Twitter Townhall

Watch President Obama's Twitter Townhall live now and submit your own question using the #askObama hashtag. How many questions about science and medical research can we get into the queue? Here are some of the questions currently being asked:

Endgame for FY 2011

On Friday, President Obama signed off on the budget deal brokered with Congress. The final tally was $38.5 billion in discretionary cuts, although even the CBO has questioned this number.

How did health research fare? We’ve seen better days. The NIH and NSF were both cut by 1.2%, about $300M and $60M respectively. The Agency for Healthcare Research and quality was cut by $25M or 6%, while the FDA was actually provided with $107M increase. The CDC has been hit with the worst of the cuts to health research, totaling $820M – a cut of nearly 13%.

So let’s think about this. At a time when our deficit is being driven by the cost of healthcare and American business is losing its competitiveness to pay for healthcare, our government has decided that prevention is not a priority. Cutting the CDC might save us $820M (0.0002% of total federal spending) in the short run, but how will those cuts impact our health, our deficit, and our economy in five years?

Some have suggested that this budget deal could have been much worse. The budget that was previously passed by the House and defeated by the Senate, HR 1, contained much deeper discretionary cuts that would have been devastating to health research and science.

Now that FY 2011 has come to a conspicuous end, Congress and the White House have already begun to set their sights on FY 2012 and beyond. Paul Ryan recently released his budget plan, ‘The Path to Prosperity’, and President Obama has put forth a plan entitled the ‘President’s Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility.’

Which plan do you support?

Crisis Averted, For Now

Some government employees may have been looking forward to a long weekend. But a government shutdown is no laughing matter. It’s clear that government employees throughout the nation were bracing for the absence of essential income in a difficult economic environment. But a deal was cut and appropriations will continue through the end of this fiscal year. So ends the long standing battle over FY 2011 budgeting, which culminated this past weekend with the 7th CR, and nearly furloughed 800,000 federal employees.

It’s hard to say just who came out ahead in this deal. All sides are claiming victory even though it is becoming increasingly clear that this was really just one of the first upcoming budget battles and tougher fights are still come (e.g. debt ceiling and entitlements).

Health research and science may emerge unscathed by this most recent budget debate, despite the fact that these areas were clearly targeted for cuts in H.R. 1 – the House spending bill that never passed the Senate.

Some have suggested that H.R. 1 should be viewed as a policy document that lays out the priorities of House Republicans and will continue to guide their approach to governing. Hence, while research programs may appear safe for now, they could be targeted again during debates over the FY 2012 budget.

This is why it is essential for all those who care about health research to continue to reach out to Congress and demonstrate the local impact and importance of these programs. Remember, that at the end of the day your representatives are ultimately accountable to you. Make sure they know that you didn’t send them to Washington to cut medical research.

Welcome to Budget 101

Image courtesy of Rep. Huizenga

Capitol Hill is buzzing over the budget these days. But for those of us not fully in tune with the budget process, all of the talk might sound like little more than, well, a buzz in our ears.

We can’t, however, brush it off: budgets for the NIH, FDA, CDC, and other important agencies are in danger of being cut. This is a time for science and research advocates to both understand and get involved in the federal budgeting process. So, consider yourself automatically enrolled in Budget 101, your introduction to the federal budget.

First, it’s important to realize that in Congress right now there are two concurrent arguments about two separate budgets:

Fiscal Year 2012
Affecting: Oct. 1, 2011 – Sept. 30, 2012
What’s going on? On Feb. 14, President Obama submitted his 2012 budget proposal to Congress. The budget will now proceed through Congressional committees and so forth (see below).

Fiscal Year 2011
Affecting: Now – Sept. 30, 2011
What’s going on? The 2011 budget was meant to have been completed and signed months ago, but a lack of movement in Congress has left the government functioning under a continuing resolution (CR). The CR stipulates that, for the time being, all areas of the federal government receive funding at the same level as the previous (2010) fiscal year. The CR, however, expires on March 4, at which time the federal government will shut down if no budget is ready. Currently, the Republican-controlled House has passed its own version of the FY2011 budget, but the Democrat-controlled Senate will likely block that budget, forcing a compromise.

As you can see, there’s been a holdup in the FY 2011 budget-making process. Here’s how the process is supposed to run, with a focus on how funding for agencies like the NIH goes through:

Step 1:
About one year before the president’s budget proposal, individual agencies (like the NIH, FDA, etc.) begin planning for the latest budget. They work with the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to come up with a budget strategy that also address the president’s priorities – fields and issues in which he’d like to see greater investment.

Step 2:
About six months before the president’s budget proposal, agencies have submitted their budget proposals and are negotiating with the OMB. By January, budget proposals should be finalized and compiled.

Step 3:
The president submits his budget proposal to Congress in February.

Step 4:
House and Senate budget committees discuss their own overall goals for spending and government revenue, which are then voted on. In cases of disagreement between the houses, a conference committee is set up. This step should take place February through May.

Step 5:
House and Senate appropriations committees take a closer look at the individual agency budgets and write bills that are then voted on by the individual house. Again, when there is disagreement between the Senate and House, a conference committee settles the difference. This step should take place June through September.

Step 6:
Appropriations bills are sent to the president - hopefully before Oct. 1, the start of the fiscal year. That, however, did not happen in time for FY2011, so a continuing resolution was passed instead. Continuing resolutions are not uncommon, but it is rare for a resolution to expire and lead to a government shutdown.

Step 7:
Agencies receive their funding.

If you’d like to learn more, check out The Washington Post’s interactive feature on the budgeting process, or this AAAS presentation on the budget process and R&D investment. Also, be on the lookout over the coming weeks as Research!America’s own website is updated with information about the federal budget.

Thoughts on the State of the Union Address

Now that it's had a bit of time to sink in, here are our thoughts on the State of the Union address made Tuesday evening.

The following passages are the opinions of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent those of any affiliated organizations.

Max's Take:
Science in the SOTU

Innovation is the light at the end of the tunnel for Obama. In his State of the Union speech, he spent an unprecedented amount of time discussing the role of science and research in leading the nation toward renewed prosperity. His remarks were undergirded by a fundamental belief in the societal benefits of science and pursuit of basic knowledge.

Even in the face of shifting national priorities and at a time when both sides of the isle are talking about cuts, Obama has been resolute in his support of science. This is especially striking given that many of the scientific investments being made today may not bear fruit in the short term, and probably not in time for the coming Presidential election.

Obama specifically mentioned the role of government support in the creation of the Internet, GPS, and computer chips. What other groundbreaking innovations should be included here? This is a tremendous opportunity for you to share how research has improved our world.

Heather's Impressions
Structural Integrity

By now you've read all of the promises about investing in biomedical research. Word is spreading far and wide about President Obama's call for innovation and more simply regulated salmon. Our Sputnik moment is upon us. And while others are discussing the verbage, I can't stop thinking about the construct.

