[androck1]

"In a budget proposal obtained by The Washington Post last month, the panel is slated for an 84 percent cut — or $542,000 — from its operating budget. That money typically covers travel and other expenses for outside experts who attend the board’s public meetings.

The reasoning behind the budget cut, said the document, reflects 'an anticipated lower number of peer reviews.'"

Doesn't sound like a "good move for science" to me.

[cryptarch]

Also doesn't sound like it will result in "more input from outside scientific bodies", because the budget for that got cut by 84%...

By the way, was that a euphemism for commerce-backed science? Like the science done for cosmetics companies and the tobacco industry?

It doesn't feel like they're talking about foreign Universities.

[supremesaboteur]

Why do they expect a lower number of peer reviews ? If there is a legitimate reason, then cutting the funding in proportion seems reasonable