Let people see behind the curtain

"As bipartisan authors of the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research (FASTR) Act, we believe FASTR would spur U.S. competitiveness, ensuring the best return on taxpayers’ $60 billion annual federal research investments. It’s not surprising that Tom Allen believes FASTR undermines “this country’s global leadership in scientific publishing” (“Scientific publishing policy should be based on facts, not politics,” The Hill’s Congress Blog, April 21), because he is the American Association of Publishers CEO. Allen, whose position wasn’t disclosed in the op-ed, is concerned about the financial impact of limiting publishers’ exclusive distribution rights for articles, but subscribers view expanded access to previously unobtainable information as a supplement to journals, not a replacement. In fact, since the National Institutes of Health’s public access policy was implemented in 2008, the number of journals published by the seven largest academic publishers has increased. Allen also argues that a 2013 White House directive duplicates the goals of FASTR. FASTR improves on the executive action by unlocking access to cutting-edge, publicly funded research from garage-based startups to medical researchers in the lab. Unfortunately, the directive has generated a patchwork policy that protects paywalls for monopolistic academic publishers, while overlooking disturbing costs associated with blocking free public access to knowledge. For example, Liberian officials noted that Ebola research hidden behind 32-year old paywalls could have helped them better respond to the outbreak. Ultimately, FASTR democratizes access to new knowledge, helping entrepreneurs and industries translate basic research into practical applications and innovative products or solutions.From Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), Kevin Yoder (R-Kan.) and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Washington, D.C."