Texas Senate advances bill to start a $3 billion dementia research fund
The Texas Senate on Wednesday advanced to the House a bill that would create America's largest brain health research center.
Senate Bill 5, by Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, would create the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. Senate Joint Resolution 3, which would require voter approval if passed by the Legislature, would fund it with $3 billion in surplus revenue. This funding is intended to attract physicians, researchers, and experts in the field of dementia to Texas. This institute would research all brain diseases, not just dementia.
Under the bill, the institute would be governed by a board of physicians and scientists with expertise in dementia research. Grants could be awarded for projects addressing the causes, prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation of dementia patients, as well as new medicines and facilities to help treat patients. Following the initial $3 billion in general revenue, future appropriations into the institute would be capped at $300 million annually.
'I can't think as a body, as a legislature, that we could make a wiser, more prudent, better investment for the people of Texas and future generations,' Huffman said from the Senate floor prior to the vote.
One of the institute's primary duties will be awarding grants. All grant proposals must undergo a peer review, and the oversight committee must approve final grant awards to ensure fairness in the grant-making process.
Sen. Kelly Hancock, R-North Richland Hills, during the discussion of the bill on Wednesday, shared that his father lived eight years with dementia before passing away last year, and it's a disease he wouldn't wish on anyone. He said that despite his personal experience, he didn't believe funding a dementia center was the government's role.
'My vote is not a vote of support. It's just a vote of recognizing that we need to focus on other things as a government, and it concerns me as we add some of these on,' said Hancock, who joined Sen. Bob Hall, R-Galveston, in voting against the legislation.
Huffman responded by saying she understood his point, but she believes the fund is worthy of investment from the state's surplus of dollars.
'There are people living today because of some of the research breakthroughs in cancer. If we can do the same thing with this and help prevention and research, it seems like it could be the best money we're spending,' she said.
Government spending has become a hot topic in the state and the nation as President Donald Trump's administration has attempted to cut medical research funding.
In February, the National Institute of Health released a notice of an updated policy that would strip research groups of hundreds of millions of dollars and place a 15% indirect cost rate on all new and existing grant awards received by research institutions.
U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley in Boston on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from cutting medical research after a litany of lawsuits, including one filed by 22 state attorneys general along with universities, hospitals, and research institutions nationwide to stop the cuts, saying they would endanger patients. Texas was not among the plaintiffs.
'While other research opportunities may diminish, the creation and funding of (the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas) will position Texas to be a leader in dementia-related research,' Huffman said in an emailed statement to The Texas Tribune on Thursday.
The dementia program is modeled after the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas which voters approved in 2009 with $3.7 billion and voters again approved in 2019 an additional $3 billion. The $6 billion cancer research institute is the largest cancer research organization in the country and the second largest worldwide.
The institute issues up to $300 million annually for cancer research and prevention projects, according to Kristen Doyle, CEO of the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute. It has recruited 324 researchers to Texas; supported the establishment, expansion, or relocation of 74 companies to Texas; and has provided 10 million prevention services, reaching all Texas counties.
'I believe we can follow this success and position Texas as a national leader in combating dementia and related disorders, accelerating groundbreaking research and improving the lives of millions of Texans,' Huffman told fellow lawmakers.
In 2012, allegations arose that millions of taxpayer dollars were distributed in grants without proper peer review, briefly engulfing the cancer institute in scandal.
Huffman said lawmakers have learned lessons from creating the cancer research institute, which should make creating a dementia institute much smoother.
'Everyone who was around will admit that the (cancer institute) had a rocky start, but those problems were resolved with legislation and oversight, and all of that has been incorporated in this legislation,' she said. 'We worked closely with the (cancer institute) as we wrote this bill and took suggestions from them so we can go full speed right off the starting gate.'
Doyle said the merit-based, peer-reviewed grant process is central to their national reputation for integrity and transparency in funding groundbreaking projects.
Huffman said that Texas already has the third-most dementia patients in the country, almost half a million, and last year, state Medicare costs for dementia care alone topped $4 billion.
