|
[Subscribe
to SPIN]
Psychology Helps Weather The Storms
After APA Fellow Dr. Baruch Fischhoff took the time to express
his concern about risk communication issues associated with the Katrina
disaster on the Op-Ed
pages of the Washington Post earlier this month, Science Policy staff
worked with APA's visiting senior scientist, Dr. Clare Porac, to conduct
outreach to other APA scientists who might also do research relevant to
disasters. The request to collect such information was actually initiated
by Dr. Mark Weiss, Assistant Director for Social, Behavioral and
Educational Sciences in the White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy.
Dr. Porac's letter was disseminated to the leadership of
all APA Divisions and has generated a few interesting and varied responses. However, this is an on-going project
and APA would welcome additional examples of how psychological science can
inform policy on issues pertaining to the prediction, prevention,
preparation and mitigation of the effects of, and recovery from, disasters
like hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Please consider the relevance of your own research or the
research of your colleagues and contact Dr. Clare Porac by email
or at
202-336-5949 for more information. Many thanks to those who have
already contributed to this important project.
Science Policy Office Hits the Road
In October, Science Policy staff Karen Studwell attended
the Society of Experimental
Social Psychology meeting in San Diego to discuss issues impacting
psychological research and to encourage psychological scientists to get
involved in advocacy. To stay on top of federal policy issues like funding
for research, priority-setting at federal agencies, and protecting peer
review or other Congressional issues, we encourage all psychological
scientists to continue to read SPIN and the Psychological
Science Agenda.
[back to top]
Commissioner of Special Education Research Addresses
Research Community
On October 14, the Commissioner of the Center for Special
Education Research, Ed Kame’enui, PhD, met with representatives of
scientific and special education organizations to discuss the mission of
the NCSER and to share the center's research priorities. The NCSER, which
was established in the 2004 legislation reauthorizing the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), assumes the research responsibilities
that were previously within the portfolio of the Department of Education’s
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The new NCSER is
one of two education research centers within the Institute of Education
Sciences (IES). During the meeting, Dr. Kame’enui discussed the
importance of putting science first in special education research, and
added that, “good science is good, but not enough. Results must lead to
the engineering of high quality performance and delivery systems.”
Operating on a budget of approximately $83 million, the NCSER has a
significant list of research priorities specifically focused on special
education research, including: reading and writing, math and science,
teacher quality, early intervention and assessment for young children with
disabilities, language and vocabulary development, assessment for
accountability, individualized education programs research, serious
behavior disorders, and secondary and post-secondary outcomes.
 More
about the research programs at the NCSER and IES overall
[back to top]
Friends of NIDA Coalition
Presents Educational Briefing on HIV and Drug Use
Behaviors associated with drug use have been shown to be
among some of the most prominent and robust predictors of HIV transmission
in the United States. In fact, injection drug use has directly and
indirectly accounted for more than one-third (36 percent) of AIDS cases in
the United States. Drug use also affects judgment about sexual risks and
thereby increases the likelihood of transmitting or acquiring HIV through
unprotected sex. But evidence suggests that drug abuse treatment can help
prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, especially when combined with prevention
and community-based outreach programs for at-risk individuals. Because
these efforts can reduce or eliminate drug use and drug-related HIV risk
behaviors, the Friends of NIDA hosted an educational briefing on Capitol
Hill on October 25 to raise awareness about the relationship between drug
use and HIV infection.
The briefing, entitled "Drug
Use and HIV/AIDS: Breaking the Cycle of Infection", was organized
by APA Science Policy staffers Sara Robinson and Geoff Mumford. It was the
third in a series this year designed to elevate NIDA's profile with
policy-makers. As with the other events, APA coordinated with the Chairs
of the Addiction,
Treatment and Recovery Caucus to find space and drum up support for
the briefing, which was co-sponsored by 18 other organizations. NIDA
Director Nora Volkow, MD, provided a spirited overview of NIDA's HIV/AIDS
research portfolio, noting, among other issues, the alarming change in
patterns of transmission disproportionately affecting African American
women. Psychologist Robert Booth, PhD, a Professor of Psychiatry at the
University of Colorado School of Medicine, described his experiences as an
HIV prevention researcher leading the community-based SAFE program in
Denver. Finally, Ms. Patricia Nalls, Founder and Executive Director of a
DC-based nonprofit organization, The Women's Collective, provided her
personal perspective as an HIV-positive woman helping other women deal
with HIV-related issues.
