Government

Proposed Bill Threatens Open Access to Taxpayer-Funded Research

Proposed House Bill Would End Open Access to Scholarly Articles of Taxpayer Funded ResearchIn recent years, Congress decided to make it a law that most taxpayer funded research had to be posted online with free access within 12 months of publishing. Access to a scholarly article can cost around $30. Now, a new bill introduced to the House of Representatives in December seeks to overturn that law.

The Research Works Act (H.R.3699) was introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). The proposed legislation would prevent unauthorized free access to journal articles on research that was in part federally-funded because publishers in the private sector do not receive the funding. According to the American Association of Publishers, which supports the bill, it would also:

[...] prevent non-government authors from being required to agree to such free distribution of these works. Additionally, it would preempt federal agencies’ planned funding, development and back-office administration of their own electronic repositories for such works, which would duplicate existing copyright-protected systems and unfairly compete with established university, society and commercial publishers.

Those who oppose the bill and support continuing and even furthering open access, like David Dobbs for Wired, believe it is necessary for “healthy science and science policy”. Dobb’s points out a blog post by Michael Eisen, a UC Berkeley evolutionary biologist, who states that it maintaining open access is good for both the general taxpaying public as well as other researchers in the field:

The policy has provided access for physicians and their patients, teachers and their students, policymakers and the public to hundreds of thousands of taxpayer-funded studies that would otherwise have been locked behind expensive publisher paywalls, accessible only to a small fraction of researchers at elite and wealthy universities.

[...]

But the policy has been quite unpopular with a powerful publishing cartels that are hellbent on denying US taxpayers access to and benefits from research they paid to produce. This industry already makes generous profits charging universities and hospitals for access to the biomedical research journals they publish. But unsatisfied with feeding at the public trough only once (the vast majority of the estimated $10 billion dollar revenue of biomedical publishers already comes from public funds), they are seeking to squeeze cancer patients and high school students for an additional $25 every time they want to read about the latest work of America’s scientists.

AAPA counters stating that more than 30,000 workers and millions of dollars make it possible produce independent peer-reviewed journals with specialized experts and that 45 percent of all papers published worldwide appear in North American journals. Without charging for these services, they believe the journals would be unable to continue the high standard demanded of scientific publications. The organization also notes that journal articles are often accessible at academic institutions, libraries, online databases and through interlibrary loan programs.

The University of Michigan’s What We’re Reading blog post by Meredith takes issue with the fact that AAPA is saying it isn’t get compensated for maintaining an expensive peer-review process. Meredith points out that many journals only facilitate peer review, with the actual review taking place by a scholar on a pro bono basis.

Eisen goes on to point out that Elseiver, a Dutch publisher, has made several political contributions in 2011, many of which went to co-sponsor Maloney although only one contribution was from a senior executive within her district.

Proposed House Bill Would End Open Access to Scholarly Articles of Taxpayer Funded Research

Elsevier political contributions. (Image via Michael Eisen)

The bill has currently been referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Comments (33)

  • mauijonny
    Posted on January 8, 2012 at 10:15pm

    Private publishers of publically funded research manuscripts don’t do it for free – they charge the scientist / research institution for publication. Those publically funded articles are then uploaded to publically funded websites, after 12 months, to make them freely available to the public. Publishers are well aware of this. I CAN tell you, by first-hand knowledge, that publically funded scientist DO dump research that doesn’t fit the prescribed “norm.”

    Report Post » mauijonny  
  • sodacrackers2
    Posted on January 8, 2012 at 7:33pm

    The problem with federally funded anything at all is that it is all corrupt. Look at the “scientists” who brought us “global warming,” the biggest scam ever foisted on the world. Global warming = UN’s “spread the wealth” Agenda 21 scheme between politicians and bought and paid for “scientists.” Their agenda is global governance, no borders, no countries, no ownership of land, state sponsored religion: paganism. Exceptionally stupid intelligencia!

    Report Post »  
  • GI_JOJO
    Posted on January 8, 2012 at 6:22pm

    @The_ancient your statement; “I don’t think a Private company should be forced to publish it for free, but access should be free (say a website or some other delivery method) to any person that wants it.”

