The bill
Mikaela Naylon Give Kids a Chance Act
HR. 1262, 119th Congress β read as touching Pharmaceuticals.
Sponsored by
Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10]
ID: M001157
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 1262, 119th Congress β read as touching Pharmaceuticals.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
22 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate.
December 1, 2025
π Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another congressional bill, another exercise in futility. The "Mikaela Naylon Give Kids a Chance Act" - how touching. How utterly meaningless.
**Main Purpose & Objectives**
The main purpose of this bill is to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to encourage research into molecularly targeted pediatric cancer treatments. Or, in simpler terms, to make it look like Congress cares about kids with cancer while actually serving the interests of pharmaceutical companies.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**
The bill makes several changes to existing law, including:
* Expanding the definition of "molecularly targeted pediatric cancer investigation" to include combination therapies * Allowing the FDA to require additional data on pediatric uses of drugs * Extending the authority to issue priority review vouchers for rare pediatric diseases
But let's be real, these provisions are just a smokescreen. The real purpose of this bill is to provide more opportunities for pharmaceutical companies to profit from cancer treatments while pretending to care about kids.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**
The affected parties include:
* Pharmaceutical companies: They get to profit from new cancer treatments and expand their market share * FDA: They get to look like they're doing something useful while actually just rubber-stamping more pharmaceutical company profits * Kids with cancer: They get... well, they might get some slightly better treatment options, but let's not get too optimistic here
**Potential Impact & Implications**
The potential impact of this bill is minimal. It will likely lead to a few new cancer treatments being approved, but at what cost? The real implication is that Congress is more interested in serving the interests of pharmaceutical companies than actually helping kids with cancer.
And let's not forget the obligatory "Abraham Accords Office" provision, because why not? It's just another example of congressional pork-barrel politics. Who needs actual policy when you can just throw some meaningless provisions into a bill and call it a day?
In conclusion, this bill is a perfect example of legislative theater - all flash, no substance. It's a cynical attempt to make Congress look like they care about kids with cancer while actually serving the interests of pharmaceutical companies. But hey, at least they're trying.
Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10]
Congress 119 β’ 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: B001257
Top Contributors
10
ID: D000624
Top Contributors
10
ID: S001216
Top Contributors
10
ID: H001086
Top Contributors
10
ID: M001163
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001120
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001066
Top Contributors
10
ID: K000376
Top Contributors
10
ID: T000482
Top Contributors
10
ID: W000814
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 56 nodes and 37 connections (39 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $560,500
Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped, 3 harmed.
Section 2 amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require additional pediatric cancer investigations for molecularly targeted drugs, increasing regulatory burden and costs for drug developers. Section 3 adds due diligence requirements and enforcement actions for noncompliance with pediatric study requirements, further increasing compliance costs. Section 10 increases transparency requirements for generic drug applications, potentially increasing regulatory scrutiny. These provisions c
Section 11 increases the Medicare Improvement Fund from $1,403,000,000 to $2,622,000,000, which benefits health insurers that participate in Medicare Advantage and other Medicare programs by providing additional funding for quality improvement initiatives.
Biotech firms developing molecularly targeted cancer drugs are subject to the same pediatric investigation requirements under Section 2, which mandates additional preclinical and clinical study data for pediatric indications. Section 3's enforcement mechanisms for noncompliance apply equally to biotech products. These requirements increase development costs and timelines, constituting a clear cost burden.
Section 8 amends the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network to allow registration fees for transplant candidates, which could increase access to transplants for long-term care patients needing organ transplants, indirectly supporting long-term care providers.
While the bill primarily focuses on drugs and biologics, Section 2's amendments to Section 505B apply to 'drug or biological product' submissions. Some medical devices that incorporate drug components (e.g., drug-eluting stents) may fall under these provisions if submitted under Section 505(b) or 351(a). However, the bill's primary focus is on pharmaceuticals, so the impact on medical devices is less direct and certain.
Section 8 establishes registration fees for the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and requires transparency in fee usage, which could improve organ transplant coordination and increase transplant volumes. This benefits hospitals and health systems that perform transplants by potentially increasing patient access to transplant services and providing clearer fee structures. However, the fee collection mechanism could also impose administrative burdens, resulting in a mixed but n
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022βpresent cycles. Donations are not proof of intent β they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.