump administration’s decision and support basic science funding.
“Republicans, wake up. Stand up. Support basic science.”
He warned that the NIH’s decision won’t just hurt blue states like Massachusetts—it will damage the entire country’s ability to lead in biomedical research, harming both the economy and public health.
What’s Next?
With House and Senate budget negotiations ongoing, the fate of NIH research funding will be a critical point of debate.
- Will Republicans push back against the administration’s NIH policy, or will they allow the funding cuts to stand?
- Will bipartisan support for biomedical research remain intact, or will political divisions threaten America’s leadership in science and technology?
As the fight over science funding and global competitiveness intensifies, expect more pushback from researchers, universities, and biotech leaders who argue that NIH investment is critical for U.S. innovation and economic strength.
Bills at the Hill 
Leave a comment