I have a bit of a background in speechwriting and oral communications, so much of my time watching speeches is paying attention to rhetorical devices and style. Structurally, the president started with formalities and then led his content sections with science and education. Although I believe it is a priority for him - and that should be reflected in the upcoming budget as promised - I don't think that's why he led with it.

Science and education paved the way in the SOTU because they are topics everyone can get behind (as evidenced by years of public opinion data). No one wants America to be left behind. But it was more than just a warm-up; a unifying set of topics to bring on the applause.

Investment in research and innovation are about to face an epic fight for funding, and by framing it his way first, the president was attempting to counter early attacks. The position in the speech is just as important as the words he used.

As contradictions in the text of the speech already show, not everything mentioned on Tuesday night is going to happen. (I challenge anyone to find a SOTU where everything mentioned was actually accomplished as laid out in the speech.) However, that isn't the point of the SOTU. It's about goals, a vision, an ideal look at the future.

Beyond the structure of the speech is the structural integrity of its vision. Will the president be able to make his vision reality in the face of the worst economic situation since the Great Depression and a Congress with other plans? For the sake of science, I hope so.

State of the Union, 2011

For those of you who may have missed it last night, what follows is a complete transcript of President Obama's second State of the Union address. The noted applause is that of Congress. Although we wholeheartedly applaud many of the same issues they did, New Voices will be sharing their perspectives tomorrow. Have something you want to share? Add it to the comments of email hbenson at researchamerica.org to be part of the post.

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Tonight I want to begin by congratulating the men and women of the 112th Congress, as well as your new Speaker, John Boehner. (Applause.) And as we mark this occasion, we’re also mindful of the empty chair in this chamber, and we pray for the health of our colleague -- and our friend -– Gabby Giffords. (Applause.)

It’s no secret that those of us here tonight have had our differences over the last two years. The debates have been contentious; we have fought fiercely for our beliefs. And that’s a good thing. That’s what a robust democracy demands. That’s what helps set us apart as a nation.

But there’s a reason the tragedy in Tucson gave us pause. Amid all the noise and passion and rancor of our public debate, Tucson reminded us that no matter who we are or where we come from, each of us is a part of something greater -– something more consequential than party or political preference.

We are part of the American family. We believe that in a country where every race and faith and point of view can be found, we are still bound together as one people; that we share common hopes and a common creed; that the dreams of a little girl in Tucson are not so different than those of our own children, and that they all deserve the chance to be fulfilled.

That, too, is what sets us apart as a nation. (Applause.)

Now, by itself, this simple recognition won’t usher in a new era of cooperation. What comes of this moment is up to us. What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow. (Applause.)

I believe we can. And I believe we must. That’s what the people who sent us here expect of us. With their votes, they’ve determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together, or not at all -– for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics.

At stake right now is not who wins the next election -– after all, we just had an election. At stake is whether new jobs and industries take root in this country, or somewhere else. It’s whether the hard work and industry of our people is rewarded. It’s whether we sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but the light to the world.

We are poised for progress. Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again.

But we have never measured progress by these yardsticks alone. We measure progress by the success of our people. By the jobs they can find and the quality of life those jobs offer. By the prospects of a small business owner who dreams of turning a good idea into a thriving enterprise. By the opportunities for a better life that we pass on to our children.

That’s the project the American people want us to work on. Together. (Applause.)

We did that in December. Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans’ paychecks are a little bigger today. Every business can write off the full cost of new investments that they make this year. And these steps, taken by Democrats and Republicans, will grow the economy and add to the more than one million private sector jobs created last year.

But we have to do more. These steps we’ve taken over the last two years may have broken the back of this recession, but to win the future, we’ll need to take on challenges that have been decades in the making.

Many people watching tonight can probably remember a time when finding a good job meant showing up at a nearby factory or a business downtown. You didn’t always need a degree, and your competition was pretty much limited to your neighbors. If you worked hard, chances are you’d have a job for life, with a decent paycheck and good benefits and the occasional promotion. Maybe you’d even have the pride of seeing your kids work at the same company.

That world has changed. And for many, the change has been painful. I’ve seen it in the shuttered windows of once booming factories, and the vacant storefronts on once busy Main Streets. I’ve heard it in the frustrations of Americans who’ve seen their paychecks dwindle or their jobs disappear -– proud men and women who feel like the rules have been changed in the middle of the game.

They’re right. The rules have changed. In a single generation, revolutions in technology have transformed the way we live, work and do business. Steel mills that once needed 1,000 workers can now do the same work with 100. Today, just about any company can set up shop, hire workers, and sell their products wherever there’s an Internet connection.

Meanwhile, nations like China and India realized that with some changes of their own, they could compete in this new world. And so they started educating their children earlier and longer, with greater emphasis on math and science. They’re investing in research and new technologies. Just recently, China became the home to the world’s largest private solar research facility, and the world’s fastest computer.

So, yes, the world has changed. The competition for jobs is real. But this shouldn’t discourage us. It should challenge us. Remember -– for all the hits we’ve taken these last few years, for all the naysayers predicting our decline, America still has the largest, most prosperous economy in the world. (Applause.) No workers -- no workers are more productive than ours. No country has more successful companies, or grants more patents to inventors and entrepreneurs. We’re the home to the world’s best colleges and universities, where more students come to study than any place on Earth.

What’s more, we are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea -– the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That’s why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here. It’s why our students don’t just memorize equations, but answer questions like "What do you think of that idea? What would you change about the world? What do you want to be when you grow up?"

The future is ours to win. But to get there, we can’t just stand still. As Robert Kennedy told us, “The future is not a gift. It is an achievement.” Sustaining the American Dream has never been about standing pat. It has required each generation to sacrifice, and struggle, and meet the demands of a new age.

And now it’s our turn. We know what it takes to compete for the jobs and industries of our time. We need to out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world. (Applause.) We have to make America the best place on Earth to do business. We need to take responsibility for our deficit and reform our government. That’s how our people will prosper. That’s how we’ll win the future. (Applause.) And tonight, I’d like to talk about how we get there.

The first step in winning the future is encouraging American innovation. None of us can predict with certainty what the next big industry will be or where the new jobs will come from. Thirty years ago, we couldn’t know that something called the Internet would lead to an economic revolution. What we can do -- what America does better than anyone else -- is spark the creativity and imagination of our people. We’re the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices; the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers; of Google and Facebook. In America, innovation doesn’t just change our lives. It is how we make our living. (Applause.)

Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation. But because it’s not always profitable for companies to invest in basic research, throughout our history, our government has provided cutting-edge scientists and inventors with the support that they need. That’s what planted the seeds for the Internet. That’s what helped make possible things like computer chips and GPS. Just think of all the good jobs -- from manufacturing to retail -- that have come from these breakthroughs.

