Illustration: Tiffany Herring/Axios
NIH's cut to indirect research costs will provide an early test of whether Republicans with major academic medical centers in their states push back against the Trump administration's government overhaul.
Why it matters: Research hubs are some of the biggest employers in certain states, and billions of dollars in cuts for overhead costs could have a ripple effect across regional economies, in addition to putting ongoing biomedical projects in jeopardy.
Catch up quick: NIH late Friday announced it's changing the way it reimburses institutions for overhead and administrative costs connected to research in order to save more than $4 billion.
- Starting Monday, it was due to cap the indirect cost rate on all new and current grants at 15% of the total cost. Reimbursements vary by institution and have averaged from 27% to 28%, with some including Harvard, Yale and Johns Hopkins receiving more than 60%.
- Grantees say that assistance with such costs is vital to keep research going, especially for institutions that don't have large endowments.
- The latest: A coalition of 22 state attorneys general sued Monday to halt the policy change, saying it violated appropriations law that's prohibited NIH from altering indirect cost rates without proper authorization since 2018.
Between the lines: So far, Republican pushback appears to be slow, but it could pick up this week if the policy stays in place and more lawmakers hear from academia.
- The extent of the protest will be a telling sign of whether they're willing to fight Elon Musk's broader "DOGE" efforts.
- "How Republicans respond will be critical," said Erik Fatemi, principal at Cornerstone Government Affairs. "If enough congressional Republicans, especially appropriators or leaders, were to speak out, that might have an impact on the administration."
What they're saying: Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said Monday that she opposes the move, calling the NIH cuts "poorly conceived" and "devastating." She said she had spoken to HHS secretary-designate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about them.
Sen. Katie Britt told AL.com over the weekend that "a smart, targeted approach" is needed in order to avoid affecting life-saving research.
- The University of Alabama campuses in Birmingham and Huntsville are some of the largest employers and research institutions in the state, per AL.com.
- Yet Sen. Chuck Grassley hailed the move, writing on X that he was glad to see the indirect cost percentage lowered because it was "just common sense" and taxpayers dollars need to be used wisely.
The other side: Congressional Democrats predictably blasted the move, stating that it would devastate biomedical research and put the U.S. behind other countries in scientific advancements.
- Senate Appropriations Ranking Member Patty Murray also said the change was illegal and arbitrary.
- "Trump and Elon are functionally forcing an indiscriminate funding cut for research institutions across the country that will be nothing short of catastrophic for so much of the lifesaving research patients and families are counting on."
