Well I guess it’s time to talk about this:
The NIH released a seemingly down-in-the-weeds new directive which has the effect of drastically reducing the federal funds that go to institutions doing basic medical research. Put as briefly as possible, NIH medical research grants are divided into funds for this specific study (“direct”) and funds that go to the institution which houses the lab conducting the study and the infrastructure that makes it possible (“indirect”). That latter category is a major funding source for research universities and academic medical centers. Last night’s directive reduces that stream of funding somewhere between 50% and 75%. The precise breakdown ranges from institution to institution. But that’s a good measure of the level of funding cuts we’re talking about.
That’s Josh Marshall at TPM. Whenever I hear about one of these funding cuts, I wonder two things. First, is it plainly illegal? I haven’t seen anyone report that this one is, though I’m sure the slipshod way that King Musk does things probably leaves a lot of “attack surface” for legal challenges. Second, is it grossly unpopular? This one seems like it it is:
Having reviewed various particulars I think there are at least some reasons to think that the drasticness of the action may make it hard to pull off. There are academic medical centers outside of Boston, New York and LA. They exist across the South and in red states as well. Indeed, these and the universities they’re associated with are often bigger drivers of job support and growth, in percentage terms, than they are in blue states. They’re also where people get treated for diseases. They’re where a lot of people’s kids go to school. So I think you will have major, major stakeholders from Republican parts of the country who will be pushing back on this. Often in this era it’s not publicly. But it still happens. I’m pretty certain that when the administration nixed its across-the-board grant freeze it was because they were starting to hear from key Republicans that they wouldn’t be able to support it because of the impact in their states and districts.
So the point is this. We all get that in our age the Democrats are essentially the party of the universities and higher education. Not simply because of the people who work in that sector but because of people who have college educations and advanced degrees and are acculturated to its values. So on its face, from a degenerate, authoritarian point of view it seems like a no-brainer — knock out the universities. But it doesn’t break down that clearly when you see where these places are located and the role they play in communities around the country.
This morning, Josh posted that Sen. Katie Britt is already crying about how the cuts will affect the University of Alabama at Birmingham, the largest employer in the state (!). I presume that King Musk will either ignore those pleas, or Court Jester Trump will prevail upon King Musk to give a little money back to the red states while punishing the blue, which will increase the illegality of the move. (Side note, I’ll know that this country is on the right track when we call can call weirdos like Katie Britt “weird” rather than pretending that their religiosity is anything but a fucking scam cover for their evil fucking racism, sexism and homophobia.)
That illegal/unpopular two-step is a good way to look at other diktats from King Musk. USAID: grossly illegal / a little unpopular (overall). Banning the existence of trans people: illegal and if it’s merchandised correctly, I think unpopular, though initially very popular with Trump’s base. The question, as always, is who’s going to enforce the law. So far, the answer is: nobody.
RepubAnon
Oh, I’m sure Pam Bondi will be on this like Trump on a vegan main course.
(i.e. ignoring it completely or discarding it in disgust)
matt
That’s sad to hear that state subsidies for the poorly run backwards province of Alabama will be threatened by the general order to defund science.
WTFGhost
You can call them weird for their religion, so long as you point to something *really* weird. So: not the mormon “temple garment,” because wearing something special every day is a *fine* way to show devotion. (Maybe you’d hate it – but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t show devotion in a fine way.)
So: Vance, whose parents had him initialed, not named, is weird because he thinks the childfree are unhappy as they are, because his religion says so. That’s *really* fucking weird, and the sort of thing that leads to minor dustups like the Inquisition and the Crusades. A religion should talk to you about *you* – it shouldn’t be feeding you contemptuous lies about other people who don’t worship the way you do.
@mistermix.bsky.social
@matt: I think the Fox-addled brains of the people living there won’t be able to process that they live in part because blue states subsidize them. Some serious propaganda will be required to kill the momentary cognitive dissonance.
rikyrah
This is too cute for words 😍
To be this young and sweet again 🥰🥰🥰
Young man is being raised right
tiktok.com/t/ZP8YAxF5N/
rikyrah
If the funds were allocated by CONGRESS
THEN CONGRESS IS THE ONE ABLE TO DECIDE IF THEY ARE TO BE DISPENSED😡😡😡
narya
I’m wondering if they can legally do that. I’ve applied for a federally approved indirect rate–for a much smaller entity than a major research institution–and it’s an application to (in my case) the DOL, I think, and it’s officially approved. Even the de minimus rate for NFP entities has been raised from 10% to 15%, with, I think, the ongoing exception for Ryan White funding. That is, these rates have gone through a process, and I think there would be grounds to fight back. We’ll see, of course, but there should be standing.
