On February 4^th, the President released his budget request for FY2009.  He requested flat funding for NIH, hefty increases for NSF, DOE’s Office of Science and USDA’s National Research Initiative and decreases for VA’s Medical Research and Support program and the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service.  Complete budget information is available on the FASEB Budget Page.

The following chart shows how the President’s request for FY2009 would affect each agency:

President Releases His FY 2009 Budget Request INSIDE (The Beltway) SCOOP - Gretchen Opper FASEB Issues Its FY2009 Budget Recommendations Moving Beyond Super Tuesday with Sciencecures.org House Freshman Briefing Farm Bill Inches Toward Conference House Science Committee Hearings on Visas FASEB Publishes Breakthroughs in Bioscience Article on the HPV Vaccine for Cervical Cancer Congressional Schedule PRINT THIS ISSUE FASEB Washington Update Archives

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

The big news from the President’s budget is that he requested flat funding for NIH, such that NIH might remain at its final 2008 omnibus appropriation level of $29.307 billion.  The only sense in which one can view the flat funding proposal for NIH as positive is by comparing it to the President’s overall proposal for HHS, which would decrease funding for HHS by 2%. The President's budget would increase funding for each of the Institutes by about .01%, and the only recognizable decrease in the President's budget for NIH would affect NIH's Office of the Director, for which he requested a decrease in the current appropriation level from $1.109 billion to $1.057 billion in '09. 

The following chart shows how the President’s FY2009 budget request would affect each Institute at NIH: 

¹ Includes comparable program transfers
² Includes funds for the Type 1 Diabetes Initiative.
³ Includes funds to be transferred to the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Tuberculosis.

The President’s budget for NIH would mean that:
      •  9,757 competing awards would be available in FY’09
      •  NIH would continue to support new investigators through the Pathways
         to Independence program and the New Innovator Awards
      •  Pre and post doctoral trainees would receive a 1% stipend increase
      •  The Common Fund would receive $534 million, which represents 1.8% of NIH’s budget
      •  NIH’s success rate would fall to 18% overall in FY’09, which would be the lowest rate
         since 1970, the last year for which data are available
      •  NIH would lose 13.4% of its purchasing power
      •  the Children’s Health Study would receive no funding 

The House of Representatives plans to hold a hearing to examine NIH funding on March 5^th.

Additional information about the President’s budget proposal for NIH is available here: http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/ui/2008/Summary%20of%20FY%202009%20Budget-Press%20Release.pdf

National Science Foundation (NSF)

In keeping with the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) to double funding for NSF within 10 years, the President requested a healthy budgetary increase for NSF in 2009 of 13.0%.  The President’s budget would increase funding for NSF from $6.065 billion in 2008 to $6.854 billion in 2009.

The President's request would also increase funding for NSF’s Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) from the current FY'08 estimate of $612.02 million to $675.06 million in FY'09, which is about a 10% increase and would be the first increase for BIO since 2003. 

Additional information about the President’s budget proposal for NSF is available here:  http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2009/pdf/entire_fy2009.pdf

Department of Energy (DOE)

In keeping with the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) to double funding for DOE within 10 years, the President requested a healthy budgetary increase for DOE's Office of Science of 18.9%.  The President’s budget would increase funding for DOE’s Office of Science from $3.973 in FY2008 to $4.722 in FY2009.

Additional information about the President’s budget proposal for DOE is available here: http://www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/09budget/Content/Highlights/Highlight2009.pdf

Department of Agriculture (USDA)

While the President requested an overall decrease for USDA, he requested a whopping 34.6% increase for USDA’s National Research Initiative (NRI); the President recommended increasing NRI’s funding level from $191 million in FY2008 to $257 million in FY2009.  On the other hand, the budget would decrease funding for USDA’s Agricultural Research Service by 10% from $1.85 billion in FY’08 to $1.067 in FY’09.

Additional information about the President’s budget proposal for USDA is available here: http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/fy09budsum.pdf

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

The President requested a 7.9% decrease in VA Medical Research and Support; his budget proposes cutting the program from $480 million in FY’08 to $442 million in FY’09. 

Additional information about the President’s budget proposal for VA is available here:

INSIDE (The Beltway) SCOOP – Gretchen Opper, Legislative Affairs Officer

“Trying to understand the laws of nature can be frustrating, but I think most of here today would agree that it pales in comparison to trying to understand the laws of man."

                                                                        - NASA Administrator Michael Griffin

In keeping with FASEB President Robert Palazzo's statement in FASEB's February 4^th news release, we’re clearly disappointed with the President’s request for flat funding for NIH.  At the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) budget rollout, John Marburger, OSTP's Director, had some interesting comments about the flat funding.  When a reporter from Science asked Dr. Marburger for the logic behind the lack of an increase for NIH, Dr. Marburger replied that NIH is very large and that even with flat resources, NIH can greatly increase its assets through internal reorganization.  Dr. Marburger stated that Dr. Zerhouni has some great ideas about how to address the issue of redirecting funds within NIH and that he thinks Dr. Zerhouni should have greater control over the way NIH spends its money.  For example, he cited the Common Fund as a source of considerably more funding discretion for Dr. Zerhouni.  When the Science reporter pointed out that NIH's budget is decreasing, given the rate of biomedical inflation, Dr. Marburger replied that the mistake, as he views it, was increasing NIH funding in 5 years without NIH's having developed a plan to change the way it spends money.  Dr. Marburger views NIH's current funding situation as a natural consequence of NIH's lack of planning and said that the NIH example is one of the reasons the America Competes Initiative (ACI) doubles funding for NSF and DOE over 10 years rather than more quickly.  Dr. Marburger characterized biomedical research as an unregulated market so that after the government put money into it and the overall number of Ph.D.s and postdocs increased, postdocs are now vying with their PIs for jobs.  Dr. Marburger also noted that while NIH money increased, NSF and DOE stagnated and led to the ACI.  FASEB obviously disagrees with Dr. Marburger’s characterization of NIH as fiscally irresponsible and is planning to issue a statement to that effect.       

