Fiscal cliff: sequestration and the individual scientist

December 31, 2012 at 11:32 am 3 comments

The deadline for the government to pass legislation that averts the fiscal cliff is rapidly approaching. Negotiators are now focusing almost exclusively on working out a deal that extends tax cuts for most Americans. However, negotiators do not appear to be discussing solutions to the devastating spending cuts set to go into effect on Jan. 2. Barring a deal that postpones sequestration, nearly all federal agencies, including the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, will sustain an 8.2 percent cut to their budgets.

Several pieces have been written about the effects of tax hikes, cuts to the defense budget, and cuts to universities and research funding. But what does sequestration mean for the individual researcher? Here are sixthings you need to know that could affect how you do science should the country go over the fiscal cliff.

  1. The 8.2 percent cut required by sequestration comes out to a $2.5 billion cut for NIH, a $560 million cut for NSF and significant cuts for other federal science funding agencies.
  2. By law, the NIH cannot reduce spending on the salaries of its federal employees with the speed required by sequestration. Thus, to trim the NIH budget by $2.5 billion, the extramural grant program is likely be cut by more than 11 percent.
  3. The White House probably will let each agency determine how best to deal with sequestration. The NIH leadership, in turn, probably will notify each institute/center of its budget under sequestration but allow each to decide how to administer these budget cuts.
  4. Each NIH institute/center is likely to administer its cuts in a different manner. This could mean reducing the funding level for noncompeting grants or cutting specific programs altogether.
  5. Our sources suggest that the NSF likely will not cut specific programs but will reduce grant awards and try to spread the pain of budget cuts out over time.
  6. Salaries comprise a significant percentage of grant monies. Thus, if grant funding is reduced, some scientist jobs may be eliminated.
    1. Tenured faculty members and graduate students often have employment guarantees from their institutions so the employment of these scientists likely will not be directly affected by sequestration.
    2. Contract scientists, such as postdoctoral scholars, nontenured faculty, instructors, staff scientists and lab technicians, are most likely to bear the brunt of workforce downsizing due to sequestration.

The possibility of a deal being completed before the new year is diminishing rapidly. It is not clear how sequestration will affect the economy, but it is possible that the nation could fall back into recession. Some people in Washington predict that sequestration will be replaced in the upcoming debate over the debt ceiling. However, this is only speculation.

UPDATE: With the passage of a deal on the fiscal cliff, sequestration has been postponed for 2 months. Stay tuned to the Policy Blotter to find out how these developments will affect science funding and individual researchers.

About these ads

Entry filed under: Congress, Science Funding, White House. Tags: .

Catching up on the fiscal cliff and other science policy stories Fiscal cliff: for science funding, a temporary reprieve

3 Comments Add your own

  • [...] What does this mean for scientists? The biggest concern in the scientific community about the fiscal cliff always has been sequestration. For the National Institutes of Health, sequestration means a roughly $2.5 billion budget cut that would potentially come entirely from the extramural grant program. Similar cuts would occur at the National Science Foundation and other federal research funding agencies. The postponement of sequestration means that the fight against budget cuts to our nation’s research programs continues. You can find how these cuts would affect individual researchers here. [...]

    Reply
  • [...] As discussed on the Blotter before, sequestration would be devastating for academic research and individual researchers. However, both parties dislike sequestration and can continue to postpone these cuts until they [...]

    Reply
  • [...] will have a devastating effect on researchers across the nation. However, ASBMB and the NDD Summit are working to convey how these [...]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Categories

ASBMB Tweets

December 2012
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

RSS ASBMB News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: