|
CONGRESSIONAL ISSUES
AFFECTING THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY - STEM CELLS
AND USDA RESEARCH
Stem Cells
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has
indicated that he plans to bring up the
bi-partisan stem-cell bill that passed both
chambers last year but was vetoed by President
Bush. The measure to expand stem cell research
has been heralded as a top priority for
Democrats, but with the budget debate and
emergency spending bill on tap before Congress
leaves for recess the first week of April, it
appears that leaders now expect to bring up the
bill after Easter. There are strong indications
that Democrats and Republicans are close to
agreeing on a streamlined process to debate the
bill to allow
federal funding of research on stem cells
derived from human embryos that are donated by
fertility clinics and would be slated for
destruction anyway, as well as a single
Republican alternative measure.
Senate Holds Hearing on Agriculture
Research Title in Farm Bill
The reauthorization of the Farm Bill, which will
occupy much of the summer, has provided Congress
with a potential platform to restructure
research funding through the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA). Currently,
three proposals have been put forward, with more
undoubtedly to come, as the congressional
agriculture committees debate how best to invest
in fundamental and applied agricultural
research. The Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and
Forestry Committee, chaired by Senator Tom
Harkin (D-IA), held a hearing on March 7 to hear
testimony and discuss the various proposals.
FASEB sent a
letter expressing our views on competitive,
peer-reviewed research at the USDA in
anticipation of the hearing. Dr. Alan Leshner,
CEO of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS), expressed similar
views on behalf of the scientific community at
the hearing.
In addition to general discussion the three
proposals, which is described below, there was a
great deal of attention focused on a number of
research related questions. The Senators seemed
especially interested in how to balance
competing and non-competing research funds
within the agricultural portfolio, as well as
how best to balance basic versus applied
research. Dr. Leshner joked that if anyone came
up with the perfect formula he could guarantee
them a publication in Science. Senator Harkin
was also quite critical of the use of formula
funding for agricultural research, stating that
the formulas seemed outdated and the data used
to calculate them unclear.
The majority of the hearing, however, was
dedicated to comparing the three potential plans
for reinvigorating research at USDA. The first
arose in 2004, as the result of a report
published by a USDA Task Force, which
recommended establishment of a National
Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) to fund
competitive, fundamental research in
agriculture. FASEB supported this proposal,
which was championed by Dr. William Danforth,
chair of the originating Task Force and witness
at the Senate hearing. The NIFA concept has gone
through a number of legislative reiterations,
having been the subject of a series of bills
that would have placed the new research entity
at either USDA or under the purview of the
National Science Foundation (NSF). While the
independent NIFA bills never moved out of the
congressional committees to which they had been
referred, the Research Title of the Farm Bill
presents an opportunity in a must-pass piece of
legislation to fulfill the Task Force’s vision.
Senator Harkin clearly favors this proposal and
has indicated he will reintroduce his NIFA
(within USDA) legislation. A similar bill has
been introduced in the House by Representative
Peterson (D-MN), chair of the House Agriculture
Committee.
The two other proposals that have arisen to
reinvent USDA’s research portfolio were
presented by Undersecretary Buchanan of the USDA
and Dr. Jeff Armstrong, representing the
National Association of State Universities and
Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC). Buchanan
discussed the Administration’s Farm Bill
proposal, which would consolidate the intramural
research arm of the USDA, the Agricultural
Research Service
(ARS) and the division that oversees the
extramural grants program, the National Research
Initiative (NRI). This plan, which was unveiled
in early February by Secretary of Agriculture
Mike Johanns, would place the consolidated
agencies under the oversight of a newly created
Chief Scientist, who would report to a newly
established Undersecretary of Science. Unlike
the NIFA proposal, the Administration’s plan
does not emphasize competitive research (on the
contrary, it reserves the Administration’s right
to target research) and does not provide for
significant additional funding, although there
is a modest increase. Chairman Harkin referenced
a similar action, which took place in the early
1980’s and resulted in the formation of the USDA
Science and Education Administration. This
entity failed and was dissolved in a few years
time and Undersecretary Buchanan was unable to
adequately explain the difference between the
Administration plan and this previous attempt.