Starfish (she/her)
University of Alabama is a large employer, and Katie owes much of her political career to the University of Alabama sorority system. Here is “The Power Funnel” Part Five of Bama Confidential about the political structures of the University of Alabama’s frats and sororities, and how they create pipelines for politicians. I think Part IV was about some current students who were chosen to be in the power funnel part of the frats and sororities so that was good too. One of the parts is “holy shit, that is the most racist thing I have ever seen.”
tobie
The NSF budget is also on the chopping block. Rightwingers have proposed to have AI evaluate grant proposals instead of human reviewer.
I got the message from my university that if NIH funding is not restored the school’s finances will be on shaky footing. I’m expectng to be laid off, which sucks since I’m too old to start anew but too young to retire. I have a template of a letter I’ve been giving friends with Republican reps. Anyone can use it. Here’s the FL version, written to appeal to a Republican mindset.
Walker
There is a specific law passed by Congress that makes this illegal from the LAST time the Trump administration tried this in 2017.
trollhattan
My kid picked a great time for applying to med school.
RaflW
I’m gonna disagree with this: “The question, as always, is who’s going to enforce the law. So far, the answer is: nobody.”
Multiple lawsuits are under way, many more are in process, and a series of rulings have started to pause, delay or reverse these often illegal orders. It is true that so far, Congress (Republicans!) have given away their prerogatives, and that’s both stupid and craven, and it is true that right now the main enforcers of court decisions, should it come to that, is a Justice Department unlikely to want to enforce them.
But there have been losses to Trump catalogued here. Yes one legal analyst said, Trump Admin folks may only be complying with some orders right now to preserve a path to appellate wins, but they are – in some cases – complying.
None of this diminishes the magnitude of the attacks. But going too far over to “he’s winning” is not helpful, nor accurate. We need to be clear-eyed about the work ahead. But I don’t think we’re served by saying it’s all fucked.
rk
I know someone at the CDC who’s been told to either resign or retire. They work on infections diseases in African countries. My guess is it’s because this person is black or it’s Africa related ( so double black) or our white overlords are morons.
Martin
The red state/blue state higher education gap is about to explode. One of the things that University of California was in pretty good shape about was that most of the campuses had at least a dozen or so socially minded billionaires that could be counted on for funding for research. Not for specific grants, but for endowed chairs, startup funds, graduate student support, construction of facilities and so on. Those people are going to be leaned on to fill some funding gaps, and will in all likelihood come through because they are not fans of Trump or Musk and understand the impact. Many of these came out of higher education with their startups being extensions of their PhD dissertation or has former university faculty. There are reasons why startups get clustered around universities…
Red state universities generally don’t have the same kind of dynamic. They do in the sense there is an industrial base hanging off the university in one way or another but it didn’t usually originate at the university in question and therefore doesn’t engage in quite the same kind of direct financial support. Massachusetts has a very similar dynamic, as do a number of of other states. You have institutions like GATech that have it as well, but they’re more outliers. Plus, these blue states are more likely to come through with state funding to make up for federal shortfalls, particularly if federal receipts get cut – CA will simply swap out federal taxation for state taxation, where Alabama isn’t likely to start raising state taxes.
I will also note there is a degree of failing to keep ones own house clean in this. Research fraud has been on the uptick in the last decade or so, particularly along those researchers that find some degree of public fame, and therefore new incomes streams, as academic institutions increasingly lean away from compensation being anchored on teaching and instead tying it to research performance, and so on. The academic world is aware of this problem and has been slow to respond to it, because any such response would require some reworking of the academic cultural space. This has also been contributed to by the absolute money grabs by academic publishers.