Half a century ago, when the Soviets beat us into space with the launch of a satellite called Sputnik, we had no idea how we would beat them to the moon. The science wasn’t even there yet. NASA didn’t exist. But after investing in better research and education, we didn’t just surpass the Soviets; we unleashed a wave of innovation that created new industries and millions of new jobs.

This is our generation’s Sputnik moment. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we haven’t seen since the height of the Space Race. And in a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We’ll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology -– (applause) -- an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people.

Already, we’re seeing the promise of renewable energy. Robert and Gary Allen are brothers who run a small Michigan roofing company. After September 11th, they volunteered their best roofers to help repair the Pentagon. But half of their factory went unused, and the recession hit them hard. Today, with the help of a government loan, that empty space is being used to manufacture solar shingles that are being sold all across the country. In Robert’s words, “We reinvented ourselves.”

That’s what Americans have done for over 200 years: reinvented ourselves. And to spur on more success stories like the Allen Brothers, we’ve begun to reinvent our energy policy. We’re not just handing out money. We’re issuing a challenge. We’re telling America’s scientists and engineers that if they assemble teams of the best minds in their fields, and focus on the hardest problems in clean energy, we’ll fund the Apollo projects of our time.

At the California Institute of Technology, they’re developing a way to turn sunlight and water into fuel for our cars. At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, they’re using supercomputers to get a lot more power out of our nuclear facilities. With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels, and become the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015. (Applause.)

We need to get behind this innovation. And to help pay for it, I’m asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. (Applause.) I don’t know if -- I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they’re doing just fine on their own. (Laughter.) So instead of subsidizing yesterday’s energy, let’s invest in tomorrow’s.

Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they’re selling. So tonight, I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: By 2035, 80 percent of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources. (Applause.)

Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all -- and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen. (Applause.)

Maintaining our leadership in research and technology is crucial to America’s success. But if we want to win the future -– if we want innovation to produce jobs in America and not overseas -– then we also have to win the race to educate our kids.

Think about it. Over the next 10 years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school education. And yet, as many as a quarter of our students aren’t even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. America has fallen to ninth in the proportion of young people with a college degree. And so the question is whether all of us –- as citizens, and as parents –- are willing to do what’s necessary to give every child a chance to succeed.

That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It’s family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair. (Applause.) We need to teach them that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline.

Our schools share this responsibility. When a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance. But too many schools don’t meet this test. That’s why instead of just pouring money into a system that’s not working, we launched a competition called Race to the Top. To all 50 states, we said, "If you show us the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement, we’ll show you the money."

Race to the Top is the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. For less than 1 percent of what we spend on education each year, it has led over 40 states to raise their standards for teaching and learning. And these standards were developed, by the way, not by Washington, but by Republican and Democratic governors throughout the country. And Race to the Top should be the approach we follow this year as we replace No Child Left Behind with a law that’s more flexible and focused on what’s best for our kids. (Applause.)

You see, we know what’s possible from our children when reform isn’t just a top-down mandate, but the work of local teachers and principals, school boards and communities. Take a school like Bruce Randolph in Denver. Three years ago, it was rated one of the worst schools in Colorado -- located on turf between two rival gangs. But last May, 97 percent of the seniors received their diploma. Most will be the first in their families to go to college. And after the first year of the school’s transformation, the principal who made it possible wiped away tears when a student said, "Thank you, Ms. Waters, for showing that we are smart and we can make it." (Applause.) That’s what good schools can do, and we want good schools all across the country.

Let’s also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child’s success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom. In South Korea, teachers are known as “nation builders.” Here in America, it’s time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. (Applause.) We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. (Applause.) And over the next 10 years, with so many baby boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science and technology and engineering and math. (Applause.)

In fact, to every young person listening tonight who’s contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child -- become a teacher. Your country needs you. (Applause.)

Of course, the education race doesn’t end with a high school diploma. To compete, higher education must be within the reach of every American. (Applause.) That’s why we’ve ended the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that went to banks, and used the savings to make college affordable for millions of students. (Applause.) And this year, I ask Congress to go further, and make permanent our tuition tax credit –- worth $10,000 for four years of college. It’s the right thing to do. (Applause.)

Because people need to be able to train for new jobs and careers in today’s fast-changing economy, we’re also revitalizing America’s community colleges. Last month, I saw the promise of these schools at Forsyth Tech in North Carolina. Many of the students there used to work in the surrounding factories that have since left town. One mother of two, a woman named Kathy Proctor, had worked in the furniture industry since she was 18 years old. And she told me she’s earning her degree in biotechnology now, at 55 years old, not just because the furniture jobs are gone, but because she wants to inspire her children to pursue their dreams, too. As Kathy said, "I hope it tells them to never give up."

If we take these steps -– if we raise expectations for every child, and give them the best possible chance at an education, from the day they are born until the last job they take –- we will reach the goal that I set two years ago: By the end of the decade, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. (Applause.)

One last point about education. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of students excelling in our schools who are not American citizens. Some are the children of undocumented workers, who had nothing to do with the actions of their parents. They grew up as Americans and pledge allegiance to our flag, and yet they live every day with the threat of deportation. Others come here from abroad to study in our colleges and universities. But as soon as they obtain advanced degrees, we send them back home to compete against us. It makes no sense.

Now, I strongly believe that we should take on, once and for all, the issue of illegal immigration. And I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows. (Applause.) I know that debate will be difficult. I know it will take time. But tonight, let’s agree to make that effort. And let’s stop expelling talented, responsible young people who could be staffing our research labs or starting a new business, who could be further enriching this nation. (Applause.)

The third step in winning the future is rebuilding America. To attract new businesses to our shores, we need the fastest, most reliable ways to move people, goods, and information -- from high-speed rail to high-speed Internet. (Applause.)

Our infrastructure used to be the best, but our lead has slipped. South Korean homes now have greater Internet access than we do. Countries in Europe and Russia invest more in their roads and railways than we do. China is building faster trains and newer airports. Meanwhile, when our own engineers graded our nation’s infrastructure, they gave us a "D."

We have to do better. America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, constructed the Interstate Highway System. The jobs created by these projects didn’t just come from laying down track or pavement. They came from businesses that opened near a town’s new train station or the new off-ramp.

So over the last two years, we’ve begun rebuilding for the 21st century, a project that has meant thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry. And tonight, I’m proposing that we redouble those efforts. (Applause.)

We’ll put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges. We’ll make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment, and pick projects based [on] what’s best for the economy, not politicians.

Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail. (Applause.) This could allow you to go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying –- without the pat-down. (Laughter and applause.) As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already underway.

