United States-Abraham Accords Cooperation and Security Act of 2025
HB1794, titled the United States-Abraham Accords Cooperation and Security Act of 2025, would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to create an Abraham Accords Office within the Food and Drug Administration. The office would be headed by a director and, within two years of enactment, would be located in an Abraham Accords country selected in consultation with those governments and relevant U.S. diplomatic and security personnel. The bill is designed to strengthen FDA engagement with countries that have signed the Abraham Accords by improving regulatory coordination for medical products and other regulated commodities.
The office’s duties would include providing technical assistance to regulatory partners in Abraham Accords countries, helping align regulatory requirements, and facilitating communication between the FDA and interested parties in those countries. It would also share information on U.S. regulatory pathways and gather feedback related to research, development, and manufacturing of FDA-regulated products. The bill defines an Abraham Accords country by reference to State Department identification and includes a national security safeguard stating that nothing in the section may require action inconsistent with a federal national security recommendation.
The bill would add a new section to the FDCA and create a reporting requirement for the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Within three years of enactment, HHS would have to report to Congress on the office’s progress, including how it has advanced compliance with FDA requirements, how many parties it has assisted, what technical assistance it has provided, and recommendations for improving coordination with entities in Abraham Accords countries. In practical terms, the measure would expand FDA’s international engagement and formalize a new diplomatic-regulatory function within the agency.
Because the bill was only referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and there are no recorded votes or committee transcripts in the provided materials, there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to assess. Based on the bill’s bipartisan cosponsorship and subject matter, it appears to be framed as a cooperation and security measure rather than a controversial domestic regulatory overhaul. The inclusion of a national security limitation suggests an effort to address potential concerns about foreign engagement and sensitive information sharing.
The main point of possible contention is the creation of an FDA office located outside the United States and the extent of U.S. regulatory coordination with foreign governments and private entities in Abraham Accords countries. Supporters are likely to view the bill as promoting public health cooperation, regulatory convergence, and economic/diplomatic ties, while critics may question the need for a new office, the costs of establishing it abroad, or whether the arrangement could raise security or administrative concerns.
The bill would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by adding a new section establishing an Abraham Accords Office within the FDA, thereby expanding the agency’s statutory international coordination role. It would require the Secretary of HHS to create the office, assign personnel, provide technical assistance and regulatory outreach in Abraham Accords countries, and submit a report to Congress, while preserving compliance with federal national security recommendations.
No votes or committee debate are provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment in the materials. The bill’s bipartisan sponsorship and its focus on cooperation, regulatory alignment, and security suggest generally favorable framing, with the national security clause indicating an attempt to preempt concerns about foreign engagement.
The likely areas of contention are the establishment of an FDA office in a foreign country, the scope of FDA involvement with foreign regulatory systems, and whether the office could create security, cost, or administrative burdens. Supporters appear to be the bill’s bipartisan sponsors and advocates of U.S.-Abraham Accords cooperation; potential skeptics would be those concerned about overseas placement of federal functions or the sharing of regulatory information across borders.