PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 2, 2012
Spending Reductions through Innovations in Therapies Agenda Act of 2012 or the SPRINT Act - Amends the Public Health Service Act to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish the Spending Reductions through Innovations in Therapies Program (SPRINT Program) to support development of therapies to reduce spending by federal health care programs for high-cost chronic conditions. Requires the Program to: (1) accelerate advanced research and development of such therapies, and (2) encourage innovation in technologies that may assist such research to reduce the time and cost of therapy development.
Requires the Secretary to select the high-cost chronic conditions that shall be the focus of the Program from conditions among the top 10 leading causes of death designated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that have: (1) the highest current and projected cost to federal health care programs and high long-term care costs; (2) a likelihood of impairing the ability of an individual to carry out activities of daily living, which can result in the individual becoming dependent on caregivers; (3) a death rate that has increased and is projected to increase significantly in future years; and (4) a lack of existing therapies to prevent, control, or cure the condition or delay cognitive decline.
Sets forth the duties of the Secretary, including to: (1) partner with certain nonprofit strategic investment entities, (2) reduce the time and cost barriers between laboratory discoveries and clinical trials for therapies used to treat high-cost chronic conditions, and (3) facilitate innovative and expedited review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the therapies developed.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes a SPRINT Award Program, under which the Secretary may award contracts or grants to public, nonprofit, early stage companies or growth companies to support advanced research and the development of therapies. Sets forth matching fund requirements. Requires the Secretary to evaluate projects funded.
People & committees
Sen. Mikulski, Barbara A. [D-MD] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S324-326)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2069 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2069 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2069 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2069 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.