Within the next five years, we’ll make it possible for businesses to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98 percent of all Americans. This isn’t just about -- (applause) -- this isn’t about faster Internet or fewer dropped calls. It’s about connecting every part of America to the digital age. It’s about a rural community in Iowa or Alabama where farmers and small business owners will be able to sell their products all over the world. It’s about a firefighter who can download the design of a burning building onto a handheld device; a student who can take classes with a digital textbook; or a patient who can have face-to-face video chats with her doctor.

All these investments -– in innovation, education, and infrastructure –- will make America a better place to do business and create jobs. But to help our companies compete, we also have to knock down barriers that stand in the way of their success.

For example, over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change. (Applause.)

So tonight, I’m asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years –- without adding to our deficit. It can be done. (Applause.)

To help businesses sell more products abroad, we set a goal of doubling our exports by 2014 -– because the more we export, the more jobs we create here at home. Already, our exports are up. Recently, we signed agreements with India and China that will support more than 250,000 jobs here in the United States. And last month, we finalized a trade agreement with South Korea that will support at least 70,000 American jobs. This agreement has unprecedented support from business and labor, Democrats and Republicans -- and I ask this Congress to pass it as soon as possible. (Applause.)

Now, before I took office, I made it clear that we would enforce our trade agreements, and that I would only sign deals that keep faith with American workers and promote American jobs. That’s what we did with Korea, and that’s what I intend to do as we pursue agreements with Panama and Colombia and continue our Asia Pacific and global trade talks. (Applause.)

To reduce barriers to growth and investment, I’ve ordered a review of government regulations. When we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on businesses, we will fix them. (Applause.) But I will not hesitate to create or enforce common-sense safeguards to protect the American people. (Applause.) That’s what we’ve done in this country for more than a century. It’s why our food is safe to eat, our water is safe to drink, and our air is safe to breathe. It’s why we have speed limits and child labor laws. It’s why last year, we put in place consumer protections against hidden fees and penalties by credit card companies and new rules to prevent another financial crisis. (Applause.) And it’s why we passed reform that finally prevents the health insurance industry from exploiting patients. (Applause.)

Now, I have heard rumors that a few of you still have concerns about our new health care law. (Laughter.) So let me be the first to say that anything can be improved. If you have ideas about how to improve this law by making care better or more affordable, I am eager to work with you. We can start right now by correcting a flaw in the legislation that has placed an unnecessary bookkeeping burden on small businesses. (Applause.)

What I’m not willing to do -- what I’m not willing to do is go back to the days when insurance companies could deny someone coverage because of a preexisting condition. (Applause.)

I’m not willing to tell James Howard, a brain cancer patient from Texas, that his treatment might not be covered. I’m not willing to tell Jim Houser, a small business man from Oregon, that he has to go back to paying $5,000 more to cover his employees. As we speak, this law is making prescription drugs cheaper for seniors and giving uninsured students a chance to stay on their patients’ -- parents’ coverage. (Applause.)

So I say to this chamber tonight, instead of re-fighting the battles of the last two years, let’s fix what needs fixing and let’s move forward. (Applause.)

Now, the final critical step in winning the future is to make sure we aren’t buried under a mountain of debt.

We are living with a legacy of deficit spending that began almost a decade ago. And in the wake of the financial crisis, some of that was necessary to keep credit flowing, save jobs, and put money in people’s pockets.

But now that the worst of the recession is over, we have to confront the fact that our government spends more than it takes in. That is not sustainable. Every day, families sacrifice to live within their means. They deserve a government that does the same.

So tonight, I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. (Applause.) Now, this would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was President.

This freeze will require painful cuts. Already, we’ve frozen the salaries of hardworking federal employees for the next two years. I’ve proposed cuts to things I care deeply about, like community action programs. The Secretary of Defense has also agreed to cut tens of billions of dollars in spending that he and his generals believe our military can do without. (Applause.)

I recognize that some in this chamber have already proposed deeper cuts, and I’m willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. But let’s make sure that we’re not doing it on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens. (Applause.) And let’s make sure that what we’re cutting is really excess weight. Cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine. It may make you feel like you’re flying high at first, but it won’t take long before you feel the impact. (Laughter.)

Now, most of the cuts and savings I’ve proposed only address annual domestic spending, which represents a little more than 12 percent of our budget. To make further progress, we have to stop pretending that cutting this kind of spending alone will be enough. It won’t. (Applause.)

The bipartisan fiscal commission I created last year made this crystal clear. I don’t agree with all their proposals, but they made important progress. And their conclusion is that the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it –- in domestic spending, defense spending, health care spending, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes. (Applause.)

This means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit. The health insurance law we passed last year will slow these rising costs, which is part of the reason that nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit. Still, I’m willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year -- medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits. (Applause.)

To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations. (Applause.) We must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market. (Applause.)

And if we truly care about our deficit, we simply can’t afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. (Applause.) Before we take money away from our schools or scholarships away from our students, we should ask millionaires to give up their tax break. It’s not a matter of punishing their success. It’s about promoting America’s success. (Applause.)

In fact, the best thing we could do on taxes for all Americans is to simplify the individual tax code. (Applause.) This will be a tough job, but members of both parties have expressed an interest in doing this, and I am prepared to join them. (Applause.)

So now is the time to act. Now is the time for both sides and both houses of Congress –- Democrats and Republicans -– to forge a principled compromise that gets the job done. If we make the hard choices now to rein in our deficits, we can make the investments we need to win the future.

Let me take this one step further. We shouldn’t just give our people a government that’s more affordable. We should give them a government that’s more competent and more efficient. We can’t win the future with a government of the past. (Applause.)

We live and do business in the Information Age, but the last major reorganization of the government happened in the age of black-and-white TV. There are 12 different agencies that deal with exports. There are at least five different agencies that deal with housing policy. Then there’s my favorite example: The Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they’re in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them when they’re in saltwater. (Laughter.) I hear it gets even more complicated once they’re smoked. (Laughter and applause.)

Now, we’ve made great strides over the last two years in using technology and getting rid of waste. Veterans can now download their electronic medical records with a click of the mouse. We’re selling acres of federal office space that hasn’t been used in years, and we’ll cut through red tape to get rid of more. But we need to think bigger. In the coming months, my administration will develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the federal government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America. I will submit that proposal to Congress for a vote –- and we will push to get it passed. (Applause.)

In the coming year, we’ll also work to rebuild people’s faith in the institution of government. Because you deserve to know exactly how and where your tax dollars are being spent, you’ll be able to go to a website and get that information for the very first time in history. Because you deserve to know when your elected officials are meeting with lobbyists, I ask Congress to do what the White House has already done -- put that information online. And because the American people deserve to know that special interests aren’t larding up legislation with pet projects, both parties in Congress should know this: If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it. I will veto it. (Applause.)

