Democrat to vote against bill restricting China's WuXi Biologics, BGI

By Karen Freifeld

(Reuters) - An influential Democratic U.S. congressman said on Friday that he will vote against legislation that would restrict business with China's WuXi Biologics (HK:2269 ), BGI and other biotech companies on national security grounds.

Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, the ranking member on the House Rules committee, told Reuters he is trying to convince colleagues to join him in opposition.

McGovern said there was no process for how companies were included in the legislation, and that he could not get a straight answer for why Wuxi Biologics was added. The company is building a facility in his district.

The Biosecure Act is scheduled for a vote on Monday by the U.S. House of Representatives. Supporters say the legislation, which would subject the companies to federal contracting bans, is needed to protect Americans' personal health and genetic information as well as U.S. pharmaceutical supply chains.

McGovern, the top House Democrat on the Congressional-Executive Commission on China and a critic of China's human rights abuses, said, "Companies providing sensitive information to the Chinese government is a real and important issue."

"But the bottom line is, this is a lousy bill."

The bill is scheduled to be voted on under a process which limits debate, does not allow for amendments and requires a two-thirds majority vote for passage.

A spokesperson for the House Select Committee on China said that "biotech companies beholden to our foremost adversary, the Chinese Communist Party, pose a tremendous national security risk" and that WuXi Biologics, BGI and WuXi AppTec have a demonstrated history of working with the party.

The legislation also identifies WuXi AppTec, MGI and Complete Genomics as companies of concern.



The companies deny posing any threat to U.S. national security and each says they should not be included in the bill.

The legislation must pass both the House and Senate before President Joe Biden could sign it into law.

Source: Investing.com