    Is exactly what’s wrong with any kind of tax-payer funded research. The bottom line is that in some ways federally funded research and it’s free availability is a wonderful thing — but — in other ways it is one of the worst possible things we can do. Making these articles available for the Peer Review process on a wider basis via free availability is great, for the scientists driving the research, it’s actually IMHO a negative thing for the general person. Bottom line most of these journals are indecipherable to someone outside the field that they cover… trust me I recieve multiple peer reviewed publications by which I maintain my CE credits (I am a radiographic technologist for those who were wondering and am trained in Computed Tomography, and fluoroscopy.) The bottom line is that someone outside my field would most likely be lost, or draw incomplete or incorrect confusion from the materials that I use, just as I would from say… the American Journal of Oncology… Those qualifications listed above represent the culmination of six years of training and on-the-job experience, not to mention hundreds of CE (continuing education) hours.
    Lack of understanding isn’t a reflection on intelligence, but necessity… incomplete understanding is worse than no und

    Report Post »  
  • kschmud
    Posted on January 8, 2012 at 4:18pm

    In order to get published in the real world, research needs to be of sufficiently quality. Further grants should be based on those doing research of publishable quality. Publishing everything for “free” takes away the motivation to do good reseach. It would IMPROVE the COMPETITION and therefore the quality of what taxpayer funds are funding.

    Report Post »  
  • rickroland
    Posted on January 8, 2012 at 1:44pm

    What this article covers is really only the tip of the iceberg. Tax-payer funded research *also* either fully or partially funds what then become patents filed for by the institution doing the research *or* the private corporation that paid for some or all(1) the research to be done. That means that tax-payers are funding what then becomes a veritable monopoly (through patents) that these institutions or private corporations are granted by the government, the result being that for the public to then benefit, they to A) pay through the nose for it and B) other companies or institutions are locked out from doing anything that the patent covers (which is then detrimental to all involved, mainly the tax-payers funding the research, in whole or in part).

    As a result, no patents should ever be issued for research done at any facility that is either wholly or partially funded by tax payer monies, in any way, shape or form. Because, it ends up being that tax-payers pay twice for it — first by their tax payer money being spent and second by giving the purchase of products or services that the patents cover. It’s a complete scam being run on the tax-payers.

    (1) Even if a research project is wholly funded by a private institution at a public facility (like a university), some portion of the facilities, staff, supplies, etc. are still monies spent by the tax payers, so no research done at *any* publicly funded institution is completely free of any tax payer money being spent on i

    Report Post »  
  • CulperGang
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 10:53pm

    This filthy government just does not want exposure. We need to remove the bastards, as soon as possible these bills are nOT serving the public good. Contrbution to campaign funds should be OUTLAWED. Candidates should ONLY run on their accomplishments. Get on C-Span say your piece and be done with it. This running around the country, caucuses is totally unnecessary in the Cyber Age.
    Politicians want to completely shield themselves like Obama has YET they take OUR privacy away.
    They have gone too far and too fast. We don’t need 90% of them. We don’t need their self serving bills either.
    WHY is a foreigner making$$$$$$$$ contribution to Maloney?? THAT is against the law. Still is isn’t it??

    Report Post » CulperGang  
  • Ted H
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 8:37pm

    My Tax return issue

    In response to the question: “List all dependents?”

    I replied -
    “12 million illegal immigrants”,
    “3 million crack heads”,
    “46 million unemployable people on food stamps”,
    “2 million people in over 243 prisons”,
    “Half of Mexico”, and,
    “535 fools in the U.S. House and Senate.”

    Apparently, this was NOT an acceptable answer.

    Report Post » Ted H  
    • sodacrackers2
      Posted on January 8, 2012 at 7:37pm

      hehehehehe I love it!! Truth is never acceptable to “progressives!”

      Report Post »  
  • independentvoteril
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 5:56pm

    easy answer PULL all taxpayer funding for ANY projects that produces articles published in any of these publications OR copy write them as belonging to the taxpayers as well than pay the taxpayers for use of the articles..

    Report Post » independentvoteril  
  • Drakkhanlord
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 2:55pm

    Until they open all the Secrets , will never trust this corrupt , disgusting govt.

