In the February 25 issue of C&E
News, Britt Erickson reports on combined House and Senate actions to make the
results of taxpayer funded government research freely available to the public.
Congratulations to Reps. Doyle (PA), Lofgren (CA), and Yoder (KS), and to
Senators Wyden (OR) and Cornyn (TX)!
Since taxpayers are paying for the research, it seems fair that they should have an opportunity to review and use the results, if any. I suspect that this information release will have no significant effect on eventual public use, because of the general unproductiveness of government research. In other words, this will really be an exercise in futility, because it is unlikely that there is anything there of real value.
However, the main reason I support the program is that what it will show the impracticality of government research, and perhaps convince Congress to be significantly cutting back on such expenditures, as they should have done a long time ago. The article says that publishes are calling it "unnecessary and a waste of federal resources". That statement apparently comes from the fact that such public release will negatively influence the bottom line profit of publishers. No mention is made, but it is also likely that government agencies and University recipients of government grants will likewise oppose this position, because it will shed light on the ineffectiveness of the present agency research programs.
Since taxpayers are paying for the research, it seems fair that they should have an opportunity to review and use the results, if any. I suspect that this information release will have no significant effect on eventual public use, because of the general unproductiveness of government research. In other words, this will really be an exercise in futility, because it is unlikely that there is anything there of real value.
However, the main reason I support the program is that what it will show the impracticality of government research, and perhaps convince Congress to be significantly cutting back on such expenditures, as they should have done a long time ago. The article says that publishes are calling it "unnecessary and a waste of federal resources". That statement apparently comes from the fact that such public release will negatively influence the bottom line profit of publishers. No mention is made, but it is also likely that government agencies and University recipients of government grants will likewise oppose this position, because it will shed light on the ineffectiveness of the present agency research programs.
No comments:
Post a Comment