In June, the House Energy and Commerce (E&C) Committee published a report proposing reforms to the NIH, including consolidating its institutes. NAEVR opposes these consolidations due to potential impacts on funding stability for eye and vision research. The proposal suggests integrating the NEI into a broader Neurological Science and Brain Institute, which could dilute resources for vision research. We are actively collaborating with partners to develop a comprehensive response to this draft report. The report’s recommendations include consolidating institutes (such as merging the NEI into a broader Neuroscience and Brain Institute), implementing Director term limits of 5 years with an optional additional 5-year extension, among other changes.
While the report seeks public input by August 16, (NAEVR will provide individuals and partners sample text for this response), unfortunately, the House LHHS Appropriations Subcommittee included the consolidation of institutes in their drafted FY25 funding bill.
Although the report is concerning as it pertains to its potential impact on the NEI, the Senate and administration have indicated they don’t intend to pursue the House recommendations. However, since the recommendations are included in the official bill text, a coordinated response from alliances and other patient advocacy organizations is underway. During the LHHS bill markup in the subcommittee, Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) stated, “The House needs to hold public hearings and engage in a thoughtful process to incorporate the best ideas to advance NIH as the crown jewel of biomedical research. Any discussion to reauthorize the NIH needs to be bipartisan and bicameral — unfortunately, the proposed reorganization in today’s partisan bill falls short.”
NAEVR will be working alongside our coalition colleagues representing and advocating for other Institutes, to push back on the proposed consolidation while also expressing openness for dialogue on NIH reform and other topics addressed in the report. In contrast to the House report, Ranking Member Bill Cassidy (R-LA) published a white paper based on feedback from stakeholders that was solicited last fall which NAEVR will also be responding to with our coalition partners.
In contrast to the House report, in the Senate, Ranking Member Bill Cassidy (R-LA) published a white paper based on feedback from stakeholders that was solicited last fall which NAEVR will also be responding to with our coalition partners.
House Appropriations Committee Activities
Last week, House Republican leaders marked up the LHHS bill, incorporating the NIH reform proposal that includes consolidating institutes. Although the spending for NIH remains flat, reducing the number of institutes from 27 to 15 without a thorough understanding of the impact on research programs and priorities across existing institutes is a significant concern.
During the markup, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee Tom Cole (R-OK) emphasized that even if Congress eliminated the entire discretionary budget of the United States, Congress still wouldn’t have a significant impact on the deficit” and continued by saying “so we’re not going to balance the budget here,” referring to the LHHS bill.
Cole emphasized that the subcommittee should draft a conservative bill, expecting it to move toward the middle since the Senate would likely disagree. He expressed that ending the budget process with a year-long continuing resolution would be a mistake. Cole acknowledged the inclusion of NIH reform in the bill, noting that subcommittee Chair Robert Aderholt (R-AL) was initiating an important discussion by incorporating recommendations from the E&C committee. He looked forward to moving the bill to the full committee, where both parties would have the opportunity to provide input through amendments, recognizing the bipartisan agreement on the importance of biomedical research.
In response, Steny Hoyer (D-MD) criticized the recent markup as merely nominal, with no amendments or changes. He expressed frustration that the subcommittee advanced the bill along party lines, focusing on political messaging rather than presenting a viable bill. The Appropriations Committee plans to discuss the LHHS bill in July within the full committee to advance it to the House floor.