There have been rumblings inside the Beltway about the likelihood of including supplemental funds for the science agencies in the war supplemental in March.  For example, last week, Representative Judy Biggert (R-IL) and five other Republican Representatives sent a letter to the President, urging him to include $300 million for DOE in his supplemental request.  When the Association of American Universities asked Dr. Marburger at his budget presentation whether he projected any possibility of including science funding in the supplemental, Dr. Marburger did not preclude the possibility but did note that the President is reluctant to open the war supplemental to any additional funds.  Dr. Marburger advised that the best scenario for the agencies would be Congress' passing the 2009 appropriations bills quickly before the next administration so that the agencies don't find themselves in the same situation as they are this year, having already spent money toward programs for 2008 that they have since discovered they cannot afford.

The Administration blames the shortfall in funding for science in FY2008 on the 9,800 earmarks in the omnibus bill.  Although funding for NIH and NSF was earmark-free, in Dr. Marburg's words, "earmarks tremendously complicated the funding process for NASA."  In keeping with this position, the President promised in his State of the Union address last week to veto any appropriations bill in which Congress has not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half, and at a recent GOP retreat, House Minority Leader Boehner (R-OH) requested a one-year Republican moratorium on earmarks as well as a special panel to review the process and abuses.    

Although the numbers for NSF and DOE are promising, as we anticipated they would be after the President called on Congress to support the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) in his State of the Union, the number for NIH is not what we had hoped.  We look to the horizon, however, at the end of the year and the possibility that Congress will hold the budget with a continuing resolution until the next administration, which may view funding for NIH more favorably.  Then, it’s anyone’s game.

Note:  Jon Retzlaff, who created the Washington Update and shared his wisdom with us for the past 3 years, has left FASEB and accepted a position as a Senior Health Research Policy Expert at Lewis-Burke Associates LLC.  FASEB will continue to publish the Washington Update.  With gratitude to Jon for his insight and enthusiasm, we wish him the best in his new endeavor.

Farewell from Jon Retzlaff, Legislative Director

While the 2008 elections are shaping up to be a battle over which party can “out change” the other in their pitch to the American people, I want to inform you of a change that has taken place within FASEB’s Office of Public Affairs.  On January 31, 2008, I resigned my position as FASEB’s Director of Legislative Relations in order to take a position with Lewis-Burke Associates, LLC, a government relations firm, to lead the firm’s health and biomedical research practice. 

I have greatly enjoyed working at FASEB and have taken pride in keeping you informed about the legislative issues that affect the broader scientific research community.  FASEB is the predominant organization for the bench scientist, and it’s been a privilege to represent your interests for the past three-and-a-half years. 

TOP OF PAGE

FASEB ISSUES ITS FY2009 BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS

Last week, on January 29^th, FASEB President Robert Palazzo, Ph.D., presided over the unveiling of FASEB’s annual report, Federal Funding for Biomedical and Related Life Sciences Research, FY2009.  This report, which FASEB developed through consultation with its 21 member societies and scientific experts, makes the case for sustainable funding for six federal science agencies:  NIH; NSF; DOE’s Office of Science; VA’s medical research program; USDA research; and NASA.  Dr. Palazzo stated that “FASEB’s strength lies in the dedication, diversity and knowledge of our membership, and through this report, we are delivering a clarion call about the importance of research to our nation and the world.”  Dr. Palazzo added that “although it might be politically expedient to seek a more modest funding level for the federal research agencies, this would be doing a grave disservice to the scientists whom we represent.”

FASEB will distribute the annual report, which serves as the basis for its research funding advocacy efforts for the next fiscal year, to federal lawmakers, health-research officials in the administration and the research community.

It is also available online at: http://opa.faseb.org/pdf/2008/FedFund09.pdf.  

The following summary details FASEB’s recommendations:

National Institutes of Health (NIH)
In order to fulfill the extraordinary scientific and medical promise of biomedical research, FASEB urges Congress to make the National Institutes of Health a priority and respectfully requests that NIH receive $31.2 billion in FY2009.

National Science Foundations (NSF)
In keeping with the America COMPETES Act of 2007, FASEB recommends an appropriation of $7.33 billion for the National Science Foundation in FY2009.

Department of Energy (DOE)
In keeping with the America COMPETES Act of 2007, FASEB recommends an appropriation of $4.8 billion for the DOE’s Office of Science in FY2009.

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
FASEB recommends funding the VA Medical and Prosthetics Research Program at the $555 million level in FY2009 with an additional $45 million for VA laboratory space renovation.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
FASEB supports funding the USDA’s National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program in FY2009 at the $257 million level the President recommended in his FY2008 budget and funding the Agricultural Research Service at $1.377 billion.

National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA)
FASEB recommends that Congress increase funding for Life Sciences Research (Ground Research, Ground Facilities and Flight Research) to $39.65 million.

TOP OF PAGE

PAGE 1 |  PAGE 2 |  PAGE 3

GO BACK TO FEBRUARY 08, WASHINGTON UPDATE