The 21st century government that’s open and competent. A government that lives within its means. An economy that’s driven by new skills and new ideas. Our success in this new and changing world will require reform, responsibility, and innovation. It will also require us to approach that world with a new level of engagement in our foreign affairs.

Just as jobs and businesses can now race across borders, so can new threats and new challenges. No single wall separates East and West. No one rival superpower is aligned against us.

And so we must defeat determined enemies, wherever they are, and build coalitions that cut across lines of region and race and religion. And America’s moral example must always shine for all who yearn for freedom and justice and dignity. And because we’ve begun this work, tonight we can say that American leadership has been renewed and America’s standing has been restored.

Look to Iraq, where nearly 100,000 of our brave men and women have left with their heads held high. (Applause.) American combat patrols have ended, violence is down, and a new government has been formed. This year, our civilians will forge a lasting partnership with the Iraqi people, while we finish the job of bringing our troops out of Iraq. America’s commitment has been kept. The Iraq war is coming to an end. (Applause.)

Of course, as we speak, al Qaeda and their affiliates continue to plan attacks against us. Thanks to our intelligence and law enforcement professionals, we’re disrupting plots and securing our cities and skies. And as extremists try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with respect for the rule of law, and with the conviction that American Muslims are a part of our American family. (Applause.)

We’ve also taken the fight to al Qaeda and their allies abroad. In Afghanistan, our troops have taken Taliban strongholds and trained Afghan security forces. Our purpose is clear: By preventing the Taliban from reestablishing a stranglehold over the Afghan people, we will deny al Qaeda the safe haven that served as a launching pad for 9/11.

Thanks to our heroic troops and civilians, fewer Afghans are under the control of the insurgency. There will be tough fighting ahead, and the Afghan government will need to deliver better governance. But we are strengthening the capacity of the Afghan people and building an enduring partnership with them. This year, we will work with nearly 50 countries to begin a transition to an Afghan lead. And this July, we will begin to bring our troops home. (Applause.)

In Pakistan, al Qaeda’s leadership is under more pressure than at any point since 2001. Their leaders and operatives are being removed from the battlefield. Their safe havens are shrinking. And we’ve sent a message from the Afghan border to the Arabian Peninsula to all parts of the globe: We will not relent, we will not waver, and we will defeat you. (Applause.)

American leadership can also be seen in the effort to secure the worst weapons of war. Because Republicans and Democrats approved the New START treaty, far fewer nuclear weapons and launchers will be deployed. Because we rallied the world, nuclear materials are being locked down on every continent so they never fall into the hands of terrorists. (Applause.)

Because of a diplomatic effort to insist that Iran meet its obligations, the Iranian government now faces tougher sanctions, tighter sanctions than ever before. And on the Korean Peninsula, we stand with our ally South Korea, and insist that North Korea keeps its commitment to abandon nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

This is just a part of how we’re shaping a world that favors peace and prosperity. With our European allies, we revitalized NATO and increased our cooperation on everything from counterterrorism to missile defense. We’ve reset our relationship with Russia, strengthened Asian alliances, built new partnerships with nations like India.

This March, I will travel to Brazil, Chile, and El Salvador to forge new alliances across the Americas. Around the globe, we’re standing with those who take responsibility -– helping farmers grow more food, supporting doctors who care for the sick, and combating the corruption that can rot a society and rob people of opportunity.

Recent events have shown us that what sets us apart must not just be our power -– it must also be the purpose behind it. In south Sudan -– with our assistance -– the people were finally able to vote for independence after years of war. (Applause.) Thousands lined up before dawn. People danced in the streets. One man who lost four of his brothers at war summed up the scene around him: "This was a battlefield for most of my life," he said. "Now we want to be free." (Applause.)

And we saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people. (Applause.)

We must never forget that the things we’ve struggled for, and fought for, live in the hearts of people everywhere. And we must always remember that the Americans who have borne the greatest burden in this struggle are the men and women who serve our country. (Applause.)

Tonight, let us speak with one voice in reaffirming that our nation is united in support of our troops and their families. Let us serve them as well as they’ve served us -- by giving them the equipment they need, by providing them with the care and benefits that they have earned, and by enlisting our veterans in the great task of building our own nation.

Our troops come from every corner of this country -– they’re black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American. They are Christian and Hindu, Jewish and Muslim. And, yes, we know that some of them are gay. Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love. (Applause.) And with that change, I call on all our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and ROTC. It is time to leave behind the divisive battles of the past. It is time to move forward as one nation. (Applause.)

We should have no illusions about the work ahead of us. Reforming our schools, changing the way we use energy, reducing our deficit –- none of this will be easy. All of it will take time. And it will be harder because we will argue about everything. The costs. The details. The letter of every law.

Of course, some countries don’t have this problem. If the central government wants a railroad, they build a railroad, no matter how many homes get bulldozed. If they don’t want a bad story in the newspaper, it doesn’t get written.

And yet, as contentious and frustrating and messy as our democracy can sometimes be, I know there isn’t a person here who would trade places with any other nation on Earth. (Applause.)

We may have differences in policy, but we all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution. We may have different opinions, but we believe in the same promise that says this is a place where you can make it if you try. We may have different backgrounds, but we believe in the same dream that says this is a country where anything is possible. No matter who you are. No matter where you come from.

That dream is why I can stand here before you tonight. That dream is why a working-class kid from Scranton can sit behind me. (Laughter and applause.) That dream is why someone who began by sweeping the floors of his father’s Cincinnati bar can preside as Speaker of the House in the greatest nation on Earth. (Applause.)

That dream -– that American Dream -– is what drove the Allen Brothers to reinvent their roofing company for a new era. It’s what drove those students at Forsyth Tech to learn a new skill and work towards the future. And that dream is the story of a small business owner named Brandon Fisher.

Brandon started a company in Berlin, Pennsylvania, that specializes in a new kind of drilling technology. And one day last summer, he saw the news that halfway across the world, 33 men were trapped in a Chilean mine, and no one knew how to save them.

But Brandon thought his company could help. And so he designed a rescue that would come to be known as Plan B. His employees worked around the clock to manufacture the necessary drilling equipment. And Brandon left for Chile.

Along with others, he began drilling a 2,000-foot hole into the ground, working three- or four-hour -- three or four days at a time without any sleep. Thirty-seven days later, Plan B succeeded, and the miners were rescued. (Applause.) But because he didn’t want all of the attention, Brandon wasn’t there when the miners emerged. He’d already gone back home, back to work on his next project.

And later, one of his employees said of the rescue, "We proved that Center Rock is a little company, but we do big things." (Applause.)

We do big things.

From the earliest days of our founding, America has been the story of ordinary people who dare to dream. That’s how we win the future.

We’re a nation that says, "I might not have a lot of money, but I have this great idea for a new company." "I might not come from a family of college graduates, but I will be the first to get my degree." "I might not know those people in trouble, but I think I can help them, and I need to try." "I’m not sure how we’ll reach that better place beyond the horizon, but I know we’ll get there. I know we will."

We do big things. (Applause.)

The idea of America endures. Our destiny remains our choice. And tonight, more than two centuries later, it’s because of our people that our future is hopeful, our journey goes forward, and the state of our union is strong.

Thank you. God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)


Transcript courtesy of the White House.

Budget Bewilderment

It’s a new year and time for a new budget! President Obama is expected to release his federal budget request for 2012 in early February. This makes for a confusing navigation of budgets, though. You see, Congress may receive the President’s request for the fiscal year (FY) 2012 budget before they have even passed the FY 2011 budget, despite the fact that FY 2011 started three months ago. And this means that most agencies are operating at FY 2010 levels. Whew!

The budget process itself is dizzying. For one, what is the fiscal year? Unfortunately, the fiscal year is not concurrent with the calendar year, which just confuses everything. The fiscal year begins October 1 of the previous year and ends September 30 of the following year. So FY 2011 began October 1, 2010 and will end September 30, 2011. Ideally, the FY 2011 budget, the layout for how much money government agencies receive for that fiscal year, should have been passed by the two chambers of Congress before the fiscal year began on October 1, 2010, but that is rarely the case, especially in an election year.

There is a lot for the chambers of Congress to get through and agree upon before they can pass the budget. After receiving the President’s budget request, the House and Senate Budget Committees each develop a budget resolution, which is a ceiling for how much money Congress can spend in certain categories, or “functions”. This is the allocations process. Then, each chamber debates the budget resolution. Finally, a House-Senate conference resolves the differences between the House and Senate resolutions, and the conference report must be passed by both houses. This is all supposed to be accomplished by April 15th, but rarely makes that mark.

Although the budget resolution is an incredibly important step, it’s not a bill and doesn’t actually give any money to anyone, but sets the spending limit for government functions. Legislation for spending, or appropriations bills, must also be passed in the House and the Senate and the spending must fall within the allocations laid out in the budget resolution.

Because the FY 2011 budget is not yet decided upon, you may have heard words thrown around like “continuing resolution,” “omnibus” and “government shutdown.” Technically, if appropriations have not been made by the beginning of a fiscal year, the government agencies should not be able to continue work and would shutdown. However, in these circumstances, Congress usually passes a continuing resolution for a set amount of time, perhaps another month, so that the government can continue operating at the previous year’s levels while Congress continues to work on an appropriations bill. For FY 2011, Congress has passed four continuing resolutions, the most recent lasting until March 4, 2011, halfway through the fiscal year!

Oftentimes, when appropriations have not been made before the start of the fiscal year, the spending is combined into one large omnibus appropriations bill rather than separate bills. Congress just withdrew an omnibus bill for FY 2011 in favor of a continuing resolution in order to avoid a government shutdown. Now the incoming Congress will have to finish the FY 2011 budget and start debating the FY 2012 budget nearly simultaneously.

Let’s hope this year’s budget process goes a little more smoothly than last.

Act Now: Urge the President to Support $35 Billion for NIH in FY2012

Final decisions about the President’s FY2012 budget recommendations are being made now, making it a critical time to take action. Cuts to the entire federal budget have been proposed – including NIH. Please remind the President that a robust investment in science is critical to creating jobs, improving health, encouraging innovation and revitalizing the economy.

Take action now. Urge President Obama to maintain his commitment to “restore science to its rightful place” by proposing and fighting for $35 billion in NIH funding in FY2012.

The Battle Has Just Begun

Despite the seeming victory in March over health care reform, the battle is far from over. There are many states and members of Congress still fighting hard to disable the act signed into law by President Obama on March 23rd of this year. Supporters of the law need to be working just as hard to keep it alive as they did before it was passed.

The first thing threatening health care reform right now is many states and their Attorneys General in particular (including Virginia’s own Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II) who have filed lawsuits to challenge the new law. Virginia is one of more than twenty states whose attorneys general have filed lawsuits trying to prevent parts of the health care law from being implemented.

Virginia’s lawsuit was the first to pass any legal test yesterday, when it succeeded in not being thrown out before it even reached a hearing. U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson declared that the law “radically changes the landscape of health insurance coverage in America” and that the case will be heard starting on October 18th.

The health care law is being attacked from another side as well. Many Republicans in Congress, as well as those who are hoping to win seats this November are trying a different tactic. They have pledged to try and win back the House in an effort to de-fund the new law, or at least the sections they find most troubling.

However many parts of the law are already receiving funding and it might be harder to prevent those parts from continuing. That hasn’t stopped nearly 120 candidates for Congress from promising to try and stop funding for as much of the health care reform as they can (they have signed a pledge at DefundIt.org).

Supporters of health care reform must do their best to make sure these measures are not successful. Particularly do as much as they can to support and encourage others' support of candidates who will fully fund health care reform and help the 30 million without care that will be covered by this law.

President Obama Signs Health Reform Legislation

Photo credit: AP

President Obama signed a health reform bill negotiated by Congress into law this week. There's been a lot of discussion about it, so as we wrap-up the week, here's your open-thread to tell us what you think.

Health Research in the President's FY2011 Budget

With the release of his FY 2011 budget proposal, President Obama reaffirmed his commitment to science and research by making them a priority amid efforts to limit spending. Although President Obama recommended a freeze on the part of the budget that includes research, he opted to increase funding for the National Institutes of Health, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Science Foundation.

Under the President’s proposal, the overall NIH budget would increase 3.2% percent to $32.1 billion in FY 2011. This recommended boost to the budget is an excellent beginning to the priority-setting conversation that now moves to Congress. Ultimately, an FY2011 budget less than $35 billion will not allow NIH to sustain the research capacity made possible through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The NIH has been functioning with a $35 billion budget for two years and we cannot afford to lose ground as the nation struggles out of the Great Recession.

In a briefing Monday afternoon, NIH Director, Francis Collins, MD, PhD, emphasized that the administration is focused on science-based budgeting, with the intent to prioritize resources and take advantage of the greatest scientific opportunity. Dr. Collins most recently outlined his priorities for the agency in Science magazine (subscription required). As a result of the science-based budgeting approach, percent increases for individual institutes and centers varied across NIH. President Obama again called for specific increases for cancer and autism research as he did in his 2010 budget proposal.

Maintaining an emphasis on evidence-based medicine, President Obama proposed $611 million for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, a 53.9% increase. Of this, $286 million is allocated for comparative effectiveness research. President Obama is keeping the NSF on a budget doubling track, by recommending $7.4 billion for the agency, an 8.0% increase. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention did not fare as well, with the President recommending a 2% cut to $6.3 billion.

