On the recordJuly 10, 2015
While I appreciate the efforts of the amendment's sponsors, I cannot support the Young-Harris amendment. As currently drafted, the amendment threatens to undermine the independent peer review process that is the bedrock of NIH funding by injecting politics into the development and implementation of the prize competition. The amendment would create an innovation prize advisory board to assist the NIH Director in carrying out the prize competition that is composed of nine members, four of which are politically appointed. It would also take away resources from existing research grant programs and other research efforts at NIH. It would require NIH to put money on reserve for the prize competition, money that would go back into the Treasury instead of funding research if the prize is not won in a given fiscal year. While I am not opposed to the potential of setting up a prize-like system--in fact, NIH already has such authority--I would prefer to work with the sponsors on the language to find a more appropriate way to accomplish their goals. Therefore, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