In the sense of ‘problems have a way of getting solved’ this one might now be getting solved to the detriment of everyone. The trajectory of higher education in the US was unsustainable. That was a big contributor to my retirement as I found myself among a rapidly shrinking body of people trying to preserve the focus on teaching, to the point I had insufficient numbers of allies to keep up the fight and was unwilling to be an active participant in the further decline of the institution. I could never figure out how reform might come, or maybe more accurately, I could never find a non-destructive means of reform. I wish I was optimistic that some good could come from all of this damage, but I doubt it. My overall sense was that academia would increasingly fall in service to meeting specific industry needs. At some point Microsoft will just have its own university, rather than the citizens of Washington State. Meta instead of the citizens of California.
No Nym
The University of Missouri system (4 campuses with huge research programs) stands to lose $212 million. Can’t wait to see how this gerrymandered red state responds to that.
artem1s
I assume they are talking about the institution’s federally negotiated indirect (IDC) rate. These are reviewed periodically to determine space usage and cost related to overhead (indirect) for research. After review, each institution receives a letter from HHS with the new negotiated fringe and indirect rates and usually are good for 2-3 years. I’ve rarely seen IDC rates for universities over 70%. Most are between 50-60%. Over the last 7 years I’ve seen my institution’s rate fluctuate between 59 and 61%. Fringe between current of 28% to high of 33. Indirect is set at the time of award for the entire award period (typical NIH grant is 5 years). So it does not change even if there is an update. Fringe can fluctuate at any time.
If the directive is combining the IDC and fringe as the target limit that’s going to represent a big cut for any institution.
Legality – I guess is going to depend on whether a judge decides those ‘letters’ represent a legally binding contract.
tobie
@RaflW: I’ll add that the way the Trump admin is complying is going to cause it problems in court. He’s outright favoring red states and hurting blue states. Sen Moran (R-Kansas) complained on Friday that food commissioned by USAID from Kansas is sitting in ports. Trump restored USAID funding for KS farmers according to a tweet from Moran this morning. Have CA’s farmers seen the same restoration? If not, Trump’s moves seem legally questionable.
Martin
@Starfish (she/her): University of Alabama (specifically their hospital system) had been the states largest employer for years, just in case anyone was unclear on just how dogshit red state economies generally are. Their biggest industrial base hangs off of Marshall Space Flight Center so if NASA funding goes in the shitter, all those jobs are going to yeet off to CA space venture capital which don’t get captured by Musk. Sen Shelby moved heaven and earth to keep that river of money flowing.
Killing SLS might be the only good decision this crew of assholes make. Shame it’s not for the right reasons.
Martin
@RaflW: There will be no enforcement of those decisions should they come down. There is no independent DOJ and no respect for those institutions – or else none of this would be happening in the first place. If y’all want those things enforced, I suspect you’re going to need to find an ample supply of bricks.
Baud
@tobie:
He does this a lot. Announce or do something extreme, walk it back selectively based on pushback, expect to be praised for being reasonable.
Starfish (she/her)
@Martin: Yes! Stennis Space Center was a big employer in South Mississippi. There are also some NOAA things going on on that campus having to do with hurricane research and coastline mapping. There were some talks of cutting NOAA too.
A lot of folks rely on hospitals for jobs as well as universities.
Cathie from Canada
Yes, I posted on this on my blog on Friday. I think Trump and Musk and the Repubs are basically shooting the messenger – they don’t want to hear any educated opinions about anything, so they think universities should just go away.
Michael Bersin
Late afternoon yesterday in Kansas City there was an organized demonstration, rally and march at Mill Creek Park on 47th Street. Around 300 people, with a lot of reaction (positive) from passing traffic. It is, after all, Kansas City. It was a diverse crowd.
“Feed the Poor, Eat the Rich”
No Nym
RE: “The question, as always, is who’s going to enforce the law.”
I listened to an interesting discussion between Tim Miller and Michael Steele about this yesterday. They pointed out that even in contempt of court cases, the people who would act would be federal marshals. Unfortunately, they are under the direction of Pam Bondi.
Baud
@Baud:
Case in point
A Ghost to Most
On the plus side, he’s now doing to Tesla what he did to Twitter.
David_C
@matt: UAB has a great reputation, so much so that when a UAB professor was chosen to be the Director of NIAID, she had serious street cred within the research community.