Since the budget and appropriations process is now in the hands of Congress, it is time for advocates to start contacting their representatives and senators in support of robust increases for research to improve health in FY 2011. New Voices will keep you posted on updates in the budget and appropriations process and alert you when your voice can make the most difference.

New Voices on the State of the Union

Disclaimer: Today's post includes the opinions of the noted authors, which are not representative of the thoughts, policies, or beliefs of anyone (or any organization) but ourselves.

On Tuesday, we encouraged all U.S. citizens to take the time to listen to (or read) President Obama's first State of the Union. As promised, you can read or watch the speech online if you missed it. (C-SPAN also has a prepared version of the text of the speech, this does not include any ad libs.)

Some of the New Voices regulars share their thoughts on the national address below.

Kimberly's reaction from her apartment.

President Obama reminded me of who he was on the campaign trail. The speech was one of the most humorous presidential speeches that I have ever heard! My favorite line was “and if there’s one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, it’s that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. You hated it. It was about as popular as a root canal”.

Outside of the humor, Obama tackled the major issues: jobs, the banking industry, expanding the middle class, the economy, and most importantly (to me) health care. As a student of public health, I have been a little disappointed in how the health care bill has been progressing through Congress. I am glad that we have gotten this far in reform, but I hoped that President Obama would have put more involvement in its details. Even though the bill has been passed through partisan lines, I’m pleased that Obama called on both sides of the aisle to stay the course, and not walk away from health care reform.

With sincerity, he acknowledged the problems that his administration has had thus far. Despite the roadblocks, he made it clear that he is laying the foundation for our nation’s “new economy” of research and innovation. I’m looking forward to seeing the fiscal support and policies that will make that statement a reality.

Sarah's take from Local 16 in DC.

In 2008, the majority of U.S. citizens were desperate for change. From soaring unemployment to costly international conflicts, Americans felt the country needed a new course. Obama’s promise of hope for a better tomorrow won him the election and inspired millions. As the election wrapped up, it was clear the American people would be in for a letdown, but not because Obama is not capable of bringing us the things we need. Many people I spoke with seemed to have a poor concept of the time frame such dramatic change would take. And as I expected, in less than a year, people lost hope that things would be any different by 2012.

In the State of the Union address, I was glad that Obama acknowledged the growing lack of faith Americans have in their government and reminded the people that the change they desired is inevitably going to be ‘messy and complicated’. But I was happier that Obama reminded those in government that he needed their help, even though important votes would not necessarily be the popular decision, but were necessary for the future of the country. Obama said, “The only reason we are is because generations of Americans were unafraid to do what was hard; to do what was needed even when success was uncertain…”

With the 2010 elections approaching, our Members of Congress are in a tough spot. However, I think elements of Obama’s speech reminded us of the way he excited the nation, and as a result suggested the best way for the legislative branch to facilitate the process. Congress needs to sell the American people on the changes that are happening. Many of the changes they have put into bills, such as health care reform, will actually improve our lives and security, we just need to hear it from them, because if people truly understood the majority would support these bills and again be hopeful and eager for change.

Heather's impressions from a friend's couch.

I am definitely an oratorical snob, but even so, I felt like the president delivered a decent speech. What I found interesting was how much of the speech was directed at Congress. Though the constitutional function of the SOTU is to address Congress, many presidents address the network television cameras; until the end, President Obama did not. Why does this matter?

The truth is, Congress has the bulk of the responsibility when it comes to getting legislation signed, sealed, and delivered to the American people. As the president mentioned, if Congress doesn't act, he must issue executive orders to get things done. I'm pretty sure this is why Article II, Section 3 is in the Constitution anyway.

Politically, President Obama needed this speech to win him back some popular support; we'll see how long the polling boost lasts. He proposed controversial topics (getting rid of Don't Ask, Don't Tell) and admonished the people who were holding up change (hello, Senators, your president is talking to you). He also made a clear statement in opposition to a recent Supreme Court decision (to allow corporations unlimited contributions to candidates).

There weren't any big surprises. As far as I know, everything he mentioned were things already passed in the House of Representatives or that have been announced by the White House in recent weeks. However, I think it was a smart play to stick to pre-released news. For one, most Americans have no idea it isn't new news and secondly, because it gave him an opportunity to elaborate personally.

All in all, he re-set his tone. There weren't really any gimics, he was light, he was charming, he was hoping for change. It's a similar story to the one we heard last year around this time. With a year under the administration's belt, will 2010 see some of the big changes in Washington we keep hearing about?

Your thoughts?

State of the Union

Tomorrow night at 9 p.m. Eastern, President Barack Obama is going to give a State of the Union address. I’m not going to speculate on the content, or tell you what I hope he’ll discuss. Rather, I’d like to give you a little history on the State of the Union and tell you why you should be listening tomorrow night.

“He shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

-Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution

The first State of the Union address was given by George Washington on January 8, 1790. Since then, every president has either given a speech or written a memo (that was later read aloud to Congress) on an annual basis that detailed where the nation was and where it was going. This may seem a rather dated tradition in an age where almost everyone has access to national news, but the value isn’t in the reporting of the actual state of the union, it is in the framing of the details in the address.

That may not seem clear, so let me explain. There are certain facts about our country. Then there is the interpretation of those facts. Considering the breadth of geography, people, and political opinions – we don't all have the same vision of America. As citizens, we should know our leader’s thoughts on what is important (you can tell he thinks it’s important if he includes it in the speech) and why it is important.

Here at New Voices we do our best to help provide resources that empower you to become better communicators and advocates for research and science. Part of being good at communicating and advocacy is being informed; knowing where our elected officials stand on the issues and what they plan to do (so we can either encourage or discourage it).

I encourage you to take the time to listen to the State of the Union tomorrow night. If you won’t be home or near a radio, record it. If you can’t record it, we’ll have a link to a transcript up on Thursday (and we know you have Internet, or you wouldn’t be reading this). We don’t all have to agree with the president, but we have a duty to know how he sees our nation.

You Can Help Make Research a Higher National Priority

Advocates nationwide are expressing their gratitude for the recent revitalization of research by writing letters of thanks to President Obama. If you haven’t, you can join them. As we urge the president to continue to make research a priority in Fiscal Year 2011, we must also reach out to our members of Congress.

Ask your members of Congress to get on the record about where they stand on supporting research online at Your Congress-Your Health and thank those who have already responded.

Patients, scientists and other research advocates across the U.S. must join together to urge Congress to support innovation and invest in research to improve health. Visit http://www.yourcongressyourhealth.org/ today and join the thousands of Americans each week who are helping make research a higher national priority.