'There is no better place than Texas to take on this challenge,' Huffman said.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick made the research institute a top bill for the session. He says that Texas' size and economic strength allow it to take on big projects like this.
'Texas, with our vast resources, has an opportunity to make a positive difference in the lives of millions,' he said in a news release.
Alzheimer's, a degenerative brain disease, is the most common form of dementia, accounting for about 80% of cases, according to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. Alzheimer's symptoms — memory loss and the inability to perform simple tasks — tend to develop in the mid-to-late 60s and occur when clumps of abnormal proteins block the communication of brain cells. Symptoms can be mild at first and worsen over time.
The Texas Department of State Health Services reports that 459,000 Texans have been diagnosed with Alzheimer's, about 12% of the state's population over the age of 65. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, this has cost the state approximately $24 billion in caregiver time.
We can't wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more.
Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025.
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rep. Sarah McBride Details Unique Bond with AOC Over the ‘Spotlight' They've Both Faced in Congress (Exclusive)
Rep. Sarah McBride tells PEOPLE that AOC is "a friend and someone who I have turned to for advice" during her first term in the House In a powerful conversation with AOC featured in the State of Firsts documentary about her run for Congress, McBride discusses the pressures she faces as the first openly trans congresswoman State of Firsts premieres June 7 at the Tribeca Festival and screens through June11Rep. Sarah McBride has a strong ally in Congress in one of the House's most visible figures: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. McBride, 34, tells PEOPLE that AOC, 35, has been a source of support since she began her first term in Congress in January. McBride, who made history when she became the first openly transgender person to be elected to the House in November 2024, is the subject of the new State of Firsts documentary from director Chase Joynt, which follows her campaign for Congress. In one scene from the documentary filmed after she won her seat as a U.S. representative from Delaware, McBride and AOC sit down in her office for a chat about "firsts." While speaking to PEOPLE ahead of State of First's Saturday June 7 premiere at the Tribeca Festival, McBride detailed her important bond with the lawmaker. "She's definitely become a friend and someone who I have turned to for advice. She entered Congress with a profile that exceeds mine with a lot of attention," McBride says. "And you know, it wasn't always easy for her." AOC made history in 2018 as the youngest women ever elected to Congress and currently represents New York's 14th congressional district. But in her first term, she said she faced backlash for her outfits and was treated like an intern. McBride says AOC's struggles in her first term have strengthened their connection. "I have often gone to her as one of the few people who knows what it's like coming in as a new member, as a freshman and having a spotlight on you that exceeds what most freshmen have," McBride says, noting, "The challenge of navigating a new place, a new workplace with that spotlight, with those attacks, there are very few people who have that experience." During the meeting between the two congresswomen featured in State of Firsts, the Delaware lawmaker tells AOC she's "struggling with protecting my voice and my ability to be seen and heard authentically for who I am and what I am here to focus on, and the inevitable pool that others are trying to pull me in." Ocasio-Cortez nods as she replies, "What people don't see and what they don't really experience is that being the first means being the only." She continues, "The immense amount of expectation placed on anyone who's a first, in my experience, that is not something that goes away." She then becomes heated over critics who have attacked McBride for her gender identity, telling her, "What they go after is your essential dignity as a human being. And, to be frank, that's what really pisses me off about this." "I want to respect your autonomy and I want to respect your story and how you want to handle this for yourself, but I also want to clock these motherf------," she exclaims. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. In a moment also included in State of Firsts, AOC hits back after the House bans trans people from using the Capitol's single-sex bathrooms that match their gender identity, calling the proposal "disgusting" in an interview that first aired on Spectrum News. "All it does is allow these Republicans to go around and bully any woman who isn't wearing a skirt because they think she might not look woman enough,' she says in the interview. While speaking with PEOPLE, McBride says AOC is someone she has "come to rely on for advice," adding, "She certainly has become a friend and I really deeply respect her." State of Firsts premieres at Tribeca Festival on June 7. Read the original article on People
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's tariffs could pay for his tax cuts -- but it likely wouldn't be much of a bargain
