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 S4815-4817)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 28, 2009
Cures Acceleration Network and National Institutes of Health Reauthorization Act of 2009 - Establishes the Cures Acceleration Network, an independent agency, to awards grants and contracts to eligible entities to accelerate the development of cures and treatments of diseases, including through the development of medical products and behavioral therapies. Defines "medical product" as a drug, device, biological product, or product that is a combination of drugs, devices, and biological products. Sets forth the functions of the Network.
Establishes the Cures Acceleration Network Review Board. Directs the Chairperson of the Board to award matching grants and contracts to eligible entities to: (1) accelerate the development of cures and treatments, including through the development of medical products, behavioral therapies, and biomarkers that demonstrate the safety or effectiveness of medical products; or (2) establish protocols that comply with the standards of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and otherwise meet regulatory requirements at all stages of development, manufacturing, review, approval, and safety surveillance of a medical product.
Sets forth provisions governing conflict of interest policies for the Network.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the Public Health Service Act to rename the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities as the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities.
Requires the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop and enforce NIH's conflict of interest policies and respond in a timely manner when such policies have been violated by a recipient of funds provided under a grant or contract.
Reauthorizes appropriations for NIH for FY2010-FY2012.
People & committees
Sen. Specter, Arlen [R-PA] · R–PA
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 S4815-4817)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4813-4814)
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.914 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.914 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.914 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.914 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.