Yes, there’s good reason to be ambivalent about the provisions of the Nelson Memo. In addition to likely creating huge financial burdens for research-intensive institutions, it will certainly lead to a further systemic entrenchment of the APC funding model, which is just another manifestation of toll access. Like all regulatory efforts, it will have unintended consequences as well as intended ones, and given how quickly it was produced I really wonder whether anyone did the kind of due diligence that would be wise in the case of rules as far-reaching as those.
From: OpenCafe-l <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Lisa Hinchliffe <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Lisa Hinchliffe <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, February 2, 2024 at 1:58 PM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Fate of the Nelson Memo?
As a side note, I've heard that there are universities are not thrilled with the Nelson memo mandates because of the financial burdens it means for institutions. If you are an academic library, it might be worth seeing if you can find out what your university is saying to Congress through its government relations office.
Lisa
___
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe
[log in to unmask]
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 1:56 PM Orange, Danelle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hello all!
Thanks for Katie Steen-James analysis, David. Unfortunately, I had already written up this monster of a response which says the same thing, basically.
So, not to get political, but unfortunately, politics necessitates it. For all the US-ians, contact your house representative and talk about how open science and open research are an overall benefit to constituents and the world. If you want a data point, our open resources are probably going to hit 10 million hits this weekend(!!!!) and are used by people all over the world, bringing prestige, grant funding, and business to the region.
First, you are correct with your assessment that this would end funding of the open access mandate in the Nelson Memo. Unfortunately, it is a bit too little too late in some respects. Open publication of Data went into effect last year, the cat is out of the bag, the horse has left the barn. This is similar to many of the already enacted mandates especially when it comes to NIH. Keep in mind that part of the reason we have these open access mandates is that Republicans wanted to know what grant funding was going for and having open access to the resultant research was an important part of government transparency.
Second, if we look at the Senate version of the bill (S.2321), defunding the open access mandate is not in their version of the bill as of the last action. This is time to convince all your representatives that this is best for their districts before the bill goes into reconciliation. This isn’t a 5-alarm fire, but maybe a 2-3 alarm fire? This can change in between now and passage.
As for the likelihood of passage: I’ll be honest, I’m not sure. The Republicans are an organizational mess at the moment and will vote against bills and compromises they previously agreed to. Who knows what they’ll do. The Democrats holding the Senate, and the narrow minority in the house only adds to the chaos. The overall chaos of the representative branch for the past several years does not really make it easy to predict what will happen.
However, Republican’s narrow majority means that they need to compromise on some items to get anything passed the house. I feel that this could be a good thing, seeing that parts of the mandate have already begun (data deposits for instance). Like all large institutions, the U.S. government is hard to get rolling, but once it’s moving on something, it is hard to get it to stop. This does bring us to the fact that the Nelson Memo is, in a sense, a formalization and timeline for a process that has already begun broadly across the government and especially in the sciences. That means that the Government has grants in place with researchers in every state regarding open publication of research in various forms and these agreements include funding for open access. The momentum is still in the favor of open access, but that doesn’t mean we can’t encourage support.
On the other hand, they’ll just pass a continuing resolution, nothing changes, and everything gets funded for 3-6 months.
Fortunately for this particular bill, but unfortunately for government budgetary stability, I’m guessing they’ll pass a continuing resolution again in March, and we’ll get to do this all again ad nauseum.
Still talk to your representatives in the House and Senate about it.
Danelle Orange (She/Them)
Digital Programs Librarian
Phone: 414-288-6295
Email: [log in to unmask]Raynor Memorial Library
1355 W Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53233
Marquette University
From: OpenCafe-l <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Rick Anderson
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2024 12:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fate of the Nelson Memo?
CAUTION: This email originated outside of Marquette University. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Greetings, fellow denizens of the Open Café –
I have a (U.S.-centric, sorry) question for the group. As many of us know, the FY24 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill contains language (in Section 552) that would prevent government funding agencies from expending any of their resources to enforce the provisions of the memo – effectively neutralizing the memo’s implementation.
As of today, the bill has been introduced in the House, but I don’t know enough about legislative process to know what this means about its prospects for passage. At some point, it seems to me that a version of the bill will have to pass in order to fund those agencies, but I don’t know how long this could drag on.
I also don’t have a good sense of where the provisions of the Nelson Memo are likely to fall in the list of priorities for members of Congress. Even for those who have strong feelings about public access to the results of federally-funded research, do they care enough to make this particular section of the bill a hill on which they’ll fiercely stand?
(Also, if the Nelson Memo ends up being neutralized by the bill’s language, that wouldn’t mean that the earlier, Obama-era version of the memo would also be obviated – would it?)
Any insights or inside info people might have on these questions would be interesting and appreciated.
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List