Even during this tense election year, bipartisan coalitions are taking steps to enhance national security, protect American-owned intellectual property and secure the country’s supply chain by lessening the nation’s dependence on biotechnology companies linked to the Chinese Communist Party.
In September, the House passed the BIOSECURE Act, with significant support from both parties. The bill prohibits federal agencies from contracting with five companies with clear ties to the Chinese Communist Party: WuXi AppTec, WuXi Biologics, Beijing Genomics Institute, MGI, and its subsidiary, Complete Genomics. The Senate will consider the BIOSECURE Act this fall.
But beyond simply divesting from companies linked to China, America now must double down on investments in its seedbeds of biotechnology innovation to shore up its domestic production, grow jobs, and strengthen our position in the global bioeconomy.
To do so, Congress needs to fully fund the CHIPS and Science Act, including the National Science Foundation’s Regional Innovation Engines and the Commerce Department’s Regional Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) programs, and maximize the impact of new agencies such as the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health.
Because of discretionary spending caps instituted as part of the 2023 budget deal, these critical programs have only been funded at a fraction of their authorized amounts. The Tech Hubs program, for example, has only received 5 percent of its total authorization, and the NSF has experienced funding shortfalls as well.
Moreover, the 2025 House budget proposes the the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health into the National Institutes of Health next year while cutting its programs by $1 billion.
These funding caps limit vital investments in the nation’s productive capacity, which are crucial to making the BIOSECURE Act a success.
Detractors of the BIOSECURE Act — including the five China-backed companies and their lobbyists — argue that their contributions to drug discovery and development processes are crucial for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and that limiting their ability to operate with American companies would stifle innovation in the sector.
The truth is, without strategic investments in the capabilities of America’s emergent biotech hubs, these companies have a valid argument. But the BIOSECURE Act does not mandate divestment from the targeted companies until 2032. Over the course of the next eight years, America must strengthen the domestic supply chain that renders robust biotech innovation and production.
The five China-backed companies the BIOSECURE Act targets effectively deliver services in three areas: genomic data and biobanks to advance personalized drug discovery and optimize clinical trial design (Beijing Genomics Institute, MGI, and Complete Genomics); contract-based research for drug development (WuXi) and biomanufacturing that synthesizes biologics and active pharmaceutical ingredients to produce drugs at scale (WuXi).
So, Congress’s ambition to break our dependence on this China-derived supply chain must be paired with an equal zeal for investing in domestic capabilities.
The good news is that Congress has already authorized the potential for major investments in key bioeconomy hubs through the Tech Hubs and Regional Innovation Engines programs, despite not yet fully funding them. These programs used a rigorous application process to designate innovation hubs that can be the seedbeds for America’s next-generation bioeconomy.
Instead of relying on WuXi Biologics and WuXi AppTec, global pharmaceutical companies could produce and manufacture in Richmond, Va., Kansas City, Mo. and many other places, building on strengths already present in those regions. For example, in Birmingham, Ala. and Baltimore, we find domestic drug discovery platforms that offer compelling alternatives to the Beijing Genomics Institute and MGI.
Meanwhile, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health was launched to be a translational science complement to the NIH’s strength in basic research. Folding it into the NIH and cutting its funding would weaken our bioeconomy at precisely the time we need to make bold bets on health solutions for all Americans.
Done right, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health will deliver transformative investments that strengthen biotech infrastructure across middle America — the very places that are proximate to some of the country’s most pressing and persistent health burdens.
We have only seen a sliver of the potential of these public investments because of the lack of funding from Congress. Legislators must finish the job they started. By fully funding the Regional Innovation Engines and Tech Hubs programs, they can realize the full potential of American innovation in this critical sector, hand in hand with the work of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health.
Such a mission can not only protect national security interests but also grow quality jobs in America’s frontier biotech economies.
Josh Carpenter is a nonresident senior fellow and Joseph Parilla is a senior fellow at Brookings Metro.
