Proposed federal budget would devastate cancer research, advocates say

Posted March 21, 2017

The NIH has long experienced bipartisan support among lawmakers, who awarded the agency an extra $2 billion in 2016. It amounts to 18 percent of NIH's budget and would trickle down to universities and other research institutions that use most of the money.

"When you see such drastic reductions in federal spending, it discourages students from completing or pursuing STEM degrees", Carney said. "Other countries are going to look more desirable". That reorganization would include eliminating entirely the $70 million Fogarty International Center, which focuses on global health by supporting research on the topic and by training researchers to work in developing countries.

Trump's spending plan - running into opposition from Republicans and Democrats alike - would cut about 20 percent of the roughly $30 billion budget of the nation's medical research agency that supports research on cancer, Alzheimer's disease, Zika and other conditions. Researchers say that work is important because numerous serious health threats faced in the United States originate elsewhere.

According to the blueprint reports of the White House Budget, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has received a 50 percent cut.

Regarding the March 17 news article "Science and medicine leaders say Trump budget would be dire for U.S". In its strongly worded statement, ASCO contended the proposed cuts would gut the USA research effort and drop the country out of its leadership role in cutting-edge medicine. UC President Janet Napolitano issued a statement decrying the proposed budget cuts, saying they would "stifle crucial advancements toward solving our nation's most pressing needs and challenges". NSF may be the biggest supporter of basic research in many academic disciplines, but agency officials have no idea whether Trump wants to raise or lower their current $7.5 billion budget. "We soundly oppose President Trump's budget outline", the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) wrote in a statement.

J. Craig Venter, a genetics pioneer and chief executive of the J. Craig Venter Institute in La Jolla, said the proposed cuts would forfeit American primacy in a sector where the United States enjoys "absolutely dominant leadership in the world".

However, Census Bureau will be getting an unexpected 7 percent rise, numerous other statistical agencies are also anticipated to be negatively impacted by the Trump administration's budget. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's statistical capabilities, for example, would be reduced while the administration maintains "core departmental analytical functions, such as the funding necessary to complete the Census of Agriculture", the document states. It's also silent on the research portfolios of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, although science advocates are not sanguine about their prospects.

"By undermining these surveys, you're undermining the quality and credibility of the data", remarked Naus.

In 2016, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis received more than $130 million in NIH grants. He also serves on national scientific advisory committees for organizations such as the National Institutes of Health. Every agency is now under a spending freeze that took effect last fall after Congress failed to pass a budget for 2017. That gives science organizations multiple opportunities to make clear why the work of research is so important.

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., who chairs the House Appropriation subcommittee that oversees NIH, didn't address NIH specifically, but said, "It will ultimately be Congress that makes the decisions about what will get cut and what will be increased".