The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology opposes this bill. Starting with the High-Quality Research Act through the original version of the FIRST Act, the Society has had several serious concerns about the effects of this legislation on the activities of the NSF. While the current version of the FIRST Act is improved over previous versions, significant flaws remain and the Society cannot endorse this bill.

For more, you can read ASBMB’s statement responding to the FIRST Act. And for further updates, follow the ASBMB Policy Blotter!

After a few quiet weeks, things are starting to pick up again on the Hill. This week saw the release of the president’s budget, which left scientists needing more.

“Major U.S. Science Agencies Face Flat Prospects” – ScienceInsider

“Obama’s Budget Proposal Fails To Calm The Science Community’s Freak Out” – HuffPost Politics

“President Obama releases FY15 budget request” – Policy Blotter

A new effort to demonstrate how budget cuts to scientific research are hurting innovation was released.

“A four-minute explanation of why innovation is so important to the United States” – Washington Post

“The innovations deficit” – The Boston Globe

“US scientists deplore ‘innovation deficit’” – Financial Times

The ASBMB Science Policy Fellowship is now open! Be sure to apply before the April 11 deadline.

“Apply for ASBMB’s 2014 Spring Hill Day” – Policy Blotter

Be sure to follow the Policy Blotter for developments in science policy news!

In the ASBMB response to Obama’s budget request, Public Affairs Director Ben Corb said “Any funding increase in times of austerity is of significant benefit for the community. However, the NIH is still below pre-sequester levels of funding for the agency. The scientific community still needs help to recover from these cuts.”

Sequestration slashed the FY13 NIH budget by 5 percent, or $1.5 billion. This resulted in over 600 grants going unfunded and more than 1,000 scientists losing funding for their research. While the Ryan-Murray budget agreement resulted in nearly $1 billion being restored to the NIH for FY14, this made up for only a portion of the losses due to sequestration.

The ASBMB strongly urges the President and Congress to find a fiscally responsible mechanism that addresses our nation’s debt and deficit while removing the possibility of further sequestration. Furthermore, the ASBMB is advocating for $32 billion for the NIH and $7.6 billion for the NSF to prevent further erosion of the purchasing power of these federal agencies and set the nation on a course to robust growth for this fundamental American enterprise.

Said Corb, “Austerity measures and the sequester are the biggest threats to growth in scientific research. These poorly designed budgeting tools only hinder American scientific progress, and there is a real possibility that the U.S. will lose its position as the global leader in biomedical research because of sequester.”

Not only are austerity measures preventing growth of the research enterprise, the diversion of funds to specific projects diminishes the money available for investigator-initiated research. For example, most of the $300 million increase for the NIH would be slated for high profile NIH projects such as the BRAIN Initiative, the Common Fund and other programs. Thus, the increases proposed in this budget would do little to help individual investigators trying to find funds at the NIH for their research. Over at the NSF, the BIO directorate would actually lose money if Obama’s budget passed. Dr. Cora Marrett, acting director of the NSF, did answer a direct question as to why this was, but she hinted that more details may come out on the March 10 NSF briefing on the budget. Nevertheless, these developments have left many science advocates unimpressed with Obama’s FY15 budget.

Follow the ASBMB Policy Blotter to stay up to date with news about federal funding for research!

The trends with regard to global research and development are cause for some concern in the U.S. While R&D expenditures have been increasing fairly linearly for more than a decade, the U.S. share of those expenditures has declined. Asian countries, led by China, South Korea and Japan, have increased their share of R&D spending such that their combined investment is slightly more than that of the U.S. The lion’s share of this increase has come from China, which doubled its R&D budget between 2007 and 2011. As a percentage of gross domestic product, though, China, South Korea and Japan have been increasing their investment in R&D while the U.S. investment has remained relatively flat (See Ch. 4 and 6 of the Indicators report and the S&E Indicators 2014 Digest).

This report, however, does not mean the end of U.S. dominance in global R&D. In total dollars, the U.S. still spends more than double its nearest global competitor, China. Furthermore, in a variety of aspects including employment and scientific infrastructure, the U.S. R&D enterprise weathered the Great Recession best of all its global competitors. Finally, the U.S. still produces a large volume of high-quality, high-impact publications and patents. These data suggest the U.S. is poised to remain the leader of global R&D for quite some time.

The ASBMB reported on scientists’ perception of the U.S. leadership in global research in our report “Unlimited Potential, Vanishing Opportunity.”An overwhelming majority of scientists in this report stated that the difficult funding environment has allowed global competitors to catch and even pass the U.S. in some scientific fields. The Indicators 2014 report confirms the impression of many of the scientists profiled in “Unlimited Potential, Vanishing Opportunity”. America’s global competitors, especially those in Asia, are rapidly closing the gap in R&D investment and knowledge. However, the U.S. remains the clear cut leader in global R&D and is in a position of strength to effectively compete against the emerging R&D powers.

For more insights into the S&E Indicators 2014 report, follow the ASBMB Policy Blotter!

If you answered yes to these three questions, then the ASBMB Science Policy Fellowship may be the perfect opportunity for you! This program offers exposure to a range of activities regarding science policy and congressional and government relations. Read more about what the day-to-day life of the science policy fellow is like and some of the duties the fellow performs.

The ASBMB is now accepting applications for the 2014-15 Science Policy Fellowship.  We are looking for recently graduated Ph.D.’s with excellent communication and analytical skills who have an interest in governmental affairs. For details on how to apply, please visit the Science Policy Fellowship Program website.  The application deadline is April 11, 2014.

