HRES-1167-119
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsored by Wesley Bell (D-MO)
What it does
This resolution would express the House of Representatives' support for designating April 2026 as "Parkinson's Awareness Month." It would formally recognize individuals living with Parkinson's disease, commend researchers, volunteers, and organizations working on the disease, and reaffirm congressional support for research toward better treatments and a cure. The resolution carries no binding legal force, creates no new programs, and appropriates no funds.
Who benefits
The approximately 1 million Americans currently living with Parkinson's disease, who gain symbolic congressional recognition. Family caregivers and care partners — estimated to have shouldered $8.3 billion in lost earnings and productivity in 2024 — who receive acknowledgment of their burden. Parkinson's advocacy organizations and nonprofits, which may use the designation to raise public awareness and support fundraising efforts. Researchers and clinicians working on Parkinson's treatments, who receive a public signal of congressional interest.
Who is hurt
No group faces a direct material harm from this resolution. There are no funding reallocations, regulatory changes, or legal obligations created. Competing disease advocacy communities receive no comparable recognition in this specific resolution, though this is a common feature of single-disease awareness designations.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Parkinson's disease affects over 1 million Americans, is the fastest-growing neurodegenerative disease in the world, and is projected to cost the U.S. economy $112.4 billion annually by 2045. They contend that formal congressional recognition raises public awareness, encourages community support, and signals to researchers and advocates that their work has national importance — all at no cost to taxpayers.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that simple awareness resolutions consume limited legislative floor time and resources without producing measurable health outcomes or directing any funding toward research or patient services. They contend that the more meaningful response to Parkinson's disease burden — which the resolution itself quantifies at billions in economic costs — would be substantive legislation funding research or expanding patient support programs, rather than a non-binding symbolic designation.