Big Pharma Has a Trump Problem
In an open letter sent June 9 to NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and key lawmakers, 92 NIH scientists warned the sweeping cuts could shutter campus labs, hollow out the biotech talent pipeline, and push jobs and billions in investment overseas.
White House spokesman Kush Desai defended the administration's approach to federal research, telling the Associated Press that Trump is focused on restoring a "Gold Standard" of science, not "ideological activism."
Newsweek has contacted the White House, NIH, and HHS via email for comment.
University labs across the country supply Big Pharma with a constant stream of breakthrough ideas and a talent pipeline of PhDs who know how to turn them into therapies.
"The industry of biotechnology is built on advances in academic labs," Richard DiMarchi, a professor of chemistry at Indiana University, told Newsweek, adding that there was "no way large companies can sustain this level of creativity and productivity without a vibrant academic research community."
This mutually beneficial relationship can be seen in Eli Lilly's planned $250 million infusion into Purdue, AbbVie's oncology alliance with the University of Chicago, and Harvard-AstraZeneca stem-cell projects—plus dozens of smaller sponsored-research deals.
"Universities also train the next generation of scientists who work in drug companies," Eric G. Campbell, a professor of medicine and director of research at the CU Center for Bioethics and Humanities, at the University of Colorado, told Newsweek.
"Research has shown that financial interactions between academics and industry are ubiquitous in biomedical research, medical education and the practice of medicine in the U.S.," he added.
Cities like Boston and San Francisco have "emerged as major hubs for biotech and pharma because of the quality and concentration of biomedical research conducted at universities such as Harvard, UCSF and Stanford," Ulrich Mueller, a professor of neuroscience and biology and director of developmental neuroscience at Johns Hopkins University, Maryland, told Newsweek.
As a result, Big Pharma companies, such as Novartis and Pfizer, have established major research facilities in Boston "to be in proximity to the hubs of discovery," he said.
Venture funds in those cities have fueled an "astonishing local biotech ecosystem that provides a direct pipeline for pharma," Mueller said, and the major founders of these biotech companies are often professors from academic institutions that "want to translate findings from their research labs funded by the NIH into cures."
"This has been a major driver of the American biomedical enterprise but is on the verge of being destroyed," he said. The ecosystem of science and drug discovery in the U.S. is now "endangered."
"The pharmaceutical industry is not equipped with the brain power or expertise to conduct basic research," Michael A. Santoro, professor of management and entrepreneurship at the Leavey School of Business and the Santa Clara University, told Newsweek.
"Even if it was somehow possible for the pharmaceutical industry to pour more billions of dollars into basic research, the payoff for the investment would be less impactful than university-conducted research," he added.
As a result, Santoro said that he thought Trump's cuts to university research would result in the costs of new drugs rising "astronomically as that will be the only way the pharmaceutical industry can justify replacing university research with private labs."
He added that the U.S. would also experience a "brain drain" as "researchers look for opportunities abroad or perhaps drop out of the economy altogether."
"The U.S. is on the verge to lose its pre-eminence in biomedical research and drug development," Mueller said.
The "cracks are already appearing" Mueller warned. Pfizer has recently made a deal with 3SBio in China to develop cancer medicine, with an upfront payment of $1.25 billion with milestones potentially increasing the deal to $4.8 billion.
"The loss is devastating because it has wide ranging impacts also for local economies and the job market," Mueller said. "Intellectual property and the benefits to the U.S. will move to other shores together with major investment of pharma and venture firms in companies abroad."
An Eli Lilly spokesperson told Newsweek: "We understand cuts will likely impact the research these labs conduct, which is not positive for the biopharmaceutical research ecosystem. However, these cuts should not impact Lilly's ability to keep our own discovery engine going which is a key priority for our company."
Newsweek has contacted Merck & Co., AbbVie, AstraZeneca, as well as Novartis and Pfizer, via email for comment.
Santoro said that the Trump administration's actions towards medical research will also "affect the quality of health care generally."
"Physicians have an ethical duty to practice science-based medicine. Without scientific research at the university level, the quality of medical care will decline," he said.