For more information about the fellowship, feel free to contact public affairs director Ben Corb or current fellows Chris Pickett or Shaila Kotadia with any questions.

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew reported to Congress that the government will reach its debt ceiling on Feb. 27. Once reached, the government will be unable to borrow money and can only use the cash on hand to pay its bills. Should the government miss a payment on any of its obligations, global confidence in America’s fiscal security would falter and potentially devastate the global economy. So where’s all the Congressional fanfare? The doom-and-gloom predictions? The hand wringing and hysteria over the potential collapse of the global economy?

The answer is a combination of exhaustion and elections. With regard to exhaustion, members of both parties and both houses have shied away from high-profile fiscal debates since the government shutdown in October. The shutdown bruised the images of both parties and has forced conservatives and liberals into a functional, if uneasy, working relationship. This newfound willingness to avoid fiscal arguments and work together produced December’s bipartisan budget agreement and January’s bipartisan passage of fiscal 2014 appropriations. Furthermore, President Obama has stated that he will not negotiate over raising the debt ceiling nor will he accept any onerous provisions attached to raising the ceiling. This has produced the White House’s desired effect of damping political arguments over the deadline with a nearly clean version of a debt ceiling increase expected to pass with bicameral and bipartisan support.

With regard to elections, both parties are looking toward the midterm elections looming in November and are interested in engaging in debates in which they feel they can win. This is why members of both parties have decided to let fiscal debates, which are often rancorous with few if any winners, fly under the radar. Instead, representatives and senators have opted to voice their concerns over, for example, the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, immigration reform, unemployment insurance and raising the minimum wage.

Raising the debt ceiling will allow the federal government to pay its bills on time. This includes fulfilling payments to scientists who have secured a grant award from any federal science funding agency, like the National Institutes of Health. Follow the ASBMB Policy Blotter to for more coverage of federal fiscal debates that affect scientists.

Are you concerned with the current science-funding situation in the U.S.? Do you want to enact change? An in-person meeting with your congressional representative can make a large difference on issues of funding and science legislation. The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Hill Day is your chance to directly speak with members of Congress and their staffs in Washington, D.C. Every year, the ASBMB brings together undergraduate and graduate student and postdoctoral researchers from across the country to meet with their congressional leaders. This fully funded opportunity gives participants the chance to help promote scientific research by directly interacting with government officials. Watch videos of past participants to get a better idea of the experience.

Arriving on Monday, March 31, participants will take part in an orientation session focused on the federal budget process and communicating with members of Congress. On Tuesday, April 1, participants will convene on Capitol Hill to meet with members of Congress, before departing on Wednesday, April 2. In exchange for your time and efforts, we provide transportation, lodging and meals during your stay in Washington, D.C.

Student and postdoctoral researchers, take advantage of this all-expenses paid opportunity to have your voice heard on the Hill and sign up now! The deadline for applying is Feb. 14.

If you have any questions, please contact ASBMB Science Policy Fellow Shaila Kotadia at skotadia@asbmb.org.

Thank you very much for your efforts. We look forward to reviewing your application and hopefully seeing you in Washington this spring!

The highlight in the science policy world this week was President Obama’s State of the Union Address. Obama hit on many topics including the importance of scientific research for the well-being of Americans. In addition, the ASBMB covered the event with a live tweet session and a State of the Union Science game.

“A Supporting Role for Science in Obama’s State of the Union Address” – ScienceInsider

“Science in the State of the Union” – The Scientist

“Scientific research in the State of the Union address” – Policy Blotter

“A recap of the #SOTUScience game” – Policy Blotter

The ASBMB spring Hill Day is coming soon! Apply before the Feb. 14 deadline for your chance to advocate in Washington D.C.

“Apply for ASBMB’s 2014 Spring Hill Day” – Policy Blotter

Be sure to follow the Policy Blotter for developments in science policy news!

• 1. Once he is announced in the House chamber, how long will it take for President Obama to begin his speech?
  • 8 minutes or less (Actual time approximately 5 minutes; 5pts)
  • More than 8 minutes
• 2. What color of tie will President Obama wear?
  • Red
  • Blue (2pts)
  • Any other color
• 3. Will President Obama mention the name of a living, working scientist?
  • Yes
  • No (3pts)
• 4. How many times will President Obama say “science”?
  • Three times or fewer (One mention while spelling out STEM; 4pts)
  • Four times or more
• 5. How many times will President Obama say “biomedical research”?
  • Zero or one time (Zero mentions; 4pts)
  • Twice or more
• 6. Will the Obamas have a working scientist as a guest in the gallery?
  • Yes
  • No (2pts)
• 7. How many times will President Obama say “STEM Education”?
  • Two or fewer (Zero mentions, although he did spell out STEM while talking about education one time ; 6pts)
  • Three or more
• 8. Will President Obama mention the BRAIN Initiative?
  • Yes
  • No (6pts)
• 9. How many pauses will there be for clapping?
  • 100 or fewer (94 pauses per Washington Post transcript; 5 pts)
  • 101 or more
• 10. How long will the State of the Union speech last?
  • 65 minutes or less
  • More than 65 minutes (65 minutes, 7 seconds per the American Presidency Project; 5 pts)

Out of a maximum score of 42 points, Matthew from United Therapeutics scored 26 and is our winner! Thanks to all who played!