[A2k] URGENT CALL TO ACTION: Tell your Senator to OPPOSE amendments that strike or change the NIH public access provision in the FY08 Labor/HHS appropriations bill

[Manon Ress]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
BAD amendments re the NIH public access policy, need for statement
opposing the proposed language before Monday October 22 (COB).
Manon

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Jennifer McLennan <jennifer@arl.org>
> Date: October 20, 2007 10:34:59 AM EDT
> To: ATA-MEMBERS
> Subject: [ATA-MEMBERS] URGENT CALL TO ACTION: Tell your Senator to
> OPPOSE amendments that strike or change the NIH public access
> provision in the FY08 Labor/HHS appropriations bill
> Reply-To: "ATA-MEMBERS" <ATA-MEMBERS@arl.org>
>
> URGENT CALL TO ACTION: Tell your Senator to OPPOSE amendments that
> strike or change the NIH public access provision in the FY08 Labor/
> HHS appropriations bill
> --------------------------------
>
> The Senate is currently considering the FY08 Labor-HHS Bill, which
> includes a provision (already approved by the House of
> Representatives and the full Senate Appropriations Committee), that
> directs the NIH to change its Public Access Policy so that
> participation is required (rather than requested) for researchers,
> and ensures free, timely public access to articles resulting from
> NIH-funded research. On Friday, Senator Inhofe (R-OK), filed two
> amendments (#3416 and #3417), which call for the language to either
> be stricken from the bill, or modified in a way that would gravely
> limit the policy=92s effectiveness.
>
> Amendment #3416 would eliminate the provision altogether. Amendment
> #3417 is likely to be presented to your Senator as a compromise
> that =93balances=94 the needs of the public and of publishers. In
> reality, the current language in the NIH public access provision
> accomplishes that goal. Passage of either amendment would seriously
> undermine access to this important public resource, and damage the
> community=92s ability to advance scientific research and discovery.
>
> Please contact your Senators TODAY and urge them to vote =93NO=94 on
> amendments #3416 and #3417. (Contact must be made before close of
> business on Monday, October 22). A sample email is provided for
> your use below. Feel free to personalize it, explaining why public
> access is important to you and your institution. Contact
> information and a tool to email your Senator are online at http://
> www.taxpayeraccess.org/nih/2007senatecalltoaction.html. No time to
> write? Call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121 to be
> patched through to your Senate office.
>
> If you have written in support before, or when you do so today,
> please inform the Alliance for Taxpayer Access. Contact Jennifer
> McLennan through jennifer@arl.org or by fax at (202) 872-0884.
>
> Thanks for your continued efforts to support public access at the
> National Institutes of Health.
>
> --------------------------------
>
> SAMPLE EMAIL
>
> Dear Senator:
>
> On behalf of [your organization], I strongly urge you to OPPOSE
> proposed Amendments #3416 and #3417 to the FY 2008 Labor, Health
> and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill (S.1710).
> These amendments would seriously impede public access to taxpayer-
> funded biomedical research, stifling critical advancements in
> lifesaving research and scientific discovery. The current bill
> language was carefully crafted to balance the needs of ALL
> stakeholders, and to ensure that the American public is able to
> fully realize our collective investment in science.
>
> To ensure public access to medical research findings, language was
> included in the in the FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services,
> and Education Appropriations Bill directing the NIH to make a much-
> needed improvement to its Public Access Policy -- requiring that
> NIH-funded researchers deposit their manuscripts in the National
> Library of Medicine=92s online database to be made publicly available
> within one year of publication in a peer-reviewed journal.  This
> change is supported by NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, and a broad
> coalition of educational institutions, scientific researchers,
> healthcare practitioners, publishers, patient groups, libraries,
> and student groups -- representing millions of taxpayers seeking to
> advance medical research.
>
> Amendment #3416 would eliminate this important provision, leaving
> only a severely weakened, voluntary NIH policy in place. Under the
> voluntary policy (in place for more than two years) less than 5% of
> individual researchers have participated -- rendering the policy
> ineffective. The language in Amendment #3417 would place even
> further restrictions on the policy, ensuring that taxpayers =96
> including doctors and scientists =96 are unable to take full
> advantage of this important public resource.
>
> Supporting the current language in the FY08 LHHS Appropriations
> Bill is the best way to ensure that taxpayers=92 investment in NIH-
> funded research is used as effectively as possible.  Taxpayer-
> funded NIH research belongs to the American public. They have paid
> for it, and it is for their benefit.
>
> I urge you to join the millions of scientists, researchers,
> libraries, universities, and patient and consumer advocacy groups
> in supporting the current language in the FY08 LHHS Appropriations
> bill and require NIH grantees to deposit in PubMed Central final
> peer-reviewed manuscripts no later than 12 months following
> publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Vote NO on Amendments #3416
> and #3417.

************************************************************************
***
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@keionline.org,

1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673

1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727

24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607

Il vaut mieux remuer une question, sans la d=E9cider, que la d=E9cider,
sans la remuer.
Pens=E9es, essais, maximes et correspondance de J. Joubert  p.249
http://visualiseur.bnf.fr/Visualiseur?Destination=3DGallica&O=3DNUMM-88671
Translation: It is better to debate a question without settling it
than to settle a question without debating it