FY11 Funding Update: House Appropriations Committee Releases Short-Term Continuing Resolution

Hoping to avoid a looming government shutdown, the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee on Friday released a short-term continuing resolution that will fund the government for an additional two weeks after the current CR expires on March 4.  In keeping with the theme of reduced spending, the proposed CR would cut $4 billion from current spending, mostly in the form of programs slated to be reduced or eliminated in President Obama’s FY12 budget.  The cuts also target earmarks within several agencies, but spare the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation.

The House will debate the bill starting on Tuesday, and, barring any unforeseen events, will likely pass the bill quickly.  This maneuver will once again move the process to the Senate, where Democrats have signaled their willingness to accept the short-term compromise, while remaining leery of the full year CR passed by the House last week.  More to come…

NIH Reorganization Approved by Advisory Panel

The National Institutes of Health are one step closer to the first large-scale reorganization in nearly a decade.   During a conference call on Wednesday, the agency’s Scientific Management Review Board officially endorsed working group recommendations that would dissolve the National Center for Research Resources and distribute its constituent programs within other entities within NIH.  Pending Congressional intervention, the board’s action is the final nail in NCRR’s coffin.

At its Dec. 7 meeting, the SMRB recommended removing the Clinical and Translational Science Awards program from NCRR and placing it in the newly-created National Center for the Advancement of Translational Science, along with programs for Therapeutics for Rare and Neglected Diseases Program, Rapid Access to Interventional Development Program, Cures Acceleration Network, and the Molecular Libraries Screening Center Network.  The board also asked NIH to form two task forces, one to determine which other programs (if any) should comprise NCATS, and the other to assign new homes within other institutes for the remaining NCRR programs.

Reporting for the NCATS task force, Dr. Thomas Insel, Director of the National Institute for Mental Health, concluded that the original Translational Medicine and Therapeutics Working Group recommendations on programs to be included in the new center were sufficient, and that no additional programs would be appropriate.  Meanwhile, the NCRR task force released a “straw model” detailing where NCRR programs would be placed, inviting feedback on the model from the scientific community.  After receiving over 1100 comments on its website, the task force released a finalized version just before the SMRB meeting.  The most striking change from the straw model was the formation of a permanent “Infrastructure Entity” within the Office of the Director, which would contain several disparate programs, including the Shared and High End Instrumentation programs and the Division of Comparative Medicine.  Meanwhile, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences would receive the Institutional Development Award program, along with all non-imaging Biotechnology Resource Technology Center programs.

The proposed reorganization has been the source of controversy since its inception.  Initially it was the scientific community leading the charge; however, the past month has seen Capitol Hill take the reins.  In January, House Appropriations staff member John Bartrum penned an incisive letter that raised numerous issues concerning the reorganization, and requested answers from NIH leadership.  Bartrum eventually met with NIH officials, including NCRR task force chair Dr. Lawrence Tabak, to discuss the issue, but was reportedly unsatisfied by the responses he received.  In addition, earlier this month, numerous members of the Senate raised concerns about the plan in a series of letters to the NIH and Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  The letters express “concern and opposition” to the pace of the proposed reorganization, specifically mentioning the placement of the IDeA program.  Adding to the fervor, last week Dr. Jeremy Berg, Director of NIGMS and former member of the SMRB, publicly expressed his displeasure with the process, and urged the board not to dismantle NCRR.

Surprisingly, none of these concerns were discussed during the SMRB phone call.  The only objection to the process on the call came from SMRB member Thomas Kelly from Sloan-Kettering Memorial, who wondered if the board should undertake a more in-depth study of the proposed reorganization.  Kelly’s concerns were dismissed by Dr. Tabak, who insisted that the completed study had in fact been sufficiently thorough.  During the public comment session, numerous participants from disease advocacy groups expressed their support for the plan.

A town-hall meeting with stakeholders has been arranged for March 14.  ASBMB staff and Public Affairs Committee members will attend and voice the society’s position.

FY11 Funding Update: House Passes Continuing Resolution (Again)

After weeks of jostling, the House of Representatives last Saturday passed H.R. 1, a continuing resolution that will fund the government through the end of FY 2011.  The finalized spending bill, which is essentially identical to the version that was introduced on Feb. 11, totals $61 billion less than FY10 spending levels and is $100 billion lower than President Obama’s FY11 budget request.

In spite of impassioned work from advocates both within the scientific community and on Capitol Hill, science agencies did not escape the chopping block.  The National Institutes of Health are set to lose $1.6 billion from their FY10 budget, while the National Science Foundation will lose $359 million.  The impact of these cuts will be felt even more strongly in reality than on paper, since they will be taken from the remaining six months of the fiscal year rather than being retroactively prorated over the entire year.   Therefore, agencies going forward will have significantly less money to award for grants than they do now, likely leading to rapidly shrinking paylines (which for some institutes have already sunk below 10 percent).

