Bill · S.Res. 93· Senate(119-SRES-93)
A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the operations of the National Institutes of Health should not experience any interruption, delay, or funding disruption in violation of the law and that the workforce of the National Institutes of Health is essential to sustaining medical progress.
- Introduced
- 2/25/2025
- Last activity
- 2/25/2025 — Referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text: CR S1352)
- Sponsored by
- Richard Durbin
- Cosponsors
- - 22 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
A Senate resolution is the Senate speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the Senate agrees to it, it is officially the Senate's word; it is not a law, so the House and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution expresses the sense of the Senate regarding the operations of the National Institutes of Health. It states that these operations should not face any interruption, delay, or funding disruption that violates the law. The resolution highlights that the National Institutes of Health conducts research on various diseases, including childhood cancers and Alzheimer's disease. It further asserts that the workforce of the agency is essential for sustaining medical progress. Finally, it notes that interfering with this work can undermine the development of life-saving treatments and threaten national responses to public health challenges.
Yes· 3 of 8
Would children be better off under this?+5
The resolution specifically mentions the importance of funding research on childhood cancers.
Would people over 65 be better off under this?+5
The text highlights the importance of research into Alzheimer's disease, which primarily impacts seniors.
Does this make the country readier for the next outbreak?+5
The resolution states that a stable NIH workforce is necessary to respond to public health challenges.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Health, Economic Vitality, and National Security: The resolution suggests that ensuring the National Institutes of Health operates without illegal interruptions protects these three areas for the people of the United States (Section 1).
-
Continued Medical Research: By preventing funding disruptions, the bill aims to protect research on various conditions such as childhood cancers, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, heart disease, infectious disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Section 1).
-
Development of Life-Saving Treatments: Maintaining the work of the National Institutes of Health workforce helps sustain efforts to develop life-saving treatments (Section 2).
-
Public Health Readiness: Ensuring the workforce is not interfered with helps protect the Nation's ability to respond to public health challenges (Section 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Children+5Good For Seniors+5Good For Students+3
- Healthcare
- Improves Pandemic Preparedness+5Increases Research Funding+5Improves Healthcare Access+3
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Economic Growth+5
- Education And Technology
- Increases Scientific Research Funding+5
- 2/25/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text: CR S1352)
- 23 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
Angela AlsobrooksDemocrat · Maryland
Tammy BaldwinDemocrat · Wisconsin
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey
Christopher CoonsDemocrat · Delaware
Tammy DuckworthDemocrat · Illinois
Ruben GallegoDemocrat · Arizona
Mazie HironoDemocrat · Hawaii
Martin HeinrichDemocrat · New Mexico
Amy KlobucharDemocrat · Minnesota
Angus KingIndependent · Maine
Edward MarkeyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Patty MurrayDemocrat · Washington
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon
Alex PadillaDemocrat · California
John ReedDemocrat · Rhode Island
Jacky RosenDemocrat · Nevada
Charles SchumerDemocrat · New York
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California
Tina SmithDemocrat · Minnesota
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland
Ron WydenDemocrat · Oregon
Peter WelchDemocrat · Vermont