More widely, the cuts could also have "societal consequences to the nation's health and economic prosperity," DiMarchi said.
"It's a delicate network that links translation of breakthrough university discoveries to drug development and registration at global pharmaceutical companies, and as such should be approached with a 'first do no harm mentality'," he added.
Related Articles
Bernie Sanders Introduces Bill Backing RFK Jr., Elon Musk PriorityPharma PAC That Donated to Trump Breaks With Him Over Executive OrderWhat Trump's Executive Order Means for Medicare, MedicaidBernie Sanders Issues Warning About Trump's Drug Pricing Executive Order
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House Republicans give Trump a ‘Big Beautiful' July 4 by passing Medicaid-slashing megabill despite GOP rift
The House of Representatives on Thursday passed President Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' which features sweeping cuts to Medicaid and nutrition assistance programs, after a whirlwind 24 hours of last-minute arm twisting of holdout Republicans — and a record-breaking floor speech from Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. The final vote was a narrow margin of 218-214, with every Democrat and two Republicans —Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie and Pennsylvania Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick — voting against the measure. After Jeffries wrapped his eight-hour and 44-minute delaying tactic — which surpassed former GOP Speaker Kevin McCarthy's 'magic minute' speech record of eight hours and 32 minutes, set in 2021 when the House passed President Joe Biden's 'Build Back Better Act' — the House finally commenced its vote on Trump's bill. The "magic minute" procedure grants members unlimited time to speak after debate on a bill has concluded. 'We have a big job to finish,' said House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana. 'With one big beautiful bill we are going to make this country stronger, safer and more prosperous than ever before.' The bill will now be sent to Trump by the July 4 deadline he'd insisted upon with congressional Republicans in the House and Senate. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters after its passage that Trump would be signing the legislation at 5 pm on Friday in what she described as 'a big, beautiful signing ceremony' at the White House.' Leavitt said the bill's passage marked a 'victorious day for the American people' and predicted that the legislation would 'create an economic boom for the United States of America.' 'We're going to continue to bring in revenue, drive down our deficit, and we'll have more money back into the pockets of the American people. And this bill is an encapsulation of all of the policies that the president campaigned on and the American people voted on on Nov. 5 and entrusted the president, and Republicans, to enact. She called it 'a great day for our country and for the American people.' A senior White House official who worked on pushing the bill through Congress called the tax cut and spending package 'a historic achievement for the Republican Party and for President Trump' because the voluminous bill 'satisfies virtually every major campaign promise that President Trump made' during his 2024 campaign. 'It represents his keeping of his commitments to the American people, everything that we talked about, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime pay, no tax on seniors' Social Security, to securing the border, rebuilding our military. It's all in this bill,' said the official, who added that the stock markets appeared to be 'loving' the legislation because they were closing at all-time highs ahead of the July 4 holiday. It all came to a head after a day of grumbling from a handful of conservative Republicans who criticized the Senate version of the bill that was handed back to the House for passage just in time to meet Trump's July 4 deadline. But after meeting with the president and receiving promises from the White House — and an all-caps threat from Trump on Truth Social overnight — members of the hardline House Freedom Caucus, voted to push the bill through. Throughout the process, the group of rabble-rousers has often held out their votes, only to fold after speaking with Trump. Still, Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina, a member of the Freedom Caucus, insisted this was not a concession. 'The reason we have credibility, they know we'll vote 'no,'' Norman told The Independent. Norman said that he was disappointed that wind and solar tax credits or the $7,5000 tax credit for electric vehicles from the Inflation Reduction Act, the signature climate law signed by Joe Biden, were not completely phased out in the legislation. 'With that being said, we had enough assurance that the president was going to deal with them in his own way,' Norman said. 