The bill now heads to the Senate, where the upper chamber will again attempt to finish the FY11 budget process. Last December, the then-Democratic lead House passed a year-long CR that would have held spending for all federal agencies at FY10 levels.  However, the Senate decided to instead consider an omnibus bill that would have increased the overall funding level relative to FY10 and included specific increases for both the NIH and NSF.  After failing to muster enough support for the omnibus bill in the Senate, Congress ended up passing the temporary CR that is now in place.

Senate Democrats have indicated that they will not support the House bill, and President Obama has also vowed to veto the bill in its current form.  The threat of a government shutdown lingers if no compromise is reached, as the current CR that is running the government will expire on March 4.  House Republicans have mentioned the possibility of yet another temporary CR being passed, in order to give Congress still more time to debate the issue.

ASBMB will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates.

FY12 Funding Update: President Releases FY 2012 Budget

President Obama released his budget request for FY 2012 on Monday.  While reducing discretionary spending to $1.344 trillion, the budget nevertheless totals $3.7 trillion in overall spending and projects a record deficit of nearly $1.6 trillion, thanks to rises in non-discretionary programs, including Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  Sticking with his themes of education and innovation, Obama targeted the Department of Education and multiple science agencies for large budget increases, while making cuts to the Department of Defense and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The National Institutes of Health were tabbed for an increase of $745 million, bringing the total agency budget to almost $32 billion.  Unfortunately, the 2.4% jump from the enacted FY10 level fails to mirror the projected 2.8% increase in Biomedical Research and Development Price Index (BRDPI) for 2011.  Furthermore, though the NIH budget request is seemingly straight-forward at a first glance, a little digging muddies the picture, in particular regarding the recent controversy surrounding the proposed remodeling of the agency.  The proposed National Center for the Advancement of Translational Science, though described in the NIH budget request summary as being an agency priority, did not receive a line item budget request.  However, several of the programs to be incorporated into NCATS, including the Tropical and Neglected Disease (TRND) program and the newly-authorized Cures Acceleration Network, did receive specific budget requests.  In addition, the National Center for Research Resources, in spite of its impending dissolution, submitted a budget request of $1.3 billion.  The NIH budget request also projects a 2% decrease in Research Project Grant success rate, resulting in 228 fewer new competing grants.  At the same time, the average grant size is expected to increase to $433,000, a jump of $16,000.

Meanwhile, the National Science Foundation received $895 million more than in FY10, leaving the agency with a final budget of $7.767 billion for FY12.  NSF Director Dr. Subra Suresh described the budget request as necessary “to maintain the agency’s position as the nation’s engine of innovation in science, engineering and science education.”  At a breakout session following Dr. Suresh’s presentation, NSF Directorate of Biological Sciences Acting Assistant Director Joann Roskoski detailed several projects, including the Research at the Interface of the Biological, Mathematical and Physical Sciences (BioMaPS) program and the Cyberinfrastructure for 21st Century Science and Engineering (CIF21) program, that would involve trans-directorate collaboration, one of the “pillars” of Dr. Suresh’s vision for the NSF.

Congressional hearings on the FY12 budget are expected to begin in late February.  However, Congress must first wrap up work on the FY11 budget before the March 4 expiration of the continuing resolution currently funding the government.

ASBMB will continue to monitor the situation both on Capitol Hill.  Stay tuned to the ASBMB Policy Blotter for the latest updates!

FY11 Funding Update: House Releases Continuing Resolution

On Friday, the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee released the most recent version of the FY11 funding bill that has been worked on for the past twelve months.  The continuing resolution, which would fund the government through the end of FY11, restricts discretionary spending to $1.028 trillion, a $60 billion decrease from FY10 enacted levels and nearly $100 billion less than President Obama’s initial request, making cuts to almost every government agency.  Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers, R-Ky., defended the cuts as crucial for “returning our nation to a sustainable financial path.”

After seeming to have escaped the chopping block following last Wednesday’s release of the initial list of budgets to be cut, science agencies instead received the same fate as other government agencies.  Relative to FY10, the National Institutes of Health would have its budget reduced to approximately $29.4 billion, a $1.6 billion decrease, while the National Science Foundation would lose nearly $360 million.

The bill is expected to be voted upon this week by the House.  Assuming it is approved, it will be taken up by the Senate, where Democrats have already signaled their opposition.  Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, criticized House Republicans for “attempt[ing] to balance the budget on the back of domestic discretionary investments,” pointing out that non-defense discretionary spending represents a mere 15% of the federal budget.

ASBMB Public Affairs staff will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates.