The third and final proposal is called “Create
Research, Extension, and Teaching Excellence for
the 21st Century” or CREATE-21 and is the
brainchild of the. CREATE-21 would result in a
major restructuring of USDA, consolidating not
only the extramural and intramural research
programs, but also the Economic Research Service
and Forestry Research programs. The consolidated
programs would be reformed as the National
Institutes of Food and Agriculture, a model
seemingly similar to the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) in that there would be multiple
institutes representing different research
areas, such as the Institute of Food and Health
or the Institute of Natural Resources and
Environment. The proposal calls for a
significant increase in authorized funding, up
to $5.35 billion, approximately 70 percent of
which would go towards competitive grant awards.
Like the NIH Director, the head of the CREATE-21
version of NIFA would be appointed by the
President. It is likely a bill to form CREATE-21
will soon be introduced, most likely by Senator
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Saxby Chambliss
(R-GA), ranking member of the Senate Agriculture
Committee.
Given the tight fiscal restraints and many
competing interests in the Farm Bill, it is
unclear which, if any, of these proposals will
ultimately end up in the Research Title. The
formation of NIFA, championed by the Chair of
the committee, seems the most likely of the
three, in that it would involve the least
restructuring, but it remains to be seen if
there will be money available to increase
research funding. Moreover, questions remain as
to what would happen to the existing NRI program
if NIFA were established and what the
appropriators, who would actually have to fund
any of these proposals, think of the ideas.
TOP OF PAGE
CONGRESSIONAL BILLS
H.R. 1280 – the Pet Protection Act of 2007
On March 1, Representative Michael Doyle (D-PA)
introduced H.R. 1280, the Pet Protection Act of
2007. The bill is intended to ensure that all
dogs and cats used by research facilities are
obtained legally. The bill would amend the
Animal Welfare Act to list permissible sources
of dogs and cats used by research facilities to
include dogs and cats obtained 1) from a
licensed dealer, 2) from a publicly owned and
operated pound or shelter that meets specified
requirements, 3) by donation from the person who
bred and raised the dog or cat and owned it for
not less than 1 year, or 4) from a research
facility licensed by the Secretary of
Agriculture. It would increase monetary
penalties for related
violations and would expressly prohibit Federal
facilities from purchasing or otherwise
acquiring dogs or cats for exhibition purposes,
except from 1) the operator of an auction that
comports with legal requirements or 2) a person
holding a valid dealer or exhibitor license. The
bill would also prohibit dealers from selling to
or otherwise providing a research facility with
random-source dogs or cats unless specified
certification requirements were met. This bill
is a companion to legislation introduced on
February 28 by Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI). H.R.
1280 had 29 co-sponsors upon introduction and
was referred to the House Committee on
Agriculture.
TOP OF PAGE
UPCOMING HEARINGS
March 19
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee to Hold
Hearing on FY 2008 Budget
The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor,
HHS, and Education (Senator Tom Harkin [D-IA],
Chairman) will hold its NIH Overview hearing on
the FY2008 Budget, with Dr. Elias Zerhouni,
Director, NIH, testifying. The hearing is
scheduled for 1 p.m. in the Hart Senate Office
Building, Room 216.
March 20
Research and Science Education Subcommittee
hearing on the "National Science Foundation
Reauthorization, Part 1."
Witnessed to include National Science Foundation
Director Arden Bement and National Science Board
Chairman Steven Beering. Location: 2318 Rayburn
House Office Building. 10:30 a.m. (March 20,
2007)
March 26
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee to Hold
Hearing on FY 2008 Budget
The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor,
HHS, and Education (Senator Tom Harkin [D-IA],
Chairman) will hold its first NIH theme hearing
on mind, brain and behavior. Drs. Story Landis,
Director, NINDS; Tom Insel, Director, NIMH; Nora
Volkow, Director, NIDA; T. K. Li, Director,
NIAAA; and James Battey, Director, NIDCD, will
testify. The hearing is scheduled for 2 p.m. in
the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 116.
April 17
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee to Hold
Hearing on Autism
The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor,
HHS, and Education (Senator Tom Harkin [D-IA],
Chairman) will hold a hearing on autism. Dr. Tom
Insel, Director, NIMH, has been invited to
testify.
TOP OF PAGE
CONGRESSIONAL SCHEDULE
The House and Senate are in session.
TOP OF PAGE
PAGE 1 |
PAGE 2
GO BACK TO MARCH 16,
WASHINGTON UPDATE |
