Clean Stopgap Funding Bill Introduced After Initial GOP Proposal Fails
Members of Congress are working under a tight timeline to pass a stopgap funding measure, known as a continuing resolution, before the fiscal year ends on September 30, 2024. House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-LA) initial efforts to pass short-term funding have hit roadblocks, leading to growing uncertainty as the clock ticks toward a potential government shutdown.
Last week, Johnson's opening proposal--a six-month stopgap funding measure paired with the controversial "SAVE Act," which requires proof of citizenship to register to vote--was struck down on the House floor when 14 Republicans joined most Democrats in rejecting the plan with a 202-220 vote. The outcome was expected, as internal divisions among Republicans continued to hamper the party's ability to pass critical spending bills.
Following the failure of the first plan, bipartisan discussions began in earnest, with Senators like Appropriations Ranking Member Susan Collins (R-ME) and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) working to prevent a shutdown. Schumer has filed procedural motions that could allow him to introduce a funding bill in the Senate if the House fails to pass one in time.
Over the weekend, Johnson released a shorter-term, clean stopgap bill that would extend government funding through December 20. The measure leaves out a farm bill extension and disaster funding.
The new proposal has been welcomed by Democratic leaders in both chambers, but it comes with the potential for another pre-holiday showdown. "While this three-month funding bill would avert a needless government shutdown and avoids many of the problems associated with a continuing resolution that lasts until March, it leaves a number of holes and fails to address many issues that must be solved in December," said House Appropriations Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT).
House Panel Considers Legislation to Halt Wildlife Refuge Plan
A subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee is reviewing legislation (H.R. 8632), introduced by Representative Glenn Grothman (R-WI), that would block the Biden Administration's proposed "Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health" (BIDEH) rule.
The proposed rule, put forward by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in February, would update and formalize protections for the wildlife refuge system. The Administration has cited climate change, biodiversity loss, and other environmental threats as the impetus for the new rule, which would cover approximately 850 million acres within the wildlife refuge system.
Critics, including ranchers, farmers, and sportsmen, fear the proposed rule would limit grazing, hunting, and fishing opportunities. Grothman argues it prioritizes federal control over local conservation efforts.
At a recent hearing, FWS Deputy Director Steve Guertin defended the rule, saying it provides a consistent, transparent, and science-based approach to refuge management. "The proposal would standardize and clarify the existing processes refuge managers use to make management decisions. It does not ban any management practices nor remove refuge managers' decisionmaking authority," stated Guertin.
Republicans, joined by at least one Democrat, namely Representative Mary Peltola (D-AK), have voiced opposition to the rule, while most Democrats, such as Representative Jared Huffman (D-CA) dismiss claims that the rule would negatively impact current hunting and fishing practices on wildlife refuges.
At the same hearing, the subcommittee also considered a bipartisan measure (H.R. 8836) introduced by Representatives Ryan Zinke (R-MT) and Don Beyer (D-VA) to boost support for wildlife migration corridors. Guertin noted that he supports the intent of the Wildlife Movement Through Partnerships Act, adding that it "would align with several existing initiatives that support the conservation of wildlife corridors in partnership with states, tribes and private landowners. Habitat loss and fragmentation are widely recognized as some of the most important threats to biodiversity."
House Committee Advances Endangered Species Legislation
Last week the House Natural Resources Committee marked up several contentious bills, including a sweeping proposal to overhaul the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
A heated debate unfolded over the ESA Amendments Act of 2024 (H.R. 9533), a Republican-led measure spearheaded by Arkansas Representative Bruce Westerman. The proposed legislation seeks to overhaul the ESA, requiring economic and national security assessments for species listings, limiting critical habitat designations on certain private lands, and allowing states more control over recovery strategies--measures that Republicans argue will streamline the law but that Democrats see as an attempt to weaken vital environmental protections.
A series of amendments, proposed by Representative Jared Huffman (D-CA), aimed at dismantling key provisions of the bill sparked a spirited exchange. Representative Garret Graves (R-LA) took issue with the proposals, accusing Democrats of hijacking the process. Eventually, the bill passed along party lines, reflecting the deep partisan divide on the issue.
Democrats and environmental groups fear that the proposed changes would cripple the ESA, leaving endangered species more vulnerable in face of the climate crisis. Westerman, however, defended the bill, pointing to the ESA's modest 3 percent recovery rate for listed species as evidence that reform is needed.
The outcome of the vote signals a political fight ahead, with Republicans using this legislation to showcase their policy priorities ahead of the November elections, even as the bill faces near-certain defeat in the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Input Requested to Help Shape the First National Nature Assessment
The U.S. Global Change Research Program has launched an ambitious effort, known as the "National Nature Assessment," to evaluate the current state, trends, and future projections of America's lands, waters, wildlife, biodiversity, and ecosystems. This multi-agency effort is inviting public participation through a series of public sessions and a 45-day online comment period, allowing individuals to offer input and shape the first assessment's chapter outlines.
The assessment's goal is to provide a comprehensive view of nature's role in society and address challenges like climate change and biodiversity loss. According to the USGCRP, the chapters will "highlight what nature provides to us in terms of its inherent worth, our well-being, economic value, and more, while looking ahead to understand how these benefits might change in the future." Philip Levin, the assessment's director, has argued that "it is an assessment that is not just a compilation of data and trends, but it's really focused on what are the needs of people."
