April 15, 2026
Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) opening assertion as ready for the document is beneath:
Thank you Chairman McCormick and Ranking Member Sykes for holding this listening to and good morning to the distinguished panel of witnesses. As a few of you understand, scientific publishing – and, particularly, open entry – is a subject I’ve cared about and studied for a very long time.
I’ve been a cosponsor of the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research – or FASTR Act – because it was first launched in 2013. Prior to that, in 2010, I cosponsored the Federal Research Public Access Act. Both of those payments had the aim of accelerating free public entry to the outcomes of taxpayer funded analysis. Congress has did not act on these payments. On the opposite hand, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy below President Obama took a leap ahead in Federal coverage with Dr. John Holdren’s 2013 memo calling on companies to implement a most 12-month embargo on all Federally funded analysis papers. In her 2022 memo, Dr. Alondra Nelson – as performing OSTP director below President Biden – carried the ball even additional towards the end line.
We can and will have a wholesome debate about how we get to the aim of fast and free entry to the outcomes of Federally funded analysis. I hope we don’t disagree concerning the aim itself. I’ll remind anybody within the room who wants to listen to this.
The analysis was paid for by the general public. The mental worth is created by the scientists and college students doing the analysis. The peer reviewers are different scientists donating their time.
To be clear, I additionally consider that publishers have lengthy performed a precious function within the scientific communication ecosystem. In the 20th Century, it might have been argued they performed an irreplaceable function. But this isn’t 1925 and even 1995 anymore, and we have to be open to new frameworks for communication and new enterprise fashions. To the credit score of many within the publishing neighborhood – of their very own accord or maybe pushed alongside by the open entry advocates – so much has modified already. In explicit, I acknowledge the multiples methods wherein scholarly societies add worth to the scientific ecosystem, from conferences, to mentoring {and professional} improvement for college students and early profession scientists, to public outreach.
Unfortunately, there are publishers who’re doing a disservice to U.S. taxpayers, U.S. scientists and even to different publishers who’re making an attempt to do the correct factor. These publishers are quickly dropping the overpriced subscriptions they lengthy depended on for his or her large income, so they’re implementing extortionist web page expenses as a substitute. They are exploiting new methods to monetize the total analysis cycle – even details about scientists meant to be non-public. For instance, a couple of years in the past Elsevier purchased an instructional expertise firm referred to as Interfolio in order that they will repackage and promote details about Federally funded science and scientists again to Federal companies. And for all we all know, given the absence of any transparency or guardrails, they might be promoting this identical proprietary knowledge to China.
I acknowledge that constructing new enterprise fashions within the age of the web and now AI is just not simple for 100 plus year-old nonprofit organizations. I stay a prepared and keen accomplice to nonprofit scholarly societies struggling to search out their footing on this new world. But I cannot stand idly by as a choose few for-profit corporations proceed to use U.S. taxpayers, U.S. scientists and probably put at danger U.S. financial and nationwide safety to line their very own pockets.
This is an extremely nuanced situation. Thoughtful advocates for open entry have precious suggestions for the way open entry can handle the numerous challenges recognized on this listening to scope. To that finish, I request unanimous consent to enter into the document a letter from SPARC.
This listening to is wide-ranging in scope – all fascinating and essential subjects. I hope along with the breadth, we are able to go deep on at least a few of these essential subjects.
I yield again.
###