As you read through this issue of Research Matters, I hope that you will see that our research community continues to be productive and carries out a wide range of research activities. We continue to be in a strong recruitment phase for funded investigators, and over the next few issues you will be introduced to our new faculty and sense their passion for research.
Whenever I talk about research, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) invariably is brought to center stage, given the very difficult times we are experiencing in funding shortfalls for research. There is some hopeful news on this front.
Recently the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the 21st Century Cures Act. This bipartisan bill, which was approved by a unanimous 51-0 vote, has the potential to enhance NIH funding of research in our universities.
In its current draft, the bill would increase NIH funding (currently at $30.3 billion/year) to $31.8 billion in 2016, $33.3 billion in 2017, and $34.8 billion in 2017. In addition, it establishes $2 million per year from 2016-2020 for an Innovation Fund. This fund would be used to support several as of yet undefined areas, but apparently includes precision medicine (the new term for personalized medicine) and “young emerging scientists.”
As the bill moves through the process, there will undoubtedly be changes. My concern centers around how the money will be spent, and, whether the increases will be sustainable. In the first case, if there are too many strings attached, earmarks, or mandates, we may not realize the gains at the grassroots investigator level. In terms of sustainability, we all know the problems encountered when an institution is in an expansion mode, yet funding for the future remains uncertain. Nevertheless, I am bolstered by the fact that the bill has received bipartisan support.
Another intriguing bill in subcommittee is H.R. 777 (Permanent Investment in Health Research Act of 2015). This proposal would move the NIH budget out of the yearly budget congressional debate, potentially providing a more stable, and predictable, budget. It is interesting to note, that if the NIH budget had been maintained constant with a modest ~3.3% yearly increase since 1990 (and adjusted for inflation), the budget would be a bit better than where we are now, with none of the ups and downs that have plagued us over the years. The status and details of this and the aforementioned bill can be found at https://www.congress.gov.
Sincerely
Stephen B. Liggett, MD
Vice Dean for Research
Professor of Medicine, Pharmacology
and Physiology
USF Health Morsani College of Medicine