    Report Post » Drakkhanlord  
  • Tyler520
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 11:43am

    On a tangent:

    Scientific fraud adn journal article retractions have increased exponentially:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303627104576411850666582080.html

    Report Post »  
  • Rowgue
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 11:35am

    If you accept government funding for your research then you know going in that the results will be freely available to the public. If you don’t want to make the results available to the people that paid for the research, then don’t accept the grant money.

    For all the bitching people do about the drug companies, at least they pay for their own research. Universities couldn’t do all the useless research they do that artificially prop up inflated numbers of people employed in acedemic fields without their government grants.

    Report Post »  
  • Anna Fallaxis
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 9:08am

    How about opening up disclosure on academic parasites who make a living off of bogus grants for ridiculous studies like shrimp on a treadmill and how fast ketchup comes out of a bottle. Every time you hear on the radio “scientist have discovered….” (some stupid thing designed to amuse us), just remember who is paying for that nonsense…YOU! Expose the abuse of grant money largesse and make all these pointy-headed scammers get a real job that will contribute to society instead of bleeding it dry. I’ll bet there are a million people who make their living this way.

    Report Post » Anna Fallaxis  
  • dnewton
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 7:51am

    I don’t see how a company can be made to offer free something that it cost them something to produce. Are we not violating the no-such-thing-as-a free-lunch rule? Maybe restaurants should make food free if the food was in anyway harvested and prepared under the management of the government. I would also like to know how this would impact the Commerce department providing magic Keynesian multipliers that were used to justify bad decisions from stadiums, convention centers, highway construction, taxes and stimulus packages. The last time I checked, you had to pay for this data directly to the government or pay someone else to produce it even though it was originally produced by a government agency.

    Report Post »  
    • MrObvious
      Posted on January 7, 2012 at 4:47pm

      There is a difference between free, and prepaid.
      If taxpayers funded the research, it’s already paid for. Charging again for access to the results would be like charging extra without justification.
      If would be like buying a car, paying for it, then having to pay an extra fee to the dealership for the keys.

      Report Post »  
    • hidden_lion
      Posted on January 7, 2012 at 5:17pm

      The studies are paid for by the taxpayer, the taxpayer should not have to pay to see the results.

      Report Post » hidden_lion  
  • MR_ANDERSON
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 4:25am

    I chose no, but it shouldn’t be easy to obtain on the internet. The information should be filled for at Government offices and picked up at Government offices. I don’t want the rest of the world benefiting more than the US.

    We pay for the research, so if China wants access to the info, they can start coughing up the cash…oh wait, never mind.

    Report Post »  
  • Chris
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 2:11am

    The federal government does not copyright their publications, The only cost for access if there is any at all should be for actual costs – if you want a printed copy of a publication it isn’t unreasonable to have to pay something to cover production and postage since you as an individual are getting a benefit for something that everybody paid for. I don’t see why on-line access should cost anything.

    Scientific journals are generally copyrighted and typically require a transfer of copyright for authors. There is usually a special clause for federal government authors in the copyright transfer to account for the fact that the work is in the public domain.

    It is true that the peer reviewers are usually doing it on a volunteer basis

    Report Post »  
  • mobynowak
    Posted on January 7, 2012 at 1:29am

    While the research may have been funded with taxpayer dollars, the physical published work belongs to the publisher. Nobody is obliged to disseminate that research to me or anyone else without compensation. We paid for the research and that’s all. Without for-profit publishers nothing would get out to begin with, unless you want higher taxes to fund that too.

    Report Post »  
  • OklahomaBound
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 11:57pm

    Sounds like we need to have one person buy a copy, scan it and then put it on the internet for everyone to see for free. Let’s see how they like them apples.

    Report Post » OklahomaBound  
  • OlefromMN
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 9:51pm

    If I read this story right, there are 310,000,000 +/- people that hold rights to the “research”. If my dollar is involved, my duly elected representatives have the say. That is why we hold elections. If you like this bill, let your reps know. If you don’t like this bill, let your reps know.

    Sorry, kinda a non-story IMO.