'I feel perfectly comfortable with that, which I wasn't before.' House members scrambled to make it to Washington after severe thunderstorms and inclement weather delayed travel for many from both parties. Some members drove to D.C. while Democrats held digital town halls to criticize the legislation. The vote came after the Senate spent a marathon 27 hours in the two days beforehand voting on amendments before the measure was tied at 50-50. Vice President JD Vance came in to cast the deciding tie-breaker. House Speaker Mike Johnson limited the number of amendments to get the bill to the president's desk. The bill's passage did not come easy, though. In the afternoon, the House held a vote to amend the rules for passage of the bill, which turned out to be the longest in the chamber's history. But Republicans soldiered on. Speaker Johnson called into Fox News in between whipping votes to reassure people the bill could pass by the July 4 deadline imposed by Trump. The rule vote finally passed at around 3.30am on Wednesday morning 219-213, with Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick the only member of the GOP to break ranks as the rest of the party's holdouts were persuaded to fall in line to set up a final floor vote. 'The bill is going to pass, they're going to vote for it, they're not opposed to the bill,' House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith told The Independent. 'Don't allow perfection to get in the way of greatness,' he said. 'And that is why they will vote for this bill, and that is why the president will be signed into law on July 4 and record that. See if I'm right.' The bill is one of the most sweeping pieces of Republican domestic policy legislation in history. Not only does it extend the 2017 tax cuts that Trump signed in his first presidency; it also includes money to hire 10,000 new agents for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and 3,000 Border Patrol agents, a core tenet of Trump's promise to conduct 'mass deportations' of undocumented immigrants. It also includes money to construct the barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border. The legislation further allows for more oil exploration and a massive increase in military spending. At its core, the package's priority is $4.5 trillion in tax breaks enacted in 2017 during Trump's first term that would expire if Congress failed to act, along with new ones. This includes allowing workers to deduct tips and overtime pay, and a $6,000 deduction for most older adults earning less than $75,000 a year. There's also a hefty investment, some $350 billion, in national security and Trump's deportation agenda and to help develop the 'Golden Dome' defensive system over the U.S. To help offset the lost tax revenue, the package includes $1.2 trillion in cutbacks to the Medicaid health care and food stamps, largely by imposing new work requirements, including for some parents and older people, and a major rollback of green energy tax credits. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the package will add $3.3 trillion to the deficit over the decade and 11.8 million more people will go without health coverage. The bill would require able-bodied adults without dependent children to work for Medicaid benefits and, in the coming years, would cap the level at which states can tax medical providers such as hospitals and nursing homes. The American Hospital Association warned it could lead to the closing of rural hospitals, which serve many Republican congressional districts. The act also imposes work requirements for SNAP recipients for able-bodied adults without dependent children. But it lowers the age at which children are considered dependent to 14 years old and would require states with high rates of overpayment or underpayment to shoulder part of the cost of administering SNAP. The legislation remains wildly unpopular, with polling showing a large amount of Americans disapprove of it. Rep. Vicente Gonzalez Jr., a Democrat who represents a district that also voted for Trump in 2024, said his district would be hit hard by the legislation. 'But I still feel, unfortunately, that people don't react until they feel the pain, and they're going to feel it pretty quick for this with this bill,' he told The Independent. Democrats will likely campaign against the bill in the coming months ahead of the midterm election, hoping to criticize the GOP for taking away healthcare benefits as a way to extend tax cuts. Republicans for their part already do not want to talk about the unpopular parts of the bill. When The Independent asked Rep. Nick Begich of Alaska about the side deal brokered by his Sen. Lisa Murkowski to shield the state from many of the provisions for SNAP and Medicaid during the rule vote, he did not speak and bolted onto the House floor. A second White House official credited Trump with being 'deeply involved' in both crafting the bill and helping move it through a narrowly-divided House and Senate along with help from his economic team. The official called Trump 'the motive force behind this legislation' based on his 'unique and powerful relationship with lawmakers' going back to the transition period after he won last year's election, during which he spent 'dinner after dinner' engaging with members. 'The President's focus on relationships carried us through in kind of a cascade here, when it came to be crunch time and the President was asking people to take tough votes, to come together, to unify, and ultimately, through late night phone calls,' they said. 'He is the omnipresent force behind this legislation, obviously.' The official added that Vice President JD Vance had been a 'key player' as well, including by 'working behind the scenes constantly in the Senate, hearing from senators, understanding their concerns, [and] making sure that the White House was responsive to them.'
