This would be a huge mistake with ramifications felt throughout fields with even remote ties to federally funded research. It would be akin to cutting out the legs from American science. With directed research from the private sector and little room for science for the sake of science, the scientific community would begin to die. This would mark the end of cutting edge research and treatments and the end, for the large part, of new ideas.
In the current system, federal money if given out in the form of grants which are awarded based on a mixture of preliminary data, ideas, plausibility, and proof you can actually accomplish what you purpose. The proposed grants are read by a study section formed from experts in a given field. This group reads proposed grants and decides which ones are the best and therefore worthy of federal money. With the current lack of money in the system, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which are the primary funders of research in the country, have been forced to fund less and less research. Often the final cut is made based on who the scientists is or some other personal quality. There have even been stories of decisions coming down to a coin toss when two grants are so equally matched and there is only enough money to fund one.
The beauty of this system can be seen in times when the NIH has more than enough money to go around. When money is plentiful a meaningful line can be drawn between grants purposing meaningful research and those of a lesser caliber. In a time of very tight funding, this line blurs and often cutting edge research is left out in the cold. It is in times like these that the idea of getting rid of all federal money is purposed. When the country needs every dime and popular opinion is that scientists are not putting their federal dollars to work. "Let the private sector fund science!" is often the call heard. At first this sounds like a great idea. The private sector, primarily pharmaceuticals, main goal is to turn a profit and so this seems like an appealing solution. Turn the job of funding research to the pharmaceuticals and in no time at all, great things will start to happen. Unfortunately, this is not the case, business being business, pharmaceuticals are only interested in what will make them money. Most researchers are working on projects that will never make anyone a dime, but add to the collective knowledge of the species. In this way, over time, it becomes possible to take in this collective knowledge and begin to look at actual marketable products. Without federally funded research, many of the miracle drugs available today would not be around. Federally funded research is a beginning, it is a start for all that we have known, all the we want to know, and all that we will ever know.
Slashdot Mirror
This would be a huge mistake with ramifications felt throughout fields with even remote ties to federally funded research. It would be akin to cutting out the legs from American science. With directed research from the private sector and little room for science for the sake of science, the scientific community would begin to die. This would mark the end of cutting edge research and treatments and the end, for the large part, of new ideas. In the current system, federal money if given out in the form of grants which are awarded based on a mixture of preliminary data, ideas, plausibility, and proof you can actually accomplish what you purpose. The proposed grants are read by a study section formed from experts in a given field. This group reads proposed grants and decides which ones are the best and therefore worthy of federal money. With the current lack of money in the system, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which are the primary funders of research in the country, have been forced to fund less and less research. Often the final cut is made based on who the scientists is or some other personal quality. There have even been stories of decisions coming down to a coin toss when two grants are so equally matched and there is only enough money to fund one. The beauty of this system can be seen in times when the NIH has more than enough money to go around. When money is plentiful a meaningful line can be drawn between grants purposing meaningful research and those of a lesser caliber. In a time of very tight funding, this line blurs and often cutting edge research is left out in the cold. It is in times like these that the idea of getting rid of all federal money is purposed. When the country needs every dime and popular opinion is that scientists are not putting their federal dollars to work. "Let the private sector fund science!" is often the call heard. At first this sounds like a great idea. The private sector, primarily pharmaceuticals, main goal is to turn a profit and so this seems like an appealing solution. Turn the job of funding research to the pharmaceuticals and in no time at all, great things will start to happen. Unfortunately, this is not the case, business being business, pharmaceuticals are only interested in what will make them money. Most researchers are working on projects that will never make anyone a dime, but add to the collective knowledge of the species. In this way, over time, it becomes possible to take in this collective knowledge and begin to look at actual marketable products. Without federally funded research, many of the miracle drugs available today would not be around. Federally funded research is a beginning, it is a start for all that we have known, all the we want to know, and all that we will ever know.