The briefing drew a standing room only crowd of over 100
guests, and the Friends of NIDA once again extend their deep appreciation
to Congressman Jim Ramstad and his staff for their assistance in obtaining
a room for the event.
View
photos from the briefing
View
Dr. Volkow's presentation
View
Dr. Booth's presentation
More
about NIDA's HIV research portfolio [back to top]
Senate Passes Amendment Supporting Scientific
Integrity
During the debate on the Senate legislation that funds the
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education, Senator
Dick Durbin (D-IL) offered an amendment that seeks to ensure that
candidates for scientific advisory committees are not vetted for either
their voting history or political beliefs, but for their scientific
expertise. Durbin shared the story of psychologist William Miller from the
University of New Mexico who, as originally
reported by Mother Jones, was denied an appointment to the National
Advisory Council on Drug Abuse. “We rely on scientists and medical
experts serving the National Institutes of Health to make wise decisions
based on real science, not politics, to ensure that our investments in
medical research will improve the health of Americans for generations to
come” said Durbin, speaking on behalf of his amendment. A similar
amendment regarding scientific appointments was offered by Rep. Henry
Waxman (D-CA) and included in the House version of the bill. As the
differences between the House and Senate bill are ironed out in a
conference committee, it remains to be seen whether either amendment will
be included in the final legislation.
Read
the transcript of the floor debate
Health and Education Funding Bill
Passed by U.S. Senate
The new fiscal year (FY 06) began October 1, 2005, but the
final funding for several key research funding agencies is still in doubt
as SPIN goes to press. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), among
other research funders, is operating under a temporary funding mechanism
until final legislation is passed.
That is why it is good news that, on October 27, the Senate passed its
$604 billion version of the Fiscal 2006 Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education spending bill. The Senate bill would provide more funding
for NIH, CDC and the Department of Education than the bill passed by the
House of Representatives last summer.
The Senate bill includes $141.7 billion in discretionary funding. The
House version, totaling $602 billion, would provide $142.5 billion in
discretionary spending, or $164 million (0.1 percent) less than for FY
2005. The remaining funds go toward entitlements, e.g. Medicare and
Medicaid. Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA), made room for extra discretionary
spending in the Senate bill by shifting more than $3 billion in mandatory
Supplemental Security Income payments by a few days from FY 2006 into FY
2007. Without that shift, the discretionary total in the Senate bill would
have been $145.7 billion.
The Senate bill would increase spending for the NIH by more than $1
billion, or 3.7 percent, to a total of $29.42 billion. The House version
provided an NIH increase of only 0.5 percent. [back to top]
No amendment was offered in the Senate debate to cut funding for any particular
research grants, as was approved in the House. The House and Senate conferees will negotiate that
provision, and the Neugebauer amendment is not expected to survive in the final
version of the bill. APA's Karen Studwell and the coalition she co-chairs, the
Coalition to Protect Research, has worked tirelessly against the Neugebauer
amendment.
Among the amendments added to the Senate bill during debate was a provision
authored by U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) that would direct officials at
agencies financed by the bill not to apply political litmus tests to candidates
for appointment to a federal scientific advisory committee. In particular,
candidates may not be asked about their political affiliation, voting history,
or "the position that the candidate holds with respect to political issues
not directly related to and necessary for the work of the committee
involved." The Durbin amendment passed by voice vote.
The Senate also approved an amendment to provide nearly $8 billion in
emergency funding to combat the avian flu.
Thanks to all the members of the Public Policy Action Network who called
their Senators to urge that the Senate act independently on its health
funding bill. Your calls and those of other scientists may have made the
difference! Because the Senate bill has now been approved, a more
substantive funding increase for NIH will be under consideration. There is
still no guarantee that the House will go along with the accounting
measures used in the Senate to achieve the larger recommended increase for
NIH, but the odds have improved with the Senate vote.
Stay tuned to SPIN to see how the story ends and what sort of funding
increase NIH and the other research funding agencies ultimately receive.