The first session was held last week at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, with 4 more in-person sessions scheduled to take place across 4 states, and a virtual session taking place on October 8. In addition, written comments can be submitted online until November 4, 2024.
Alongside the final report, due in 2026, the project will offer data dashboards, maps, and other tools to help policymakers and the public understand how changes in ecosystems may impact the future. This effort is seen as critical not only for documenting the value of nature but also for informing strategies to enhance biodiversity, sustainability, and equity nationwide.
Final Biomedical Research Misconduct Rule Scraps Controversial Provisions
The U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI), an oversight agency that investigates research misconduct by federally-funded biomedical scientists, has finalized its revised research misconduct policy, dropping controversial proposals after receiving extensive feedback.
ORI had initially proposed a change that would have allowed it to publicly release misconduct findings by universities, but concerns about regulatory overreach and breaches of confidentiality led to its removal. According to ORI, "the institutional investigation report is not a public document and is protected by federal privacy laws." However, institutions can "publish findings if they so choose," clarified ORI Director Sheila Garrity.
The agency also abandoned a proposed 30-day deadline to start an inquiry after an institution first receives a misconduct allegation; restored the option for universities to dismiss cases as "honest error"; and scrapped a requirement for institutions to record and transcribe all initial testimony.
The finalized rules, effective January 2025, give institutions until January 2026 to implement them. The new rules empower ORI to recommend journal retractions based on institutional findings and notify institutions if an employee was found guilty of misconduct by a former employer. ORI estimates compliance costs for federally-funded institutions impacted by the policy will reach $105 million over five years, but they predict the new policy will lead to more efficient investigations.
NSF Encourages Research Proposals at the Intersection of Biology and AI/ML
The National Science Foundation (NSF) Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) has released a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) encouraging proposals that leverage Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) to advance biological research.
The DCL, titled "Advancing Research at the Intersection of Biology and Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML)," emphasizes AI/ML's potential to address complex biological questions, develop predictive models, and spur bio-inspired innovations. It also highlights how increased understanding of biological systems can inform AI/ML developments.
Proposals should be submitted to existing BIO programs and must integrate or develop AI/ML methods to advance one or more goals represented by NSF biological sciences programs. Collaborative projects between biologists and AI/ML experts are encouraged, particularly those advancing both biological discovery and novel AI/ML research. However, proposals solely aimed at data generation are discouraged.
Researchers can access computing resources through the National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource (NAIRR) Pilot for AI-related projects. Principal Investigators are advised to contact relevant NSF program directors before submitting proposals. Inquiries may be directed to bio-ai@nsf.gov.
Last Chance to Enter the 14th Annual Faces of Biology Photo Contest
Enter the Faces of Biology Photo Contest for a chance to win $250 and to have your photo appear on the cover of the journal BioScience.
The competition showcases, in a personal way, biological research in its many forms and settings. The images help the public and policymakers better understand the value of biological research and education. The competition is sponsored by the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology in addition to the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS).
"Photography is an effective tool to help communicate the process of scientific research," said Scott Glisson, CEO of AIBS. "This contest provides a visual forum for expression, inspiration, and technical skill that can have a positive impact on how the public views research and science."
The theme of the contest is "Faces of Biology." Photographs entered into the competition must depict a person, such as a scientist, technician, or student, engaging in biological research. The depicted research may occur outside, in a lab, with a natural history collection, on a computer, in a classroom, or elsewhere.
The winning photos from the 2023 contest were featured in the April 2024 issue of BioScience.
Submissions must be received by 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on September 30, 2024. For more information or to enter the contest, visit our website.
Short Takes
-
In response to a requirement in the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, the National Science Foundation (NSF) is requesting input on ways to incorporate ethical, social, safety, and security considerations into the agency's merit review process and to develop strategies for mitigating the potential harms of scientific research and amplifying societal benefits from such research. Comments are requested on or before 11:59 p.m. (EST) on Friday, November 15, 2024.
-
The Polar Research Board (PRB) of the National Academies serves as the U.S. National Committee to the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC), a non-governmental, international scientific organization that promotes and facilitates cooperation in all aspects of Arctic research. In this role, the PRB is responsible for the selection of the U.S. Delegate and two representatives to each of the five Working Groups (WGs) of IASC. Nominations are currently sought for candidates to serve on the Cryosphere, Marine, and Social and Human WGs for a four-year term. Nominations should be submitted by Wednesday, September 25 to April Melvin (AMelvin@nas.edu). Learn more.
-
The Committee on Human Rights of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has compiled a set of resources meant to support researchers and scholars who have been targeted in connection with their professional work. In recent years, such attacks have been fueled in part by increased use of social media and other digital forms of communication. Recognizing that targeting comes in many forms and from a variety of actors, these resources are meant to support researchers and scholars in preventing and responding to targeted attacks.
From the Federal Register
The following items appeared in the Federal Register from September 9 to 20, 2024.
Agriculture
Commerce
Energy
Environmental Protection Agency
Health and Human Services
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
