Senate Multiplies Biomed Stimulus

The Senate is doubling down on the House proposal to support biomedical research and innovation with the recovery and reinvestment package—and then some. The Senate version of the stimulus bill originally provided $3.5 billion in funds for the National Institutes of Health (similar to the House version), but an amendment (SA 178), cosponsored by Sens. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Tom Harkin (D-IA) and passed by voice vote, adds $6.5 billion, for a total of $10 billion, according to Bob Grant at The Scientist.

A boost this significant would go a long way towards stabilizing an agency that has seen flat funding for five years, and a concomitant 13 percent decrease in buying power as a result of inflation.

Hopefully, a new policy on that lifts restrictions on federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research will follow passage of this stimulus. Increased NIH funding will give greater heft and meaning to the new stem cell policy. Indeed, some scientists have expressed skepticism about real change in the research environment if the policy shift opens up new stem cell lines to non-existent federal funding. Paul Basken reports in the Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription): “If Mr. Obama promises a policy reversal without finding significantly more money, ‘it will tend to ring hollow’,” according to Dr. Arnold R. Kriegstein of the University of California at San Francisco.

The article goes on:

A move by Mr. Obama might even bring scientists a counterproductive renewal of attention to the politics of stem cells. For all the attention Mr. Bush attracted with his 2001 order, stem-cell research has largely been redirected rather than blocked.

For more on the positive economic impact of NIH work and biomedical research in general see our recent post: “Data Bank: NIH Funding By the Numbers.”

Tags: , ,

Comments on this article

One Response to “Senate Multiplies Biomed Stimulus”

  1. David Bruggeman says:

    Exactly how is a temporary boost in funding supposed to stabilize an agency? Seriously. How will this not repeat the problems biomedicine faced after the last large boost in funding without some sign that the community won’t act like they have a free line of credit to hire and build to their hearts content?

Leave a Comment

Please remember that the Science Progress Terms of Use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted. By clicking "Submit Comment" below, you acknowledge that you have read our Terms of Use agreement and agree to its terms.

Close
E-mail It