Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
This bill amends section 498B(e) of the Public Health Service Act to broaden the statutory definition of “valuable consideration” in the prohibition on sale or transfer of human fetal tissue. The new definition explicitly includes payments, gifts, waived fees, forgiven loans, transfers of items or services without customary charge, and payments tied to transportation, processing, storage, or quality control of fetal tissue.
Progressives emphasize research and public-health harms
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory amendment that effectively and specifically redefines 'valuable consideration' in the referenced prohibition.
This bill amends section 498B(e) of the Public Health Service Act to broaden the statutory definition of “valuable consideration” in the prohibition on sale or transfer of human fetal tissue.
The new definition explicitly includes payments, gifts, waived fees, forgiven loans, transfers of items or services without customary charge, and payments tied to transportation, processing, storage, or quality control of fetal tissue.
The change would make routine reimbursements and many ancillary payments fall within the statutory prohibition.
Narrow statutory tweak increases legal restrictions on fetal tissue use—popular with some coalitions but highly controversial, reducing bipartisan Senate prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory amendment that effectively and specifically redefines 'valuable consideration' in the referenced prohibition. The core mechanism is clear and correctly integrated into the existing statute, but the text omits fiscal acknowledgment, implementation specifics beyond the statutory amendment, and explicit oversight or exception rules.
Progressives emphasize research and public-health harms
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize research and public-health harms
Likely to view the bill negatively.
They would see the broader definition as a significant restriction on biomedical research and a way to indirectly curb reproductive-health services.
They would emphasize harms to public health research and call for narrow exceptions.
Mixed reaction: supports preventing profit from fetal tissue but worries about unintended consequences.
Would seek clarifying language and narrow carve-outs to protect public-health research and operational reimbursements.
Would request regulatory guidance and cost analysis before full support.
Likely to view the bill positively as closing a perceived loophole that allowed lucrative transactions tied to fetal tissue.
Sees it as a practical step to prevent commercialization and align policy with pro-life priorities.
Wants firm enforcement.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow statutory tweak increases legal restrictions on fetal tissue use—popular with some coalitions but highly controversial, reducing bipartisan Senate prospects.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize research and public-health harms
Narrow statutory tweak increases legal restrictions on fetal tissue use—popular with some coalitions but highly controversial, reducing bip…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused statutory amendment that effectively and specifically redefines 'valuable consideration' in the referenced prohibition. The core mechanism is clear and c…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.