Proposed Biotech Policy Board Debated

Washington - A proposal for a permanent body to stimulate biotechnology research and its commercial applications has triggered political tug-of-War over the right to shape federal policy. The Senate is expected to act a early as this spring on a bill (S. 1966) to set up a National Biotechnology Policy Board with 20 members drawn from government agencies, industry and academia. The board would be a permanent body within the executive branch and would produce a report every two years, beginning January 1990. The bill carries a five-year budget authorization, starting at $2 million and rising to $3 million by 1992, for a staff to carry out its duties. Washington - The National Science Foundation's plan to fund $30 million in university-based science and technology centers is dead for this year, according to NSF sources. But the program will get a boost in the 1989 budget that President Reagan will submit next Week. A tight 1988 budget has forced NSF officials to delay plans to begin the centers program this year. At press time NSF was still processing some 400 to 500 proposals that ware submitted by, and In some cases after, the January, 15 official deadline. Although no awards will be given before the start of the next fiscal year in October, one knowledgeable official said that the 1989 budget contains "significant money" for the program. The president's 1989 budget is expected to contain a proposed increase comparable to the 17 percent requested last year. That would mean about $300 million more for research and science education. In December Congress completed work on the 1988 budget that gave NSF $94 million more than in 1987. The plan is a compromise measure that incorporates aspects of earlier proposals, some of them still pending. It was introduced last month by Sen. Lawton Chiles (D. Fla.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and of the subcommittee that would appropriate money for the board, and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D.Mass), chairman of the committee in Which the bill has been referred, Its third co-sponsor is Sen. Pete Domenici (R. N.M.), whose proposal last summer for a program to sequence the human genome has been reworked into a national advisory panel on the subject that would report to the policy board. The proposed board is being applauded by biotechnology companies seeking federal support for their scientific and commercial efforts. "We hope it can develop solutions to a range of difficult problems, including anti-trust legislation, patent laws and other obstacles to commercialization," said Lisa Reines of the Industrial Biotechnology Association. The 70-member trade group is expected to support the legislation when its members are polled later this month. There is widespread agreement on the need for a coordinated federal effort to increase support for training and research to set consistent regulatory policies, and to ensure more timely commercial application of discoveries in the field. But political considerations may jeopardize those goals. The administration is certain to oppose the measure, called the Biotechnology Competitiveness Act of 1987. Officials say such a policy board would overshadow an interagency Committee on the Life Sciences being formed by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. OSTP recently revamped the federal Biotechnology Science Coordinating Committee, crested in 1985 to examine the technical aspects of biotechnology regulation. P> "The objectives of the bill are worthy, but the mechanisms are already in place," said Beverly Berger, OSTP assistant director for life sciences. The new 24-member life sciences committee has the ability to draw on the private sector when necessary, she said, and the structure that creates such federal panels provides sufficient stability to tackle Whatever problems arise. She noted that the administration opposed Domenici's original plan last summer to create a government-industry-university consortium to launch a human genome project because "it would be redundant" to ongoing federal efforts. "While they were trying to figure out what to do with the BSCC, we decided to go ahead," said one of Kennedy's aids. "This bill is a good mechanism to get a discussion going, and it adds stability to the process," said another knowledgeable government official who requested anonymity. "But it's really a slap in the face of OSTP." One problem that the Chiles-Kennedy bill tries to resolve is the territorial maneuvering between the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy over their respective roles in fostering biotechnology efforts. Under S. 1966 the advisory panel on the human gnome would be co-chaired by the Secretary of Energy and the NIH director, and its remaining members would be drawn from government, industry and the research community. At the same time, its proposal for a National Center for Biotechnology Information at the National Library of Medicine may rile the agricultural community. P> "We believe there needs to be a national coordinated policy on biotechnology issues," said a Senate Agriculture Committee staffer. "But [committee chairman) Sen. Leahy (D-VT.) is concerned about the bill being weighted toward health issues, and we want to make sure that there is an adequate role for agriculture." A Kennedy staffer said that no more hearings have been scheduled but that some may take place later this month in Massachusetts. He predicted that the Senate would approve the bill by April, and that the House would also act relatively quickly. Mervis is on the staff of the THE SCIENTIST.

Proposed Biotech Policy Board Debated

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of