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The House just passed Donald Trump's ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill.' Here's what that means for you
The GOP's budget package is on its way to President Donald Trump's desk after Speaker Mike Johnson called his colleagues' bluffs and put the Senate's package on the floor for a vote Thursday afternoon. It passed with a thin but steady 218-214 margin after conservatives in the chamber who were upset with changes made to the bill by the Senate folded one last time. So too did all the various Republicans who drew lines in the sand regarding cuts to Medicaid benefits or eligibility standards. The bill was passed through the budget reconciliation process in the Senate, meaning that it required only a simple majority to pass. That process also barred the bill from containing explicit policy provisions — though money itself is policy, and this legislation still provides plenty of funding for the president's political priorities. Here's a look at what made it in the final version, and how it could mean real changes for millions of Americans: At its core, the package's priority is $4.5 trillion in tax breaks enacted in 2017 during Trump's first term that would expire if Congress failed to act, along with new ones. That includes allowing workers to deduct tips and overtime pay, and a $6,000 deduction for most older adults earning less than $75,000 a year. The first and most expensive provision of the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' it is actually an extension of the biggest piece of legislation to pass during Trump's first presidency. Then, after a failed bid to repeal the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), Trump and his Republican allies turned to a more politically appealing target: tax cuts. The result was a tax bill passed by the House and Senate before the end of 2017, notable for its changes to the corporate tax rate (setting a flat rate at 21%) and lowering individual income taxes, though the cuts were found by analysts to favor wealthier households. Republicans, at the time, projected that it would not add to the federal debt, though it did. Sound familiar? The insistences from GOP leaders today that the OBBA won't add to the national debt were the same promises made by Republicans in 2017, who claimed that resurgent economic growth spurred on by Donald Trump's magic touch would make up the gap. Now, GOP leaders have the ironic task of selling that argument when the most expensive part of the OBBA is an extension of the deficit-swelling Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. This time around, Republicans upped the game by temporarily expanding the child tax credit and removing taxes on some tipped wages. There's also a hiked cap on state and local tax deductions (SALT), part of a deal cut to get Republicans from blue states on board. The cap was boosted from the current $10,000 a year to $40,000, though it will revert in 2030. Somebody's gotta pay for all of this — or at least part of it. That's where Medicaid and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, come in. Both programs will be subject to new work requirements under the law, with Medicaid spending alone estimated to fall by just over $1 trillion over the next decade in the latest analysis from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). For Americans on the program, that means new reporting requirements and paperwork. Individual eligibility checks will still be handled by state-level agencies, which will set their own guidelines for determining whether recipients are in compliance. SNAP benefits will now be withheld from adults with children who do not return to work, if their youngest child is 14 years or older. The legislation also requires state governments to pick up some of the tab for SNAP payments if their in-state payment error rate is above a certain threshold. Another carve-out in the bill, this time to secure the vote of Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, delays this provision in her state. The closest thing to a true policy provision in the GOP bill and one of the least-reported aspects, this section would turn America's immigration enforcement division into one of the most well-funded law enforcement organizations in the entire world. The bill delivers an absolutely massive increase in funding meant to transform the size and scope of immigration enforcement in the United States. Among the provisions: $46.6 billion for completion of the border fencing Trump demanded during his first term; $29.9 billion for ICE enforcement operations including the hiring of up to 10,000 new agents; $45 billion for the construction of new detention facilities. Put simply, the Trump administration is set to have the resources it needs for a massive upscaling in the daily number of arrests and raids that ICE agents are carrying out across the country. Utterly villainized by the right (to a questionable degree of success) after it was introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey, the 'Green New Deal' never actually became law in any form. That doesn't stop Republicans from insisting otherwise, however, and many have latched on to the phrase as they pushed to roll back electric vehicle tax credits passed as part of the Inflation Reduction Act under Joe Biden's presidency. Those provisions originated in Biden's signature 'Build Back Better' legislation, which failed early into the Democratic president's term thanks to an inability of Democrats to pull two centrist members of their Senate caucus into line. The OBBB strips tax incentives for wind, solar and other renewable energy projects by 2027 and gives developers stringent requirements to claim them. And electric vehicle makers like Elon Musk will also be hit because the bill ends EV tax credits of up to $7,500 at the end of September that had been scheduled to last through 2032. That was a big incentive for potential electric car buyers This part of the bill is a gift to two people: Mike Johnson and John Thune. The GOP leaders have watched members in both chambers balk against raising the debt limit time and time again, causing headaches for congressional leadership and sapping the time and political capital of the entire Legislative Branch. The just-passed legislation raises the debt ceiling by $5t trillion, averting at least one deadline later this summer. There's also a hefty investment, some $350 billion, in national security and Trump's deportation agenda and to help develop the Israeli Iron Dome-like 'Golden Dome' defensive system over the U.S. It's part of a $150bn surge in defense spending in the package described as a 'one-time' boost to help the Pentagon fund shipbuilding, munitions acquisition and other priorities.