Martin
@No Nym: One of the dirty secrets of higher education is that taxpayer funding for the enterprise has been insufficient since 2008. The financial crisis forced pretty much all institutions to chase external dollars – including research. The taxpayers won’t bail the institutions out now any more than they did after 2008, and the institutions will simply get more aggressive at chasing external dollars – becoming even more direct vassals of corporations, and doing even scammier stuff than professional masters programs and summer academies. Distinguishing scam for-profit universities from state-run public universities is going to get a lot harder.
Baud
@David_C:
A lot of red states depend on the value produced by their usually blue urban areas.
HinTN
@matt: There are many good things in the bright blue dots across the grossly ruby red states. It’s that tension that drives the massive gerrymandering.
tobie
@Martin: Private benefactors will not be able to match the scale of federal funding. I live in a state that receives over a $1 billion in NIH and NSF funding annually. Donors cannot come close to matching that level of sustained funding over many years.
I sympathize with some of the problems in academia you outline and disagree with others. Yes, universities have moved to more partnerships with industries and this has also meant a switch from basic research to applied work. The NIH and NSF shifted funding priorities in this direction too.
Univ administrators have done NOTHING to explain the value of basic research for decades now, and as a result most Americans wouldn’t have even a general sense of the difference between academic research and corporate R&D, which is never open-ended. Companies only invest in research where there is a high likelihood of return on investment.
Where I disagree with you: teaching and teaching faculty have become a big priority at universities over the past decade. I’m on the rule committee of my R1 univ, and at least 30% of the members have to be teaching faculty. I don’t know a single R1 univ that hasn’t created teaching professorships and added teaching faculty to major governing boards. It’s an ongoing project but the exploitation of adjuncts continues to be addressed.
marklar
@artem1s: “I’ve rarely seen IDC rates for universities over 70%. Most are between 50-60%. Over the last 7 years I’ve seen my institution’s rate fluctuate between 59 and 61%.”
So, capping the rate at 15% means a 75% reduction from a previous level of 60%.
HeleninEire
I have spent most of the weekend on the phone or on text with numerous friends and former colleagues. I have been a grants financial manager for 35 years; almost my entire career.
This shit is bad. Very, very bad.
When super storm Sandy hit the east coast I was working for Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Their entire research mouse population was wiped out; literally flooded to death. Years and years of research for some investigators. This is 100x worse.
I am an old lady and I work for the city of NY, who does not have an indirect rate. And personally I can get fired tomorrow and I’ll be OK. But my friends and former colleagues, all of who are paid from indirect costs, are screwed.
The big difference between the red and blue states is this: three of the organizations that I have worked for, all of which are in the top 10 research grant grantees: NYU, Columbia U, and Memorial Sloan Kettering all have HUGE endowments and more money than they know what to do with. They will be OK if they step up for the next 4 years and don’t act the assholes. Spend that money. This is an emergency.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Martin:
A thousand times this. The impact of billionaire money from people like Theil and the Kochs to basically buy chairs/departments/etc in major state universities is awful and also not widely known.
No Nym
@Martin: I think it is already hard for the uninitiated to tell a scammy for-profit program from a public university. How could anyone think an online degree is equivalent to the experience of attending a public university? I wonder what will happen when all the universities, which employ thousands of people, start shedding employees here in Misery.
Booger
@matt: Huntsville has the highest concentration of PhDs of any city in the nation.
So I hear.
raven
On Friday, Feb. 7, the University of Georgia issued an official statement on how federal funding freezes may impact research. In the statement, which was also sent in an email to all faculty and staff Friday morning, the university expressed uncertainty but provided key takeaways based on what was currently known.
“We understand that prolonged uncertainty or permanent shifts in agency funding priorities could have significant implications, particularly for graduate assistantships, funding for specific areas of research and scholarship, and budgeting,” the statement said. “While the situation continues to be in flux, please know that we are exploring all options.”
This announcement came after President Donald Trump’s flurry of executive orders since taking office on Jan. 20. His orders aimed to curb federal spending on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, among other programs. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order on Trump’s orders on Monday, Feb. 3. The ultimate outcome remains uncertain.