Thank President Obama for Reprioritizing Science and Health

Urge President Obama to Fulfill His Commitment to Research

During this season of thanks, join advocates nationwide to express your gratitude for the recent revitalization of research. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has invigorated the research community after years of diminishing budgets for the National Institutes of Health.

Please contact President Obama now to thank him for his recommitment to science and urge him to continue to make research a priority in Fiscal Year 2011. It is critical to strengthen the scientific and economic momentum generated by ARRA by making NIH's new research capacity permanent.

President Obama will decide what funding to recommend for NIH before the end of the year. Patients, scientists and other research advocates across the U.S. must demonstrate our collective support for his innovation strategy by sending a strong call to robustly invest in NIH. Write to President Obama today!

Urge President Obama to Support Increases for NIH

Join advocates across the U.S. in asking President Barack Obama to make research to improve health a national priority and support robust funding for the National Institutes of Health.

To coincide with National Medical Research Day on Wednesday, October 21, the ResearchMeansHope.org campaign, Research!America and other groups are rallying advocates to contact the White House this week in support of significant annual increases for NIH.

Now is a particularly important time for President Obama to hear from research advocates because he is working with his administration to determine the FY 2011 budget priorities. Take action and write to President Obama now!

The Benefits and Challenges of Electronic Medical Records

October is “Update Your Medical Records Month,” so we want to take this opportunity to remind you to bring your records up to date, if you haven’t already. It also seemed like an appropriate time to write about electronic health records, a current topic of discussion in the health community.

Electronic health records are one measure that many—and the Obama administration in particular—support as a means of improving patient health care. Although there are many significant benefits to electronic systems, including better access to information and the ability to tailor care, there are also some major hurdles to the implementation of such a system including the initial cost. In 2008, however, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine revealed that only 17% of doctors and 10% of hospitals were using computerized health records (the rest were using a paper based system).

Computerized health records offer a number of benefits to health practices. They can help improve patient care by assisting doctors in finding relevant information more quickly and prescribing the right treatments. “Fully functional” records can provide reminders of care guidelines, helping doctors to avoid problems such as prescribing medications that a patient is allergic to or administering tests for information that has already been acquired through similar tests (which the doctor may otherwise overlook).

In turn, this will cut costs by improving efficiency and eliminating unnecessary procedures. Making depersonalized records available will allow doctors and researchers to look at larger numbers of patients and learn what type of care is most effective for an individual.

Doctors have identified one major challenge to implementing electronic systems: cost. For small practices with only one to three doctors—the type of practice where almost half our country’s doctors practice—the average cost of implementation is $40,000-$50,000. Dissatisfaction with current system options is another barrier: according to the 2008 study 54% of those who had not adopted computerized records said that a major reason was that the existing options did not meet their needs.

The Obama administration has taken strides to reduce the cost by offering $19 billion in incentives to doctors, hospitals, and regional health information networks. Payments can be up to $44,000 per physician for those that demonstrate “meaningful use” of “certified” electronic health records, which means they must demonstrate quality reporting and be able to share information with clinics, hospitals, and government (although the specifics need to be determined). There is also a disincentive to not adopting: if health providers have not switched over by 2015, they may experience a penalty when seeing Medicare or Medicaid patients.

Additionally, providers of electronic records systems are partnering with health providers to make implementation easier.

Patient privacy is the other major concern that needs to be addressed. It will rely on the depersonalization of records, and strong cyber security technology, a necessity for implementation.

Of the physicians, large practices, and hospitals that have already implemented electronic systems, the reviews are overwhelmingly positive: 82 percent said they improved the quality of clinical decisions, 86 percent said they helped in avoiding medication errors and 85 percent said they improved the delivery of preventative care. With help from the government and private industry, the number of health professionals using computerized records is bound to increase in the next few years.

Have you ever used electronic health records? Do you know any doctors who have? How has this affected patient care? Leave a comment and let us know!

And don’t forget to update your own medical records!

Image credit: Ablsa

President Obama's Health Care Reform Speech

Image credit: CBS News

Last night, President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress (and the nation) about health care reform. Pundits from everywhere have put in their two-cents about what the speech means, who it was for, and the merits of specific policy points.

Today on New Voices, we'd like to hear you be the pundits (we'll join in the fun too).

What sections of the speech stood out to you?

How is this like/different from the president's other national addresses?

Do you think the plan has any hope?

The comments section is open for discussion.

Majority of Americans Support Stem Cell Research

Stem cell research continues to fill the news as the science progresses in this exciting field of research. We recently learned that scientists have been able to create teeth using stem cells in mice; and another team activated stem cell genes without using a virus, eliminating some problems with earlier models.

With the public focus shifting away from the controversy of stem cell research and toward the scientific possibilities, New Voices was curious about where Americans stand on the issue of stem cell research. We turned to a recent poll commissioned by Research!America for the Your Congress-Your Health initiative. Here are some of our findings.

Support for federally funded embryonic stem cell research has increased

Summer 2009: 73% of Americans support expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
Summer 2005: 57% of Americans supported federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Support for therapeutic cloning (Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer) has also increased

Summer 2009: 74% of Americans support therapeutic cloning (SCNT).

Summer 2005: 59% of Americans support therapeutic cloning (SCNT).


What explains the change in public opinion? Do more people understand stem cell research? Has the end of President George W. Bush’s term in office affected public opinion?*

Since 2005, the majority of the public has supported both embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. Today, the majority of the public that support this research has grown significantly.

With that in mind, the minority--those opposed to expanded federal funding for stem cell research--is shrinking. Yet the shrinking minority has become even more vocal in their opposition to federal funding. We say this play out in the public comment period for the NIH stem cell guidelines.

In July 2009, President Obama ordered federal agencies to enact the new rules governing federally funded stem cells, updated by the NIH and originally mandated by his Executive Order. According to an ABC News/MedPage Today report written at the time:

"Of 49,000 public comments submitted to the NIH on its proposed guidelines, at least 30,000 were from groups and individuals who flat-out oppose federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

These were determined to be non-responsive the question, said Dr. Kington, [the then acting Director of NIH]. 'We did not ask them if we should fund human embryonic stem cell research. We asked in what circumstances should we fund human embryonic stem cell research.'"

This leaves the majority of Americans who do support expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research with one choice--speak up!! Our voices won't be heard unless we use them.


*Recall that when the 2005 poll was administered, President Bush was holding strong on his restrictions for federally funded embryonic stem cell research. Despite President Bush's objections, the public and Congress supported expanding federally funded stem cell research. Congress passed legislation to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research twice, only to be vetoed by President Bush.


This is Part 3 in our series highlighting data from the Your Congress-Your Health poll.
Part 1 - Can you name a living scientist?
Part 2 - Poll Methodology
Part 3 - STEM Education