On March 5, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, President Trump’s nominee for Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), appeared before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) for his confirmation hearing. Dr. Bhattacharya earned his MD and PhD in economics from Stanford University where he is currently a Professor of Health Policy. He gained national attention in 2020 for his controversial viewpoints on measures intended to curb the spread of COVID-19, including lockdowns.
Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-LA) opened the hearing by highlighting the public’s loss of trust in public health institutions and stressing the need for transparency. He praised Dr. Bhattacharya’s support for open debate among scientists who disagree and looks forward to working with him on NIH reform.
Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-VT) raised concerns about Dr. Bhattacharya’s authority if confirmed, questioning whether Elon Musk, head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), would wield decision making power instead. Just last week, for the first time since taking office, President Trump set limits on Musk’s power, stating that agency secretaries will hold decision making authority, with Musk’s team serving only in an advisory role. NIH has faced major setbacks under the Trump administration, including layoffs and proposed funding cuts. (For more details, read our previous article “What’s Happening at NIH”.)
Next, Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) introduced Dr. Bhattacharya, praising his alternative suggestions for handling the COVID-19 epidemic. Ricketts claimed that Nebraska benefited both economically and educationally by implementing Dr. Bhattacharya’s recommendations, which considered how lockdowns would impact various aspects of the community, including educational performance rates.
In his opening statement, Dr. Bhattacharya acknowledged NIH’s critical role in his career and expressed deep respect and admiration for its scientists and staff. He outlined five goals for NIH if he is confirmed:
- NIH should focus on research that solves the American chronic disease crisis.
- NIH-supported science should be replicable, reproducible, and generalizable.
- NIH should establish a culture of respect for free speech in science and scientific dissent.
- NIH must recommit to its mission to fund the most innovative bio-medical research agenda possible to improve Americans’ health.
- NIH must embrace and vigorously regulate risky research that has the possibility of causing a pandemic.
Dr. Bhattacharya stated that he intends to advocate for increased openness and free speech within the NIH, highlighting the ongoing debate over the future of scientific discourse and government accountability. While encouraging, FABBS notes that despite similar promises, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy’s recent decisions have contradicted his commitment to transparency (see FABBS article).
As the hearing progressed, FABBS closely monitored comments and questions related to the cap on facilities and administrative (F&A) costs, early career research, NIH restructuring, and vaccines.
Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) raised concerns about the 15 percent cap on F&A costs, which is far below the rates many institutions currently receive. Murray noted Stanford’s cap is 55 percent, and both Collins and Baldwin argued the cap violates appropriations law. Dr. Bhattacharya responded that he would “follow the law” regarding F&A cost allocation.
Baldwin, Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services (HHS), also voiced concerns about early-career researchers and the cancellation of agency council advisory meetings, which disrupts grant distribution. Dr. Bhattacharya repeatedly mentioned that, if confirmed, he would need to assess the situation with NIH personnel, as it is difficult to make definitive statements from the outside.
Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) addressed NIH restructuring and Dr. Bhattacharya’s stance on decentralization. Dr. Bhattacharya emphasized decentralization’s importance in “fostering diverse ideas to address uncertainties.” (See FABBS article on changes to the NIH review process.)
Senator Cassidy, a physician and vaccine advocate, emphasized the need to avoid using taxpayer money and NIH resources on further research into the disproven link between vaccines and autism, as strong data has already refuted this claim.” Vaccines were also a topic of discussion during Kennedy’s hearing. It seems Kennedy is already breaking his promise to “protect the public health benefit of vaccination” with the latest news of the termination of NIH grants for studying vaccine hesitancy (see FABBS article).
On March 13, the committee voted along party lines, 12-11, to advance Dr. Bhattacharya’s nomination to the full Senate for final confirmation.
{Watch the Full Hearing Here} {Read Dr. Bhattacharya’s Testimony Here}