UGA’s statement advised faculty and staff to forward any suspension orders, stop work orders or termination orders for sponsored projects to contacts at UGA’s Sponsored Projects Administration. Additionally, they asked to be forwarded any project-specific instructions given to researchers based on DEI, environmental justice and other topics covered under the executive orders, as well as requests to certify that a project does not cover these contested topics.
“Unless notified to the contrary, you should continue to operate your awards as normal,” said the email.
UGA announced on Wednesday, Feb. 5 that the university’s research and development expenditures in fiscal year 2024 exceeded $600 million for the first time. Federal research expenditures made up nearly half of this total at $255.1 million. According to the UGA Office of Research, research spending contributes to college rankings and makes up a key part of the university’s multi-billion dollar impact on the economy of Georgia
raven
@Martin: I worked for the University System of Georgia for 20 years. Every year we had record enrollment and record budget cuts.
Betty Cracker
@tobie: Thanks for sharing that. Will repurpose it to send to my shitty Repubs (pardon the redundancy).
@trollhattan: Oy. But congrats regardless!
Lily
Cuts, even medium ones, to researchers at state universities in the states that can’t afford to (or are unwilling to) increase how much tax funds they allocate to post secondary education = serious dismantling. Universities are such a disobedient hotbed of DEIA in every corner.
Barry
@Martin: “I will also note there is a degree of failing to keep ones own house clean in this.”
No. These people have no concern with honesty.
TBone
I’m reposting this because that mofo can’t steal everything.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=MqJ3p3xkRes
This is my gospel today! Try me, mothaphucka!
trollhattan
@Betty Cracker:
Thanks!
Little ahead of myself since she doesn’t have her MCAT scores back, but dad has faith all that prep will pay off. Very adroit at the test-taking thing.
And nobody is discussing a half-decade of tuition yet.
Geminid
@Booger: Huntsville was a small town town going into the Second World War. Now its Alabama’s lsrgest city.
I always thought Huntsville should put up a staue honoring their economic foundation, like Birmingham has. But instead of Vulcan holding a hammer and brandishing a freshly forged spear, Huntsville’s would have Richard Shelby holding a coal scoop full of cash.
jonas
At which point its mission would be simply technical training, not education, producing drones whose skill set would be tailored to that company, making it hard to leave or found your own start-up, or imagine applications or issues not directly tied to your manager’s promotion. I’m sure Zuck gets wood just thinking about the exploitative possibilities…
TBone
@RaflW: thank you, come sit by me if ya wanna.
Anyway
I always thought government moved slowly — I don’t understand how these fine-tuned changes can happen so fast. I get changing a web-site but this seems like it should take more time
And I totally agree about favoring red states and punishing blue states – RThugs and FF esp have done that for years and get away with it.
TBone
@Michael Bersin: people after my own heart, appreciated!
Steve LaBonne
I’ve mentioned before that one of the things that most sticks in my craw is that the new NIH director is a research physician turned economist who is a professor of health research policy. He cannot possibly plead ignorance of the catastrophe this is going to cause.
Martin
So, my R1 joined that group after 15 years of me lobbying to do so. And yes, teaching faculty have been a good, if insufficient, step to addressing adjunct abuse, but teaching faculty are ultimately a cost saving measure, not a mechanism to restore lost funding, or a mechanism to grow the institution. They generally remain 2nd class faculty. Don’t get me wrong – it’s MUCH better than more adjuncts, but my sense is that the loss of overhead funding will force institutions to protect the time of research faculty even more by leaning back into adjuncts. At the end of the day, you have to chase the things providing money and you have to chase productivity for the things not providing money – and that means researchers becoming even more dedicated to chasing those grants (because diminishing returns from grants are still returns) and leaning back into paying some adjunct $8K to teach a course. The administration will argue that it can’t be avoided under the current circumstances, because it’s not like state taxpayers are going to fill the gaps in most cases, and the backlash on filling the gap with tuition is going to be too severe.
Baumols cost disease is about to hit higher ed hard.
MomSense
@RaflW:
The problem is that the law is coming in after the fact. By the time the pause in funding is restored to the health clinic in Bangor, it will be long closed and almost impossible to reopen. That’s just one small example. Yay the courts have placed a TRO on Musk/DOGE accessing Treasury. Except they already did and we have no idea what they have already done with that access.
