At Hearing, Senator Murray Slams Trump Administration for Threatening Biomedical Research and Jeopardizing Americans’ Health
***WATCH AND READ: Senator Murray’s opening remarks***
***WATCH: Senator Murray’s questioning***
*WATCH AND READ: Emily Stenson’s testimony*
Washington, D.C. – Today—at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on biomedical research—U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, underscored why the investments we make in biomedical research are so vital, what’s at stake for patients and families as Trump takes a wrecking ball to this research, and why Congress must forcefully push back.
In just 100 days, President Trump and his administration have taken unprecedented actions across the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that are having devastating impacts on biomedical research, innovation, and ultimately, the lives of millions of patients and families. The Trump administration’s actions are delaying funding and stalling research for lifesaving treatments and cures, weakening our biomedical workforce, cancelling vital ongoing studies and trials, and threatening to undo decades of hard-won progress.
At the hearing, Senator Murray shared the story of Emily Stenson, a mom and patient advocate from Washington state whose daughter Charlie was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer at just three years old but who, thanks to a National Cancer Institute clinical trial at Seattle Children’s Hospital, has been cancer free since December 2024. You can WATCH and READ Emily’s testimony here.
Senator Murray emphasized that these lifesaving cancer trials are now on the chopping block as the Trump administration terminates $137 million in cancer research grants and plans to cut the NIH budget in half, and asked Emily, “If half of the cancer clinical trials were suddenly cancelled—what would that mean for patients like Charlie and the people you know on the cancer ward at Seattle Children’s?”
Emily replied, “It would be devastating. There’s no other option often than a clinical trial. And how can you look at these families and say, we’re taking away the only option to save your child. There’s no funding. It feels like the government doesn’t care about families like ours if they take that away. It will be futures left in the balance.”
Senator Murray also asked Dr. Sudip Parikh, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and Dr. Barry Sleckman, Director of the University of Alabama Comprehensive Cancer Center, about the impact Trump’s attacks on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will have on the future of biomedical research and Americans’ health.
Senator Murray noted that over the last three months, NIH has awarded billions less in funding than over the same period in previous years, which is unprecedented for an agency that typically awards 60,000 grants a year. All the while, Trump has fired or pushed out nearly 5,000 NIH employees, including grant administrators whose job it is to award this funding. Senator Murray asked Dr. Parikh, “At this rate, do you think NIH will be able to spend the $47 billion Congress passed and President Trump signed into law?”
Dr. Parikh responded, “Thank you for that. If the will is there they can because I know the program folks that are still there, and they will work harder than anybody to work with the scientists in the field, to do the peer review, to get those dollars out. Because those dollars are not just about getting money out the door, it’s about funding the ideas that have been proposed, and there are plenty of proposals, there are plenty of good ideas. We don’t fund enough; the pay lines are already at 20 and 10 percent. We need to make sure that we do get those out, because otherwise it will be impoundment by default.”
“Well, we know that they have canceled peer review panels and they’re firing staff. So, can they get that funding out the door effectively?” Senator Murray followed up.
“Only if it becomes a priority. Only if it becomes a priority. We have to make sure that it can go out. I am confident that it can, if they make it a priority. I have not seen that yet,” Dr. Parikh replied.
Senator Murray pressed, “Who’s the ‘they’?”
“The ‘they’ is the NIH. The NIH administrators, leaders, and the Department of Health and Human Services. We have to be able to say that we are going to start awarding these grants at the rate that it requires to get the fully appropriated amount that you all approved at the end of last fiscal year,” Dr. Parikh responded.
“To your knowledge, has that been done?” inquired Senator Murray.
Dr. Parikh stated, “Not yet, the rate isn’t quite there yet.”
Senator Murray also discussed the Trump administration’s announcement that they would stop funding the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), which they later claimed they would reverse. WHI studies cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis in postmenopausal women—and thanks to this research, 126,000 cases of breast cancer and 76,000 cases of heart disease were prevented over a decade. The Fred Hutch Cancer Center in Seattle is the clinical coordinating center for WHI and one of four regional centers. Senator Murray noted that: “The annual funding for these centers costs about $10 million, that’s less than half by the way of what taxpayers spend on President Trump’s golf trips just in case you were keeping track over the last 3 months—$10 million!”
“How important, I wanted to ask you, is sex in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, and do you think now is the time to be cutting breast cancer research?” Senator Murray continued by asking Dr. Sleckman.
Dr. Sleckman replied, “Thank you for that question, Senator. You know, let me make a comment first about the Women's Health Study. These types of studies are essential for cancer and understanding the basis of cancer. This is a very long-term study, not a five-year grant. Something where they've been following women for decades and using that information to understand about cancer risk and then make informed decisions about cancer prevention. These types of studies could only be funded in a large, organized way through the federal government, the NIH and the NCI. Getting back to your question, is that it’s extremely important to study the biological difference between men and women when it comes to cancer risk, cancer progression, and cancer treatment—extremely important. There are large groups at pretty much all NCI cancer centers that either take that into account when they're designing a trial or are studying it specifically—absolutely important. Thank you for that question.”
____________________________
As the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, NIH has long been considered one of America's crown jewels with a long history of strong bipartisan support from Congress. Less than 1 percent of the federal budget goes to medical research, yet NIH research drives our economy at the national and local levels by supporting thousands of jobs in every state. More than 83 percent of NIH's budget goes to more than 300,000 research personnel at over 3,000 universities, medical schools, and other research institutions. NIH directly and indirectly supports more than 550,000 jobs across the country. It pays off: local communities see $2.56 of economic activity for every dollar invested in this research. NIH-funded research contributed to 354 out of 356 drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2010 to 2019. The FDA plays an intricate role in advancing the biomedical research ecosystem in the United States, by regulating, promoting, and supporting the approval of new drugs, biologics, and medical devices coming on the market.
Despite this, President Trump has systematically undermined NIH and the research it funds, as well as the FDA. He has terminated nearly 800 NIH grants across the country, cutting off more than $1.1 billion in essential research and trials. So far this year, he has slow walked roughly $2 billion in vital NIH funding that should be going out the door to fund the research that might discover the next treatment or cure that will change—or save—a patient’s life. Funding for Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, and cancer research are just a few examples of large multi-million-dollar research grants that we know are being held hostage. He has illegally sought to cut billions in funding for universities to conduct this vital research by illegally capping the indirect cost rate in direct violation of bipartisan appropriations law. President Trump has pushed out nearly 5,000 NIH employees and 4,000 FDA employees—decimating the very work responsible for discovering lifechanging treatments and cures and ensuring they can safely get to market. He also reportedly plans to propose to nearly halve NIH’s budget.
As a longtime appropriator and former Chair of the Senate HELP Committee, Murray has led Congressional efforts to boost biomedical research. Previously, over her years as Chair of the Labor-HHS Appropriations Subcommittee, Senator Murray secured billions of dollars in increases for biomedical research at NIH, and during her time as Chair of the HELP Committee she established the new ARPA-H research agency as part of her PREVENT Pandemics Act to advance some of the most cutting-edge research in the field. Senator Murray was also the lead Democratic negotiator of the bipartisan 21st Century Cures Act, which delivered a major federal investment to boost NIH research, among many other investments.
###
Next Article Previous Article