CONTENTS
BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
- Congress Will Delay Decisions on FY17 Appropriations with a Continuing Resolution
CONGRESSIONAL ISSUES
- Research Community Campaign Urges Approval of Cures Act
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
- National Academies Issues Report on Defense Medical Research Programs
- Associations Submit Amicus Brief on Internet Service Provider Case
BUDGET & APPROPRIATIONS
CONGRESS WILL DELAY DECISIONS ON FY17 APPROPRIATIONS WITH A CONTINUING RESOLUTION
Rather than approve FY17 appropriations bills in the lame-duck session, Congress will approve a continuing resolution (CR) lasting through March 1, 2017, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) announced on November 17. “While I’m disappointed that the Congress is not going to be able to complete our annual funding work this year,” he wrote, “I am extremely hopeful that the new Congress and the new Administration will finish these bills.”
Earlier this week, AAU sent a letter to House and Senate leaders urging them to finish the FY17 appropriations process this year. The letter noted that proposed funding increases for research in the House and Senate appropriations bills, as well as the Senate-proposed restoration of the year-round Pell Grant, would be lost with a year-long CR. The new Congress could still provide the investments mentioned in the letter if it passes FY17 appropriations bills. “All these proposed funding increases would help prevent an innovation deficit and ensure the U.S. remains the global innovation leader,” said the letter. AAU also requested increased investments for other research and higher education programs.
CONGRESSIONAL ISSUES
RESEARCH COMMUNITY CAMPAIGN URGES APPROVAL OF CURES ACT
The research community and business and other supporters of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding have launched a campaign to convince Congress to approve the 21st Century Cures Act during the lame-duck session.
On November 10, AAU and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities sent a letter to congressional leaders asking them to approve the bill, which contains a surge of multi-year, guaranteed funding for NIH and provisions “to provide regulatory relief and encourage the next generation of the biomedical research workforce.”
On November 14, The Hill published an op-ed by AAU President Mary Sue Coleman and two other leaders of the United for Medical Research (UMR) coalition urging Congress to pass the Cures Act in the lame-duck session.
There’s Nothing ‘Lame’ about Passing Cures Bill argues that the legislation offers Members of Congress “a rare opportunity to come together to put the divisiveness of the recent campaign behind them and pass legislation that will make a real difference in the life of every American.” The other op-ed authors are Marc N. Casper, president and CEO of Thermo Fisher Scientific, and Chris Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
NATIONAL ACADEMIES ISSUES REPORT ON DEFENSE MEDICAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS
A National Academies’ report on the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP) in the Department of Defense has found, “in general, the CDMRP review process is effective in dispensing research funding across its programs and is not in need of extensive revisions.” The report identifies four areas for improvement:
- development of a strategic plan for each research program
- more formal coordination between CDMRP and NIH and the Veterans Administration
- greater transparency in the CDMRP review process, and
- improved standardization of CDMRP’s business practices.
ASSOCIATIONS SUBMIT AMICUS BRIEF ON INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER CASE
A group of higher education and library associations, including AAU, on November 14 filed an amicus brief with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in BMG v. Cox Communications. The case concerns the applicability of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) “safe harbors” to broadband internet service providers (ISPs).
Educational institutions and libraries provide Internet access to more than 125 million Americans and thus fall within the DMCA’s definition of ISPs. Like other ISPs, to receive the DMCA’s protection from damages liability for users who upload infringing material, educational institutions and libraries must adopt and implement policies for terminating the Internet access of repeat infringers.
In the brief, the associations take no position on the merits of either party’s position in this case. Rather, the brief argues that a decision that interprets the DMCA to impose a uniform repeat infringer policy could force educational institutions and libraries to restrict Internet access in a manner contrary to the public interest. Such a uniform policy would also conflict with the flexibility afforded under the Higher Education Opportunity Act.