[Random-bits] KEI letter opposing amendments to weaken open access to NIH funded research

[James Love]

http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=155

KEI letter opposing amendments to weaken open access to NIH funded
research
 
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW Suite 500, Washington DC, 20009 - Tel +1 202
332 2670, www.keionline.org

22 October 2007
 
contact: Manon Ress, manon.ress@keionline.org

Dear Senator:

Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)[1]  opposes proposed Amendments
#3416 and #3417 to the FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services and
Education Appropriations bill (S.1710).

Both amendments are naked attempts to eliminate public access to
government funded research, in order to protect a handful of publishers.

KEI wrote the Senate on July 23, 2007, supporting the current provisions
in the appropriations bill that require the deposit of manuscripts in
the National Library of Medicine’s online database to be made publicly
available within one year of publication in a peer-reviewed journal.[2]
One of the proposed Inhofe amendments (#3416) would return to the failed
voluntary NIH policy now in place, while the other (#3417) would
effectively eliminate the obligation whenever it was contrary to "the
policies of the publishers who have conducted the peer review and
accepted the manuscripts for publication." 

Amendments like these are shocking reminders that citizens have to fight
for access to the very research they have paid for as taxpayers.

As it stands, the open access provisions in the appropriation bill are
not very strong.  The Senate could have provided for public access with
six months of first publication (as  proposed in recent World Health
Organization negotiations over access to knowledge standards),  or much
stronger measures, such mandatory obligations to publish only in open
access journals that provide for immediate access.

Americans pay about $100 per capita to support the NIH, and deserve
policies that promote access.  When everyone has access to the research,
science advances faster, and the expanded dissemination of new knowledge
benefits doctors, patients and others who make more informed decisions. 

KEI joins the growing movement of consumer groups, libraries, academic
researchers and citizens who ask you to vote NO on Amendments #3416 and
#3417.

Sincerely,

 

Dr. Manon A. Ress 

[1]KEI is public interest organization that searches for  better
outcomes, including new solutions, to the management of knowledge
resources. KEI undertakes and publishes research and new ideas, engages
in global public interest advocacy, provides technical advice to
governments, NGOs and firms, enhances transparency of policy making,
monitors actions of key actors, and provides forums for interested
persons to discuss and debate knowledge ecology topics.  KEI also
publishes the peer reviewed open journal  Knowledge Ecology Studies.

[2]
http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102