Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Pressley, Ayanna [D-MA-7]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 10, 2025
Bottom line
This bill seeks to formally recognize and address structural racism and police violence as public health crises through dedicated research, data collection, and intervention development within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a National Center on Antiracism and Health within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to conduct research, collect data, and develop interventions aimed at dismantling structural racism's impact on public health. It also creates a law enforcement violence prevention program within the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control to research and address the public health consequences of police violence. Both initiatives are authorized to receive 'such sums as may be necessary' for their operations.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that racism and police violence are critical determinants of health inequities, leading to significant physical and mental health disparities in communities of color. They contend that establishing dedicated centers within the CDC is essential to systematically research these issues, develop evidence-based interventions, and integrate an antiracist framework into public health practice, ultimately leading to a healthier and more equitable society.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that these issues fall outside the traditional scope of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, potentially diverting resources from other public health priorities. Concerns could also be raised about the definitions of 'antiracism' and 'antiracist' as potentially prescriptive or ideological, and whether the proposed research could lead to politicized rather than purely scientific outcomes.
The bill is concise and clearly structured, allowing an informed reader to quickly grasp its core provisions and implications.
Section 3, amending Part B of title III of the Public Health Service Act.
Establishment of National Center on Antiracism and Health (NCAH)
This provision establishes a new center within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) called the National Center on Antiracism and Health. Its mission is to declare racism a public health crisis, develop new knowledge in the science and practice of antiracism, identify how racism operates in health care and other systems, and create interventions to replace racist mechanisms with equitable structures, policies, practices, norms, and values.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a dedicated center is crucial to systematically address the pervasive and documented health impacts of structural racism, providing the necessary institutional focus, resources, and expertise to drive meaningful change in public health policy and practice.
Critics contend
Critics might express concern that establishing a center with a specific ideological framing ('antiracism') could lead to biased research or policy recommendations, potentially politicizing public health efforts rather than focusing on universally accepted scientific methods.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies between the urgent need to address health inequities linked to racism and concerns about the scope and potential politicization of a federal public health agency's mandate.
Section 3, new Section 320C(a)(2) of the Public Health Service Act.
Research, Data Collection, and Intervention Development Mandates for NCAH
The NCAH is mandated to conduct research, collect and analyze data, and provide leadership on antiracism science and the public health impacts of structural racism. This includes identifying policies with disparate impacts, understanding implicit bias and white supremacy, examining social determinants of health, and exploring the intersection of racism with other forms of oppression. The Center will also award noncompetitive grants, establish at least three regional centers of excellence, and create a data clearinghouse.
Section 3, new Section 320C(a)(2)(F)-(I) of the Public Health Service Act.
Inter-agency Coordination, Training, and Reporting for NCAH
The NCAH is required to consult with other CDC centers and institutes to ensure structural racism is considered in their activities, establish a Federal Advisory Committee on racism and health, and develop training programs for public health professionals and researchers. It also mandates providing standards for federal data collection, coordinating with the Indian Health Service and Tribal Advisory Committee to ensure meaningful Tribal consultation and respect for Tribal data sovereignty, and producing biennial public reports on antiracist activities.
Section 4.
Establishment of Law Enforcement Violence Prevention Program
This section establishes a law enforcement violence prevention program within the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the CDC. The program is tasked with researching the public health impacts of uses of force by law enforcement, including police brutality and violence. It will also develop public health interventions to eliminate related deaths, injury, trauma, and negative mental health effects, and ensure comprehensive data collection and reporting in consultation with the Department of Justice.
Section 4(c).
Specific Research, Grant, and Reporting Functions for Police Violence Program
The law enforcement violence prevention program's functions include summarizing and enhancing knowledge on law enforcement-related death, trauma, and injury; conducting research on factors correlating with police brutality; providing public information; and awarding grants for epidemiologic research and intervention development. It also mandates coordination with the Department of Justice on data standardization, submitting annual reports to Congress with recommendations, and studying alternatives to law enforcement response as a method of reducing police violence.
The bill defines 'antiracism' as 'a collection of antiracist policies that lead to racial equity, and are substantiated by antiracist ideas' and 'antiracist' as 'any measure that produces or sustains racial equity between racial groups.'
Section 2.
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to define key terms upfront, but the specific wording of these definitions is crucial for understanding the bill's underlying philosophy and potential scope.
Case for: Proponents argue that clear definitions of antiracism are essential to guide the work of the new Center, ensuring a consistent and intentional approach to addressing racial inequities in health.
Case against: Critics might argue that these definitions are broad and potentially ideological, which could lead to a prescriptive approach to research and interventions rather than a purely scientific one.
Estimated impact: These definitions will shape all research, data collection, and intervention strategies undertaken by the National Center on Antiracism and Health.
The bill requires that data collected by the National Center on Antiracism and Health be 'comprehensive and disaggregated, to the extent practicable, by including racial, ethnic, primary language, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, and disability disparities.'
Section 3, new Section 320C(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Public Health Service Act.
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for specifying data requirements, but its comprehensive nature is a significant detail.
Case for: Proponents emphasize that such granular data disaggregation is critical for accurately identifying specific disparities and tailoring effective interventions for diverse communities.
Case against: Critics might raise concerns about the feasibility and cost of collecting such extensive disaggregated data, as well as potential privacy implications, despite the bill's privacy protections.
Estimated impact: This provision ensures a highly detailed understanding of health disparities across numerous demographic axes, significantly enhancing the analytical power of the Center.
The bill mandates that the National Center on Antiracism and Health 'Engage in government to government consultation with Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations.'
Section 3, new Section 320C(a)(2)(H) of the Public Health Service Act.
Why it matters:This is a standard requirement for federal agencies interacting with Tribal governments, but its inclusion here is significant for ensuring Tribal sovereignty.
Case for: Proponents highlight this as a crucial step to ensure that public health initiatives affecting Indigenous communities are developed with their direct input and respect for their self-determination and data sovereignty.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against government-to-government consultation with Indian Tribes, as it is a recognized federal policy.
Estimated impact: Ensures that the Center's activities are informed by and respectful of the unique needs and sovereign status of Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations.
The law enforcement violence prevention program is mandated to 'study alternatives to law enforcement response as a method of reducing police violence.'
Section 4(c)(8).
Why it matters:This is a specific programmatic detail within a broader list of duties, which is common legislative drafting, but it represents a significant policy direction.
Case for: Proponents argue that exploring alternatives to traditional law enforcement responses is essential for genuinely reducing police violence and addressing underlying social issues through non-punitive, community-based approaches.
Case against: Critics, particularly from some law enforcement perspectives, might view this as undermining the role of police or promoting strategies that could compromise public safety.
Estimated impact: This provision could lead to significant shifts in how communities respond to various crises, potentially reducing police involvement in situations where alternative, non-law enforcement interventions might be more effective.