Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA)
Defense Biotechnology Strategy Act
A Democratic bill with 2 Republican cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is called the Defense Biotechnology Strategy Act. It tells the Secretary of Defense to make a strategy on the national security implications of emerging biotechnologies. The strategy must be submitted to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees no later than one year after the Act is enacted. It must include plans for expanding commercial biomanufacturing facilities and updating military specifications to use biotechnology-based products. The bill also requires plans for advance market commitments, wargaming exercises, and a biotechnology regulation science and technology program. Finally, it looks at how to work with NATO member countries on pooling purchasing power and sharing biotechnology research initiatives.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +6
Does this put more money into scientific research?
Directs the development of biotechnology research initiatives and grand challenges.
- Scored +5
Does this put more money into medical research?
The bill promotes research grand challenges and biotech development.
- Scored +5
Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?
Strongly encourages pooling purchasing power and research with NATO member countries.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what is spent on the military?
Establishing new networks and research challenges will likely increase defense spending.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2(b)(1) focuses on how the Department of Defense will develop and expand a network of commercial facilities for the biomanufacture of products critical for defense needs. This could benefit people by boosting the domestic manufacturing sector for biotechnology products.
-
Section 2(b)(6) includes the development of a biotechnology regulation science and technology program, along with digital infrastructure to support simplified regulation and biometrology tools. This might be a positive step for making regulatory processes simpler through new digital tools.
-
Section 2(b)(7) and Section 2(b)(8) outline plans for working with NATO member countries to pool purchasing power and coordinate research initiatives. These provisions could have positive outcomes by building stronger international relationships and combining research capabilities.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
Based on the provided text, there are no specific sections or provisions identified that outline negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Positive for biotech company owners through expanded commercial facilities and government agreements. Would students be better off under this? — Provides more research opportunities in emerging biotechnologies. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Increases opportunities in scientific research and biotech careers.
- Healthcare
- Does this put more money into medical research? — The bill promotes research grand challenges and biotech development. Does this make the country readier for the next outbreak? — Developing biomanufacturing capabilities and biotech strategies enhances national readiness for biological threats.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — Strongly encourages pooling purchasing power and research with NATO member countries. Does this favour talking over confrontation abroad? — Promotes international coordination on biotech for national security. Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Aggregate demand and pooling purchasing power with allies improves trade in biotech. Does this reduce what is spent on the military? — Establishing new networks and research challenges will likely increase defense spending.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — Expanding commercial biomanufacturing facilities is likely to create new jobs in the biotech sector. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Investment in emerging biotechnology and commercial facilities supports industrial growth. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Offtake agreements and market commitments can provide stability for biotech firms.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Directs the development of biotechnology research initiatives and grand challenges.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases the role of the Secretary of Defense in directing biotech strategy.
- 1/7/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/10/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Pete SessionsRepublican · Texas