Why It Matters

The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs held a hearing on Wednesday, July 22, 2026, to examine whether the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) can sustain its research mission under hiring freezes, staffing caps, and contracting disruptions. The hearing, titled “Advancing the Mission: Evaluating the Future of VA Research,” came as lawmakers warned that workforce instability is slowing or stopping studies that have long driven major medical advances for veterans and the broader public.

The Big Picture

Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) said VA research has led to breakthroughs including the pacemaker, the first successful liver transplant, the nicotine patch, and CT scanning, and she argued that the Trump administration has not shown the same commitment to the scientific enterprise. In her prepared remarks, Murray said that on the first day of the administration, all VA research staff were subject to a hiring freeze and probationary firings, which she said put stroke-prediction work in Pittsburgh on hold, delayed advanced cancer trial enrollment, and canceled a Florida study on preventing dementia and heart disease.

Murray said VA researchers now report startup times of more than a year and hiring delays of up to six months, with one planned RSV study missing its enrollment window and another clinical trial closing after a researcher hire took too long. She also said a VA researcher’s NIH grant on opioid use disorder among minority veterans was canceled as “DEI-related,” and that large VA research sites are reporting their non-VA federal funding is down by one-third or more.

The hearing page listed Mark Zhang, MD, acting executive director for Discovery, Education and Affiliate Networks at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA); La’Toya Prieur, MBA, chief human capital management for VHA; and Michael Kelley, MD, executive director of the National Oncology Program, as the VA witnesses. It also listed Gina B. Carithers of the Prostate Cancer Foundation and Glenn D. Graham, MD, PhD, of UCSF and the Association of VA Neurology Services (AVANS) as panelists, underscoring that the debate reached beyond agency staffing and into the external research community.

A Stars and Stripes report said VA had about 3,800 researchers on time-limited appointments and that roughly 300 to 400 people were affected by the hiring freeze, while NAVREF said the system depends heavily on appointments that are not directly paid by VA but are still vulnerable to staffing disruptions. APHA warned that the freeze could put about $35 million in research funding at risk and could suspend or end about 370 non-VA-funded studies and clinical trials.

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS) has pushed the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act, a package built from 62 bipartisan, bicameral bills, and he used the hearing to highlight the importance of advancing the measure. Separately, Moran has backed the POPCaP Authorization Act, which would codify VA’s precision oncology prostate cancer program and add seven centers of excellence, another sign that Republicans are trying to answer the research disruption with legislation.

What They're Saying

Sen. Murray said she intends to “rip up” the Trump budget and write a new one as vice chair of Appropriations, signaling that Congress may try to restore research funding and protect staffing through the spending process. The committee is also likely to keep pressing the VA on hiring delays, staffing caps, and the status of individual studies that have been slowed or canceled.

At the same time, public and advocacy pressure remains high. An Ipsos survey cited by NAVREF found that 85 percent of Americans and 91 percent of veterans believe VA doctors and staff should conduct research to improve treatments and practices, and that 70 percent of Americans and 83 percent of veterans want VA research funding strengthened or maintained. That level of support gives lawmakers political cover to treat research staffing as a core veterans’ issue rather than a narrow budget line.

The Bottom Line

The hearing made clear that VA research is not being threatened by a lack of ideas or funding on paper, but by the staffing and contracting bottlenecks that determine whether studies can actually move forward. If Congress wants to protect the department’s research legacy, the next fight will be less about rhetoric than about whether lawmakers can restore enough operational capacity to keep trials open, grants moving, and researchers in place.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article