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 · Mar 3, 2025
Scientific External Process for Educated Review of Therapeutics Act of 2025 or the Scientific EXPERT Act of 2025
This bill requires the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to facilitate and participate in externally led, science-focused drug development meetings to discuss the development of treatments for rare diseases and conditions.
The FDA must enter into an arrangement with the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA under which the foundation agrees to convene such meetings. Meetings must be held at least four times a year, and each meeting must focus on a different rare disease or condition.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The foundation must establish a permanent steering committee to review and recommend topics for each meeting. In evaluating potential topics, the committee must consider unmet therapeutic needs, patient population sizes for different diseases and conditions, and whether a disease or condition would benefit from clarity and alignment on drug development questions, among other factors.
In planning each meeting, the foundation must develop a list of medical experts, drug sponsors, scientific organizations, patient organizations, and other entities to be invited to participate. Representatives of the FDA’s review divisions must attend each meeting.
After each meeting, the foundation must make available a summary of the meeting noting areas of consensus, areas where additional clarification or information is needed, and next steps agreed upon with the FDA.
The bill also requires the FDA to indicate whether it incorporated any input from these meetings when approving a new drug or biologic.
People & committees
Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN] · D–MN
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.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.822 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.822 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.822 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.822 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.