FY11 Funding Update: Appropriations Committee Details Spending Cuts

On Wednesday, the House of Representatives’ Appropriations Committee released its initial list of spending cuts for FY11.  According to Committee Chairman Harold Rogers, R-Ky., the move will result in savings of $74 billion, relative to President Obama’s FY11 budget request.  The list details 70 agencies and departments that will see reduced budgets; the National Institutes of Health would see its budget held at the FY10 level of $31 billion, $1 billion less than the President’s request, while the National Science Foundation budget would be set at $7.285 billion, a surprising increase of $359 million.

Unfortunately, these proposals did not sit well with several House Republicans, who demanded that the Appropriations Committee remain committed to the party campaign promise of $100 billion in spending cuts.  In response, Chairman Rogers, announced that he would instruct his subcommittee chairs to make deeper cuts in order to reach this goal.  However, his lieutenants have indicated that science agencies may be spared: Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf, R-Va., signaled his subcommittee’s intent to do “everything we can to protect NSF.”

It is expected that the full budget proposal for FY11 will be unveiled by the House sometime next week.  Also next week, President Obama will release his FY12 budget request, leaving the Congressional Appropriations committees the unenviable task of trying to tackle both budgets simultaneously.

The ASBMB Public Affairs staff is closely monitoring the situation and will continue to report on developments as they occur.  Stay tuned for alerts on how you can get involved with the process!

FY11 Funding Update: House Republicans Unveil Spending Plan

Last Thursday, the House Budget Committee re-started the FY 2011 budget process by releasing its spending caps for appropriations bills.  The overall discretionary appropriations level was set at $1.055 trillion, which is $74 billion less than President Obama had initially requested for FY11.  However, the cap is “only” $35 billion less than the FY10 enacted level, much less extreme than the $100 billion cuts proposed by Republicans in their September “Pledge to America.”  In response, Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., claims to have essentially pro-rated the cuts, given the fact that the proposal is being submitted more than four months into FY11, and promised to “continue to tackle the country’s fiscal problems by advancing spending cuts and spending reforms, and by charting a new course with a new budget for the upcoming fiscal year.”

Based on the cap set by Chairman Ryan, House Appropriations Chairman Harold Rogers, R-Ky., then dictated allocations to each of the twelve Appropriations subcommittees that reflected the decreased spending.  The Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education subcommittee, which funds the National Institutes of Health, was allocated $157 billion, a 4 percent decrease from FY10.  Much more severe was the cut to the Commerce, Justice and Science subcommittee that funds the National Science Foundation, which received a 16 percent overall decrease in allocations, relative to FY10.  By contrast, Defense spending will actually rise from FY10, though only by 2 percent.  It will now fall to the individual subcommittees to determine which specific agencies and departments will see their budgets cut.

Moving forward, it is expected the Appropriations subcommittees will report back to the full committee with their bills sometime this week.  From there, the individual bills would be combined into a single omnibus appropriations bill that would be debated on the House floor before being taken up for a vote, likely during the week of February 14.  The process would then fall to the Senate to complete before the continuing resolution that is currently funding the government expires on March 4.

NIH Reorganization Proposal Draws Scrutiny

The back and forth over the proposed reorganization of the National Institutes of Health has heated up over the past few weeks.  Following the Dec. 7 announcement from the Scientific Management Review Board recommending the creation of the National Center for Advancing Translational Science and corresponding destruction of the National Center for Research Resources, stakeholders have offered their opinions, both publicly and privately, but received little to no response from NIH leadership.  After Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius officially notified Congress of the agency’s plan on Jan. 14, NIH Director Francis Collins finally broke his silence and gave a series of interviews on the topic.  Collins was directly quoted by the New York Times in an article that implied the NIH was attempting to form a pseudo-pharmaceutical company.  This characterization drew an unexpected response from the NIH, who posted a series of rebuttals of the article and its implications on the feedback.nih.gov website.

However, the debate did not end there.  On Jan.19, John Bartrum, former NIH budget director and currently a staffer on the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee, sent Collins and Sebelius a letter asking several poignant questions about the process.  Several of these questions, which ranged from budgetary issues to justification of the criteria used to eliminate NCRR, echoed concerns voiced by stakeholders.  A meeting between Bartrum and NIH leadership, including NCRR Director Barbara Alving and NCRR Task Force Chair Lawrence Tabak, is scheduled for this Friday, Feb. 4.

Congress is not the only body speaking up.  Last week, advisory councils for both NCRR and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences vocalized their opposition to the plan.  The NIGMS council went so far as to agree to write a letter to Dr. Collins, formally indicating their displeasure with the reorganization.  NIGMS is the proposed destination for several NCRR programs, including several of the instrumentation programs, and its director, Dr. Jeremy Berg, has indicated his reluctance to accept a change in his institute’s structure.

Howard Garrison, Director of Public Affairs for the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, has volunteered to draft the letter from the NIGMS council.  ASBMB will work closely with Dr. Garrison to ensure that the letter presents our membership’s concerns.  Stay tuned to the Policy Blotter for the latest updates on the situation!