General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrumps budget calls for seismic disruption in medical and science research
They also go beyond what many political observers expected. Trump had made clear that he would target the Environmental Protection Agency, but the budget blueprint calls for a startling downsizing of agencies that historically have received steady bipartisan support. The National Institutes of Health, for example, would be cut by nearly $6 billion, about a fifth of the NIH budget.
The shock waves of this blueprint will be felt far beyond the walls of government bureaucracies. The scientific endeavor across America depends to a large degree on competitive grants distributed by federal agencies that face dramatic budget cuts. NIH uses only about 10 percent of its $30 billion budget for in-house studies; more than 80 percent goes to some 300,000 outside researchers.
Investment in research and development has been seen since World War II as critical to national prosperity and security. But the Trump administration has signaled that government-funded science, like government more broadly, has become too sprawling.
The result is a budget that takes a sharp bite out of some programs and kills others outright. Those targeted for termination include an EPA program to clean up the Cheseapeake Bay, the accident-investigating Chemical Safety Board, and a NASA satellite program (long ago known as the GoreSat, after the idea was promoted by then-Vice President Al Gore) that monitors solar storms and Earths climate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/trumps-budget-would-slash-scientific-and-medical-research/2017/03/15/d3261f98-0998-11e7-a15f-a58d4a988474_story.html
greymattermom
(5,754 posts)First, NIH years ago started focusing on translational research, i.e. the road to cures. We don't want cures now? Second, NIH pays a huge portion of the salaries of medical school faculty. Medical schools have to provide research opportunities to students to keep their accreditation, and class sizes are increasing so more students will need research opportunities. We don't want medical schools now? Third, faculty have to be awarded at least one NIH grant, and in many institutions more than one, to get tenure or they lose their jobs. What is the bottom line here? No new cures, many fewer new doctors.
Hugin
(33,130 posts)Under our current low-brow "leadership".
Hugin
(33,130 posts)There. Fixed it.
Yes, this is where we land after 30 years of petty right-wing information and intellectual hating alt-news sites (See: Breitbart and InfoWars) running headlines (and only headlines) ridiculing basic research as an un-necessary waste of tax-payer money.
It's back to the Flat Earth and the dark ages.
Pholus
(4,062 posts)All our bases belong to China now....
http://www.computerworld.com/article/3180984/high-performance-computing/spy-agency-doe-see-china-nearing-supercomputing-leadership.html