PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3894-3899)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 7, 2008
Accelerating Cures Act of 2008 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to define "translational research" to mean research that transforms scientific discoveries arising from laboratory, clinical, or population studies into clinical application to reduce disease incidence, morbidity, and mortality.
Establishes a Pathways to Cures Subcommittee within the Office of Portfolio Analysis and Strategic Initiatives (OPASI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to help advise and direct translational research priorities.
Requires the Director of NIH to establish a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) on clinical effectiveness research. Requires the Director of FFRDC to establish an independent Clinical Effectiveness Advisory Board.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Director of OPASI to appoint a Director of Centralized Institutional Review Boards who shall establish and oversee the functioning and progress of a series of such Boards to serve as human subject safety and well-being custodians for multi-institutional clinical trials that are funded by public research dollars.
Requires the Director of NIH to: (1) commission the Institute of Medicine to study the rules that protect patient safety and anonymity; (2) examine informed consent processes; and (3) ensure that each institute and center of NIH has established a translational research training program.
Requires the Director of OPASI to develop a Translational Development Program for New Innovations to guide entities through the translational research development process.
Establishes the Translational Research Fund to consist of amounts appropriated for translational research priorities.
Requires each application for, and summary of, a project, grant, or contract from NIH to include a statement on the possible applications of the research for detecting, treating, or curing a health condition or disease state.
People & committees
Sen. Lieberman, Joseph I. [ID-CT] · ID–CT
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. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3894-3899)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3894)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.2988 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.2988 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.2988 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.2988 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.