The Congressional Budget Office, the government's nonpartisan arbiter of tax and spending matters, says the One Big Beautiful Bill, passed by the House last month and now under consideration in the Senate, would increase federal budget deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. That is because its tax cuts would drain the government's coffers faster than its spending cuts would save money. By bringing in revenue for the Treasury, on the other hand, the tariffs that Trump announced through May 13 — including his so-called reciprocal levies of up to 50% on countries with which the United States has a trade deficit — would offset the budget impact of the tax-cut bill and reduce deficits over the next decade by $2.5 trillion. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up So it's basically a wash. Advertisement That's the budget math anyway. The real answer is more complicated. Actually using tariffs to finance a big chunk of the federal government would be a painful and perilous undertaking, budget wonks say. 'It's a very dangerous way to try to raise revenue,' said Kent Smetters of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model, who served in President George W. Bush's Treasury Department. Trump has long advocated tariffs as an economic elixir. He says they can protect American industries, bring factories back to the United States, give him leverage to win concessions over foreign governments — and raise a lot of money. He's even suggested that they could replace the federal income tax, which now brings in about half of federal revenue. Advertisement 'It's possible we'll do a complete tax cut,'' he told reporters in April. 'I think the tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax.'' Economists and budget analysts do not share the president's enthusiasm for using tariffs to finance the government or to replace other taxes. 'It's a really bad trade,'' said Erica York, the Tax Foundation's vice president of federal tax policy. 'It's perhaps the dumbest tax reform you could design.'' For one thing, Trump's tariffs are an unstable source of revenue. He bypassed Congress and imposed his biggest import tax hikes through executive orders. That means a future president could simply reverse them. 'Or political whims in Congress could change, and they could decide, 'Hey, we're going revoke this authority because we don't think it's a good thing that the president can just unilaterally impose a $2 trillion tax hike,' '' York said. Or the courts could kill his tariffs before Congress or future presidents do. A federal court in New York has already struck down the centerpiece of his tariff program — the reciprocal and other levies he announced on what he called 'Liberation Day'' April 2 — saying he'd overstepped his authority. An appeals court has allowed the government to keep collecting the levies while the legal challenge winds its way through the court system. Economists also say that tariffs damage the economy. They are a tax on foreign products, paid by importers in the United States and usually passed along to their customers via higher prices. They raise costs for U.S. manufacturers that rely on imported raw materials, components and equipment, making them less competitive than foreign rivals that don't have to pay Trump's tariffs. Advertisement Tariffs also invite retaliatory taxes on U.S. exports by foreign countries. Indeed, the European Union this week threatened 'countermeasures'' against Trump's unexpected move to raise his tariff on foreign steel and aluminum to 50%. 'You're not just getting the effect of a tax on the U.S. economy,' York said. 'You're also getting the effect of foreign taxes on U.S. exports.'' She said the tariffs will basically wipe out all economic benefits from the One Big Beautiful Bill's tax cuts. Smetters at the Penn Wharton Budget Model said that tariffs also isolate the United States and discourage foreigners from investing in its economy. Foreigners see U.S. Treasurys as a super-safe investment and now own about 30% of the federal government's debt. If they cut back, the federal government would have to pay higher interest rates on Treasury debt to attract a smaller number of potential investors domestically. Higher borrowing costs and reduced investment would wallop the economy, making tariffs the most economically destructive tax available, Smetters said — more than twice as costly in reduced economic growth and wages as what he sees as the next-most damaging: the tax on corporate earnings. Tariffs also hit the poor hardest. They end up being a tax on consumers, and the poor spend more of their income than wealthier people do. Even without the tariffs, the One Big Beautiful Bill slams the poorest because it makes deep cuts to federal food programs and to Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income Americans. After the bill's tax and spending cuts, an analysis by the Penn Wharton Budget Model found, the poorest fifth of American households earning less than $17,000 a year would see their incomes drop by $820 next year. The richest 0.1% earning more than $4.3 million a year would come out ahead by $390,070 in 2026. Advertisement 'If you layer a regressive tax increase like tariffs on top of that, you make a lot of low- and middle-income households substantially worse off,'' said the Tax Foundation's York. Overall, she said, tariffs are 'a very unreliable source of revenue for the legal reasons, the political reasons as well as the economic reasons. They're a very, very inefficient way to raise revenue. If you raise a dollar of a revenue with tariffs, that's going to cause a lot more economic harm than raising revenue any other way.''
