Approaching Elimination of FCT: Marcelo Issues Veto Threat and Recalls "Berbicacho" from SEF
The President of the Republic has expressed reservations about the government's plan to abolish the Foundation for Science and Technology, drawing a parallel with the case of the Science and Engineering Foundation (SEF). In a recent statement, the President highlighted the critical role these foundations play in supporting scientific research, innovation, and education.
Arguments against the pure abolition of science foundations, as exemplified by the case of the SEF, focus on the infrastructure essential to maintaining scientific progress and democratic accountability in science. If the Foundation for Science and Technology were to be abolished, it would undermine this essential infrastructure.
One key argument is that science foundations ensure sustained funding and support for research. Their budgets enable long-term projects, data sharing, and innovation across disciplines. Abrupt abolition risks significant budget cuts that constrain scientific capacity. For example, proposals that drastically reduce budgets for bodies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) by over 20% threaten core research programs. This illustrates how foundation abolishment or severe cuts jeopardize ongoing scientific efforts.
Foundations also protect scientific integrity and prevent political interference. They provide a degree of independence from political cycles and pressures. Attacks on federal science systems and sidelining of scientists, as seen during recent administrations, highlight how the weakening or removal of foundational support enables manipulation or censorship of scientific data with harmful public consequences.
Moreover, science foundations support education and workforce development. They contribute essential funding for K-12 STEM education, professional development, and resources critical for cultivating future scientists and an informed public. Withholding funds for STEM education programs directly harms rural and high-poverty districts that rely on this support.
Furthermore, abolishing science foundations disrupts international research collaborations. Sudden loss of funding not only impacts domestic research but also undermines international partnerships and data sharing, as seen with projects affected by funding cuts in the US impacting Canadian research.
Lastly, science foundations uphold democratic values tied to science. Associations of higher education and academic freedom have condemned executive orders and policies aimed at dismantling science funding as attacks on intellectual diversity and academic freedom. Beyond mere funding, science foundations symbolize commitment to evidence-based policymaking and democratic principles.
In sum, using SEF as an example, arguments against pure abolition cite the foundational role these organizations play in supporting research, safeguarding scientific independence, enabling education, maintaining international collaboration, and protecting democratic ideals in science policy. Removing them risks widespread harm to the scientific enterprise and society at large.
The President of the Republic believes that the abolition of the Foundation for Science and Technology may not be beneficial and has urged the government to reconsider its decision. The future of scientific research, education, and democratic accountability in science policy hangs in the balance.
The President further emphasizes that the abolition of the Foundation for Science and Technology could negatively impact health-and-wellness, as medical-conditions might not receive the necessary research funding and support. The role of science foundations in ensuring sustained funding and innovation for various disciplines, including medical research, is crucial in advancing scientific understanding and health-related advancements.
Additionally, the President highlights the importance of foundations such as the Foundation for Science and Technology in protecting scientific independence and maintaining scientific integrity, which are crucial in making evidence-based decisions that contribute to the health-and-wellness of the public. Without the preservation of these foundations, the democratic accountability in science policy, particularly in medical research, could suffer.