    Report Post » OlefromMN  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on January 6, 2012 at 10:16pm

      This is a huge story..Every story of this kind should be printed so we know who our enemies are. This is another right that we cannot lose..Can you imagine the audacity of these people being funded on the tax payer dime and then wanting the public to pay for its findings? If they want to play that way..then I think the public should rebel against them being federally funded..They didn’t get to where they were by having to pay for all of their information..Funny how when some people get a little power…they get really greedy and selfish. They should consider this information already paid for by the American tax payer..Did you know that the government has enacted forty thousand new laws for us? Constitution…where are you?

      Report Post »  
    • Hobbs57
      Posted on January 6, 2012 at 10:38pm

      This article is written a bit confusing. I can access all these journals, as can any student who is in college, through the database at their school library. I can actually access it at home through a port hole and get whatever journals that are published in the data base. I believe all libraries have a data base of these works that one can go and access. Much of this research does receive public funding but some of it is privately funded with some federal grants. I guess I agree with the law makers, if there is federal money invo0lved then the scholarly journal should be available for free. However, I don’t know what manner these journals are presented in, meaning, I wonder if there is some type of editing and publishing methods that make the information provided be in a presentable way. In other words, who maintains these data bases and inputs the information so that I am able to access it through my school ? I am sure there is cost involved with managing them.So will the we, the tax payer, now have to pay for maintaining these data bases ?? Does the Conressman/woman have some friends who will do this for the government and be funded there in ? Thus, wiping out the competition and lowering the quality of standard while costing the tax payer more ?? Just like school loans. Obama took over the loans, but the interest rates are still the same and a private bank they select manages the loans. SO what did he do, get rid of the private market and replace it with his friends?

      Report Post » Hobbs57  
    • 13th Imam
      Posted on January 6, 2012 at 11:08pm

      Seems that you remedy this by cutting all funding by TAXPAYERS (53%). If private companies or university’s(that have millions in endowment funds) want to spend their own money on research, they can keep any profits. otherwise this crap happens when politicians , unions and private companys, collude to steal Taxpayers(53%ers) money.

      Report Post » 13th Imam  
    • Ohello
      Posted on January 7, 2012 at 12:33am

      A better question is should taxpayers who paid for the manufacture of surplus historical M1 Garand WWII rifles have to pay market price or higher for rifles they already bought and own as taxpaying citizens? I think the cost of shipping and maintenance would be sufficient, maybe a 100-200 each rifle should be enough. The 99% should get them at surplus prices. The 1% should pay double market.

      Report Post »  
    • Chris
      Posted on January 7, 2012 at 2:19am

      The researchers and the organizations that they work for – industry, university, or government – aren’t the ones making the money off of these publications, it is the people that publish the journals. A university researcher that works on a government grant publishes the results in a journal and it is the journal that charges for access.

      At least some federal agencies publish their own research results. Those publications are in the public domain but publishing in a journal is still attractive because of a potentially wider audience and higher impact because the more prestigious journals are more competitive and harder to get a paper in.

      Report Post »  
  • Slice_Of_Life
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 9:50pm

    How’s that transparency working for ya?

    Report Post » Slice_Of_Life  
  • Dumbwhiteguy
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 9:42pm

    There are so many people and organizations that think of new ways to politicized our system and undermine our democracy everyday, We have demonized our system to the point that is leading us to our end days.

    It’s a shame that we think our kids are going to have a future and we will be grandparents. I guess each individal family has to find out if they are ready to battle the beast.

    Report Post »  
  • planeboy
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 9:41pm

    Let me see if my tax dollars paid for it….no brainer…

    Report Post »  
  • justangry
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 9:38pm

    Why the overwheming bi-partisan support for all this disgusting legislation from the same people who can’t come together on a freaking budget? Seems like they’re all playing for the Team Screw America. Only pretending to be polar opposites on meaningless crap. They’re all crooked and need to be fired.

    Report Post » justangry  
  • the_ancient
    Posted on January 6, 2012 at 9:30pm

    People receiving the money should freely publish to research, I don’t think a Private company should be forced to publish it for free, but access should be free (say a website or some other delivery method) to any person that wants it.

    Report Post » the_ancient  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love