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The changes coming to Trump's 'big beautiful bill have little to do with Elon Musk
Washington was on two parallel tracks this past week when discussing President Trump's "big, beautiful bill." On one front: The nation's capital was transfixed by a seismic fight between Elon Musk and President Trump, centered on the cost of the $3 trillion tax and spending bill. On another front: Republican leaders steadily advanced the pricey package with only a few changes apparently on offer. "Pedal to the metal," Senate Majority Leader John Thune offered in a speech Thursday near the height of the Musk drama — ignoring promises from the world's richest man to oust lawmakers who didn't join his effort to kill the bill. Republicans instead appeared to move closer to passage. They previewed changes that will be of interest to taxpayers and businesses, but with little to fulsomely address the critique from Musk and others around the package's price tag. In spite of Musk's campaign and multiple government and independent analyses that found at least $2.4 trillion in new red ink, Thune dismissed Musk this week by saying "we're a long ways down this track" and that his party is "rowing in the same direction." Thune may be overstating things a touch, with a vocal group of fiscal conservatives emboldened by Musk suggesting they will vote no. But Republican leaders from the president on down echoed Thune's position throughout the week. Stifel's Brian Gardner offered a bottom line in a note this past week, suggesting the fighting "makes for great TV and fodder ... but it is unlikely to fundamentally change the composition of the tax bill." "Musk's sway among Republican voters is limited," he added. The week saw a flurry of negotiations over changes to the House package, but, perhaps Washington being Washington, even the cost-saving changes appear to have been immediately spoken for. A meeting on Wednesday with the president, Thune, and members of the Senate Finance Committee ended with a focus on two changes. The first could save significant money by paring back a $40,000 tax deduction in the House bill for state and local taxes (SALT). Any changes there will face fierce opposition when the bill returns to the House, but the Washington Post reported this week that Trump has even indicated he is willing to lower the deduction. But any savings there may be quickly eaten up by the second bit of news this week, which concerns making some business tax incentives permanent. These tax deductions to businesses involve property depreciation, interest expenses, and R&D and are currently temporary in the House package. But an array of key Senators are keen to make them permanent (and more expensive). It's still a matter of some debate, with some hawks like Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin having told reporters he is looking to keep those tax breaks temporary and that Trump isn't sold. Johnson had emerged as a fierce critic of the package over spending and is also threatening to reform or break the package into different parts. He would need at least three Republican senators to join him and stand up to what is expected to be a fierce White House pressure campaign. Another key business-world change in the offing that emerged this week involves a provision that says no state may make its own law to regulate artificial intelligence in the coming decade. The need for changes there became evident when Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia acknowledged she hadn't been aware of the provision when she voted yes in the House, but that she would flip to no if it stayed in place. Those proposed revision — seen this week as part of a larger spectrum package released by the Senate Commerce Committee — would change the House plan for a 10-year outright ban to a system that blocks some federal broadband funding if a state passes certain AI laws. Tech companies will be watching those developments closely, but they're not expected to have much impact on the bill's price tag. Another possible change could actually push up the price tag, with a growing debate around changes in the House bill to Section 899 of the IRS code, focused on what Republicans call "discriminatory foreign countries." The provision would allow the president to impose new taxes to combat the practices. Removing that change could cut into future government revenues, allowing the president to levy fewer taxes as a result. Other changes could also be coming that might increase the price tag, with some senators still concerned that current cost-saving measures go too far. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri has been outspoken on one of the key changes around limiting Medicaid benefits, writing in a recent New York Times op-ed that cuts will hurt the working class and that the core of the issue is "will Republicans be a majority party of working people or a permanent minority speaking only for the C-suite?" Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