Martin
I didn’t mean to suggest that they would. My point is that their ability to replace any of it won’t be evenly distributed – and blue state institutions are more likely to find alternate sources than red states. The gap can widen even as both groups decline.
Ruckus
@WTFGhost:
Do not forget that some religions think that they are the end all be all of humanity, and without them it isn’t humanity.
Steve LaBonne
@jonas: Except corporations have long since stopped wanting to spend their own money training new employees. So they pressure state legislators to turn state universities into vocational schools. Which is a lot cheaper than research so it won’t be affected by cuts to research. The big exception is that the pharma industry depends heavily on NIH-funded basic research. One hopes that pharma execs will make their voices heard in the coming days.
Kelly
Asha Rangappa says Musk has bought a Super Bowl ad to attack USAID.
asharangappa.substack.com/p/prebunking-elon-musks-super-bowl
Kayla Rudbek
@trollhattan: If I were applying to college, med school, or graduate school I would be looking outside the USA now.
oldgold
@trollhattan: Been there and done that.
The tuition is just the half of it. You know, they still need to eat and such.
But, some of the best expenditures J have ever made. Don’t regret a dime of it.
matt
@Booger: Well, those PhDs are about to get it good and hard from the party that the state overwhelmingly votes for. And since the university is the state’s biggest employer that will affect general prosperity statewide. Voting and elections are more important than people generally think.
Baud
Via Reddit, readership capture. (I do not vouch for accuracy).
Ruckus
@Cathie from Canada:
What they want is no taxation.
What they want is a non functional federal government.
What they want is a government by, for and of them. A system that all the money at least goes through their pockets – well not all of it goes through, a bunch stops there.
What they want is his rich royal majesty to be the one and only voice of everything. (That’s elon BTW) OK that’s what elon wants but still – he’s RICH so he must know everything and always is right.
That picture on the right of the screen “No one voted for Elon Musk” is as on point as it gets.
different-church-lady
The reality of whether we will still have laws is what’s on the table.
Kay
@Baud:
thanks
John S.
@No Nym:
Not all online degrees are the same. There’s a vast difference between a degree from Kaplan University and one from Western Governors University.
But I take your point and agree. Online schools should never replace traditional universities.
Miss Bianca
@Ruckus: What you’re describing as what they want…is exactly what the French aristocracy and priesthood had…just prior to the French Revolution.
Pretty sure there are no more billionaire historians out there than there are philosopher kings, but if there are…they ought to be getting really, really nervous right about now.
Elizabelle
@Miss Bianca: I will learn to knit if someone else is putting together a guillotine, 21st century version.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Baud: Keep in mind Musk’s wealth is based on Tesla stock.
Geo Wilcox
@Ruckus: It is actually Peter Theil not Musk. Musk is just the front freak, those behind the scenes are the real deal
tobie
@Geo Wilcox: Elon sure has a lot of time to tweet for someone who is supposedly working night and day to hold govt agencies to account. Makes sense that he’s a front. He’s a salesman who’s good (or was good) at pitching products he didn’t design. If I recall correctly Tesla didn’t turn a profit until 2020 and even then it wasn’t for its cars but its carbon credits. Can we call Elon what he is–a corporate Welfare King?
ETA: Here’s a link to a 2021 CNN article on “Tesla’s dirty little secret.”
RaflW
@different-church-lady: This is the open question. Where I’m coming from is that agreeing now that we do not is a tactical error. Don’t walk off the field if the contest isn’t actually decided.
Aziz, light!
Tesla is expected to make about $25 billion a year from opening its charging network to its EV competitors. Sale figures for its cars are not the only measure (wish they were).
Ksmiami
I’m sorry- tell me again why blue states should stay in this dysfunctional “union”??? And no I don’t really feel like we have to remain to help ppl who stay in Red states.
Ruckus
@Miss Bianca:
A couple of points.