[back to top]
APA Takes Stand on Detainee
Issue
The Science Directorate and Public Policy Office have
taken the lead in coordinating APA's response to recent legislative
initiatives in Congress regarding U.S. detainees and prisoners of war.
APA, along with other mental health and human rights organizations,
supports Senator John McCain's amendment to the Fiscal Year 2006
appropriations bill (which funds the Department of Defense - DoD) which
would effectively prohibit cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of U.S.
detainees and call for uniform standards for interrogations within DoD.
The Senate-passed version of the bill includes Sen. McCain's amendment,
but there is no similar language in the companion bill passed by the
House. This particular amendment is drawing a lot of attention during the
conference process, during which the House and Senate negotiate a final
version of the bill, and the President has threatened to veto the funding
bill if it includes the McCain amendment.
Our support for this important amendment is based on our
fundamental mission to protect and promote human welfare and recognition
of the many psychologists working on behalf of our national security
interests. The APA ethics code requires psychologists to respect the
dignity and worth of all individuals and to strive for the preservation
and protection of fundamental human rights. In addition, a 1986
Council resolution supports the U.N. Declaration and Convention
Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment, as well as the U.N. Principles of Medical Ethics. In August of
2005, the Council reaffirmed this resolution through its endorsement of
the report
of our APA Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National
Security. APA President Ronald Levant, EdD had an opportunity to
further discuss these issues during a recent
DoD trip to U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay that included leaders
from the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical
Association.
In addition to formally requesting congressional
leadership support for the McCain amendment in the conference
negotiations, APA also urges its members to call their congressional
delegation in Washington to ask for support of the amendment. For more
information on making calls to your representatives, click here.
[back to top]
Psychology and Human Intelligence
During the last week of October, John Negroponte, the
Director of National Intelligence (DNI), took the unusual step of publicly
revealing the National Intelligence Strategy of the United
States. The
Strategy, which calls for "transformation through integration and
innovation", formalizes previous reports that the DNI was planning to
shift resources away from technical information collection toward human
intelligence gathering. The details are laid out in a series of 15
"mission" and "enterprise" objectives. Science Policy
staff were pleased to see that one of those objectives focused on enhanced
research as follows: "Exploit path-breaking scientific and research
advances that will enable us to maintain and extend intelligence
advantages against emerging threats."
Developing a plan to meet that objective will fall to a
physiological psychologist, Dr. Eric Haseltine, the new Associate Director
of National Intelligence for Science and Technology. We wanted the
Associate Director to know that APA was here to serve as a scientific
resource as those plans evolve, so two days after the release of the
Strategy, Science Directorate Executive Director Steve Breckler and
Science Policy staffers Geoff Mumford and Heather Kelly met with Haseltine
to discuss opportunities for collaboration. At his temporary offices at
CIA headquarters in Mclean, Virgina, Haseltine spent over an hour
providing candid insight on issues ranging from the organizational culture
of the intelligence community, stress related to the operational
environment abroad, and the role psychology and behavioral science might
play in the training of future analysts and operational personnel.
Haseltine detailed a number of opportunities for follow-up and Science
Policy staff look forward to maintaining a close collaboration with him as
his strategic initiatives unfold.
Haseltine brings a unique set of on-the-job training
credentials to his current position.
Prior to joining DNI, Haseltine had served for three years in an analogous
role as Associate Director for Research at the National Security Agency (NSA),
one of the 13 intelligence agencies now grouped under the jurisdiction of
DNI. But for more than two decades before joining NSA, Haseltine worked in
private industry, first as Director of Engineering for Hughes Aircraft and
later as Executive Vice President for Research and Development at Walt
Disney Imagineering. Haseltine was recruited and selected for the DNI
position by his former NSA boss, General Michael Hayden, who now serves in
the number two slot at DNI as Director Negroponte's Deputy Director.
View
the National Intelligence Strategy [back to top]
Any questions?
If you have any questions regarding SPIN or specific
science policy issues, please feel free to contact any of APA’s Science
PPO staff.
Geoff
Mumford, Ph.D., Director of Science Policy
Pat
Kobor, Senior Science Policy Analyst
Heather
O'Beirne Kelly, Ph.D., Senior Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer
Karen
Studwell, J.D., Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer
Sara
Robinson, Legislative Assistant
| 
APA's
Science Policy Insider News