Newsweek
30 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Elon Musk Touts 'Laser-Focus' Plan for How New Party Can Control Congress
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Elon Musk floated a proposal for how his new political party could build power in Congress in upcoming elections. Newsweek reached out to Musk for comment via the Tesla press email. Why It Matters Musk left the Trump administration in May and has since proposed creating a new political party called the "America Party" amid his feud with President Donald Trump over the "Big Beautiful Bill," which Congress voted to pass on Thursday. Third parties have struggled to break through in the United States, where the Democratic and Republican parties have for decades held a lock on Washington—despite frustration with both parties among many Americans. But Musk, the world's wealthiest person, has considerable funds to support a new party if he chooses to do so. What to Know Musk on Friday took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to suggest how the America Party could build power and hold considerable sway in Congress. The Fourth of July, also known as Independence Day, is the "perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!" Musk wrote. The new party could "laser-focus" on two or three seats in the Senate and eight to 10 seats in the House of Representatives to build enough power to play a key role in determining which legislation makes it through, Musk wrote. Elon Musk attends the Viva Technology conference in Paris, France on June 16, 2023. Elon Musk attends the Viva Technology conference in Paris, France on June 16, 2023. Chesnot/Getty Images "Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people," he wrote. His comments come after a new poll found that 40 percent of voters say they would consider backing his party. The Quantus Insights poll of 1,000 registered voters from June 30 to July 2 found that 40 percent of voters, including many Republicans, would consider supporting the party. Why Third Parties Struggle in the U.S. — Political Expert Grant Davis Reeher, a political science professor at Syracuse University, told Newsweek there are "several structural hurdles to creating and maintaining a viable third party." "The most significant is that with some exceptions at the local levels, our legislatures and executive elections use geographically defined districts that are represented by one person, who is elected by finishing first in the field, regardless of the size of the plurality.," he said. "We also replicate that system for president through the Electoral College, and the practice of the states, except for Nebraska and Maine, to award all their electoral votes to the candidate finishing first, regardless of the size of their plurality." This means that parties that can't compete to finish first have "little to offer their voters" and "have a hard time sustaining themselves, even after they are created," he said. People's range of political opinions in the U.S. tends to be narrower than in other countries, so it's harder for another party to break through, according to Reeher. "We have tended to have a broad consensus that argues over two different flavors of similar things," he said. "No one is really arguing for the elimination of Medicare or Social Security, for instance, and no one is arguing for genuine socialism (though the latter may be changing). What would a middle party be based on, policy-wise?" It's more likely that the two main parties will work on figuring out better ways to appeal to the middle, Reeher said. What People Are Saying Quantus Insights wrote in a blog post: "The signal is clear: a large slice of the electorate is open to something new, something disruptive. This is not about Musk. It's about the growing sense that the existing order is failing to represent the country as it truly is, or wants to be." Musk wrote in June: "If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day. Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE." Political Scientist Larry Sabato told CNN: "Well, certainly it's possible, particularly for the world's richest person. However, it is very difficult to do. I don't think Elon Musk has really looked into the procedures of creating a political party. Those of us who study such things for decades know that you have to be willing to spend an enormous amount of time and money, do careful planning. Will Elon Musk really stick with it?" What Happens Next Polymarket betting odds currently have a 45 percent chance that Musk will create his new party by December 31 and a 39 percent chance that he will establish the party by the end of the month.
