Science Setbacks: 2013

Attracting research funds is never a simple proposition even in the best of years, but in 2013, life scientists dealt with some unique impediments to getting federal grants.

| 2 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
2:00
Share

WIKIMEDIA, PSYCHONAUGHTWell before the first of this year, there were dire warnings that budgets at federal science agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), would be on the chopping block if Democrats and Republicans in Congress could not work through partisan bickering to hammer out a deal to decrease the deficit by $1.2 trillion over 10 years. On August 2, 2012, President Barack Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011, which formed a bipartisan committee tasked with marshalling deficit-reduction legislation through Congress, and mandated 10-year-long, across-the-board cuts—or sequestration—to military and domestic spending if that committee failed.

And it did fail.

The sequester was set to begin on January 1, but was delayed by two months because of another piece of legislation, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. On March 1, sequestration went into effect, and almost immediately US scientists and their collaborators abroad began to feel the pinch. The NIH was forced to slash its 2013 budget by 5 percent, or $1.55 billion. According to its own estimates, the agency eliminated more than 700 new grants, and an average of 4.7 percent was cut from ongoing grant budgets.

The NSF fared a bit better, having to trim its budget by only 2.9 percent, thanks to a temporary spending bill passed later in March.

Life scientists hoping to get new NIH ...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member? Login Here

Keywords

Meet the Author

  • Bob Grant

    From 2017 to 2022, Bob Grant was Editor in Chief of The Scientist, where he started in 2007 as a Staff Writer.
Share
Image of a woman in a microbiology lab whose hair is caught on fire from a Bunsen burner.
April 1, 2025, Issue 1

Bunsen Burners and Bad Hair Days

Lab safety rules dictate that one must tie back long hair. Rosemarie Hansen learned the hard way when an open flame turned her locks into a lesson.

View this Issue
Conceptual image of biochemical laboratory sample preparation showing glassware and chemical formulas in the foreground and a scientist holding a pipette in the background.

Taking the Guesswork Out of Quality Control Standards

sartorius logo
An illustration of PFAS bubbles in front of a blue sky with clouds.

PFAS: The Forever Chemicals

sartorius logo
Unlocking the Unattainable in Gene Construction

Unlocking the Unattainable in Gene Construction

dna-script-primarylogo-digital
Concept illustration of acoustic waves and ripples.

Comparing Analytical Solutions for High-Throughput Drug Discovery

sciex

Products

Green Cooling

Thermo Scientific™ Centrifuges with GreenCool Technology

Thermo Fisher Logo
Singleron Avatar

Singleron Biotechnologies and Hamilton Bonaduz AG Announce the Launch of Tensor to Advance Single Cell Sequencing Automation

Zymo Research Logo

Zymo Research Launches Research Grant to Empower Mapping the RNome

Magid Haddouchi, PhD, CCO

Cytosurge Appoints Magid Haddouchi as Chief Commercial Officer