CONTENTS
BUDGET, APPROPRIATIONS, TAX ISSUES
- House Speaker’s Resignation May Prompt Quick Approval of Short-Term Funding Bill
OTHER
- National Academy Panel Calls for Major Changes in Research Regulation
- AAU Releases Aggregate Results from Campus Survey on Sexual Assault and Misconduct
BUDGET, APPROPRIATIONS, TAX ISSUES
HOUSE SPEAKER’S RESIGNATION MAY PROMPT QUICK APPROVAL OF SHORT-TERM FUNDING BILL
House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) announced this morning that he will resign from Congress at the end of October. A number of news reports suggest this sets the stage for the House to approve a short-term continuing resolution (CR) that would fund the government through December 11 and avoid a government shutdown on October 1. Approval of the CR has been held up by a group of Republican conservatives’ demand to use the measure to defund Planned Parenthood, a package that could not pass the Senate and which the President has threatened to veto.
Following Speaker Boehner’s announcement, according to news reports, House Republicans said they had reached an agreement to pass a “clean” CR, without the controversial amendment. The House next week would first pass the clean CR now being considered in the Senate, and then begin work on a budget reconciliation package that would both defund Planned Parenthood and repeal the Affordable Care Act. A reconciliation bill is considered under special rules and cannot be filibustered in the Senate.
Senate leaders have used a two-step process to move the CR. On September 23, the chamber took up a CR with the Planned Parenthood provision, which Senate Democrats and some Republicans blocked. A CR without the amendment was then brought up, and a vote is planned for Monday, September 28. The clean version is expected to pass.
The CR is necessary because Congress has been unable to approve any FY16 appropriations and additional time is needed to work out a longer-term agreement.
-- New Paper Highlights Consequences of a Year-long CR
A new paper issued by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities highlights likely outcomes of a year-long CR, including its effects on discretionary spending and the loss of the opportunity to renegotiate sequester-level discretionary spending caps. While Congress is not expected to vote on a year-long CR before October 1, it is among the options that will be under consideration for a final resolution of the FY16 appropriations process.
OTHER
NATIONAL ACADEMY PANEL CALLS FOR MAJOR CHANGES IN RESEARCH REGULATION
A panel of the National Academy of Sciences on September 22 released the first part of a two-part report on the regulation of federally funded academic research. It calls on the federal government to streamline and harmonize its regulation of federally funded academic research.
This portion of the report, Optimizing the Nation’s Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century, Part I, was released by the Academy’s Committee on Federal Research Regulations and Reporting Requirements. The committee will continue its work and issue a spring 2016 addendum report that addresses such items as export controls and dual-use research of concern. (The summary below is based on the analysis provided by the Council on Governmental Relations.)
Among its recommendations, the report calls on Congress to address a lack of uniformity in regulations, policies, forms, and requirements. It encourages creation of a risk-based system of human subject protections; use of a single institutional review board for multi-site studies (with a standard set of policies and procedures and “a nationally uniform work-flow-based informatics infrastructure”); and establishment of a unified approach to the care and use of research animals.
The report makes several recommendations related to inspectors general, and encourages the Office of Management and Budget to affirm that institutions may take advantage of the flexibility provided in the Uniform Guidance in documenting personnel expenses and effort reporting. The report also recommends modifying sub-recipient monitoring requirements to make them less onerous.
For research institutions, the report recommends that campuses review whether their own regulatory policies are excessive or unnecessary, and seek to foster a campus culture of research integrity.
The report also encourages Congress to create a self-funded, government-linked Research Policy Board (RPB), composed of nine to 12 members from academic research institutions and six to eight federal agency liaisons, to serve as the “primary policy forum for discussions relating to the regulation of federally funded research programs in academic research institutions.” A new Associate Director, Academic Research Enterprise, within the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy would oversee the group.
AAU RELEASES AGGREGATE RESULTS FROM CAMPUS SURVEY ON SEXUAL ASSAULT AND MISCONDUCT
AAU released the aggregate results from the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct on September 21, with findings generally consistent with other campus surveys on this issue. A press release, executive summary, FAQs, the full report, the survey instrument, and related materials are available on the AAU website. The report will be discussed at the October meeting of AAU presidents and chancellors.
Overall, 11.7 percent of student respondents across 27 universities reported experiencing nonconsensual sexual contact by physical force, threats of physical force, or incapacitation since they enrolled at their university. The incidence of sexual assault and misconduct was 23.1 percent for female undergraduates and 5.4 percent for male undergraduates.
The rates of students reporting sexual assault and misconduct incidents to authorities were low, ranging from five percent to 28 percent, depending on the specific type of behavior. The most common reason for not reporting was that the incident was not considered serious enough to report. On the other hand, more than 63 percent of respondents said they believed a report of sexual assault or misconduct would be taken seriously by campus officials, and 56 percent said it was very or extremely likely that those who report an incident would be protected by university officials.