One of the good things about this country is that one does not have to be a child of wealth to have a decent life. There are more opportunities now than when I was born, in the first half of the last century. There is no one reason for that but education is high on the list of reasons why that is. And that is all levels of that education. Some of that is just that life has changed A LOT in the last 100 yrs, in many ways and most of them positive. It isn’t perfect of course, it is after all humanity. But life is better. Is it perfect. Hell no, nothing in humanity is perfect. But it is better and for a large percentage of people. And some are pissed because they view that improvement as coming directly out of their pockets. Poor babies. Is it perfect? Well seeing as humanity is involved – how can it be? And of course many will see the overall betterment as being against them because they “HAVE TO BE THE ONES” and that’s just not how it works. That seems where musky is – the wealthiest man wants everything, not just money. He wants power, position, the peasants at his feet, control – he wants everything. And he’s earned nothing.
pajaro
@Martin: Normally the DOJ does not enforce court orders. Rather, the people who are ordered comply with the orders. Failure to comply allows them to be held in contempt.
Assuming that court orders will be disobeyed does nothing to help us, and does, in.fact, help our opponents. So don’t do it until it happens. As for contempt, normally the US Marshall’s service would get involved. Neutering that institution would, of course, hit at an entity of which Justice Roberts and his buddies depend upon a great deal. Individuals can be confined civilly, if they are in contempt (it’s last resort), and it’s not something that’s subject to a pardon.
I would note the the right wing Justices haven’t behaved in quite the same was as their buddies in Congress. They are still very invested in having their decrees obeyed; for example, they made clear in the Trump immunity decision that they, not the President, got to define the outer boundaries of the President’s immunity. Any decision of a President to disobey a federal court order would strike at their power, and they would not be amused.
FDRLincoln
There are many credible reports that the Trumpers and Musk are already ignoring court orders and not restoring funding.
I assume we will see contempt hearings soon.
cmorenc
@Baud: Musk’s income stream to support himself comes mainly from a recurring series of loans backed by Tesla stock as collateral. Will Tesla stock shrinkage cross the point where lenders consider the financial risk of default has become too high to continue making these loans? BTW: this revoving loan-against-stock-portfolio is among of the key ways many billionaires are able to maintain a lush income stream while minimizing their tax liabilities substantially below the effective rates for middle-income taxpayers.
Alce _e_ardillo
@matt: Unfortunately that goes double for other universities in blue states, like SUNY, and Illinois.
cmorenc
@FDRLincoln:
Be interesting to see how CJ Roberts reacts to Trump & Musk’s defiance of federal court orders – especially since the possibility of an upcoming power struggle between Trump and the federal courts, conservative as they may be, has dawned on Roberts when he cautioned Trump against defiance of court decisions and orders. Will Roberts and enough others among the RW6 SCOTUS Justices be willing and able to find effective ways to push back and restrain Trump & Musk from simply running over them, especially since the Justice Dept has been rendered a subservient legal arm of the Trump Administration? What would Roberts do if and when Trump essentially responds to a SCOTUS decision reigning Trump in with: “FU – I have power to do that, you don’t have power to say no”
different-church-lady
@RaflW:
Totally agreed. We only have laws if enough people agree we do.
Not unnaturally, I’m concerned about that.
different-church-lady
@cmorenc: Considering that CJ Roberts already thought giving Trump an inch didn’t equal all the miles, I don’t have much optimism on that.
Alce _e_ardillo
@pajaro: I assume that lEon himself is not carrying out the directives, but having a flunkey do the dirty work. The point of attack for contempt would be those lackeys, who presumably do not have the immunity from legal action. If they won’t carry out the orders under fear of contempt, then what neoL wants is immaterial.
different-church-lady
Another day, another episode of COMPLETE, UTTER DUMBFUCKS:
Maybe next time PAY A FUCKIN’ ATTENTION TO WHAT DIPSHIT HITLER ACTUALLY SAYS BEFORE YOU VOTE.
Professor Bigfoot
@rk: The shade of Woodrow Wilson nods in approval.
Tom Levenson
@marklar: At MIT the current rate is 59%. There is a rule that every non-federal grant cover the same overhead number as the Feds do. Almost all don’t, which means they are subject to “under recovery” That’s MIT-speak for using the Institute’s own funds (i.e, endowment income) to cover the difference between whatever a non-federal donor allows for overhead and the negotiated federal number. Which also means that we have to get approval for any funds we seek that might be subject to under recovery.
All of which is to say that the to-some very high overhead numbers being quoted are far from the full story.
Also, doing a very much back of the envelope calculation dropping to a 15% overhead rate from 59% would/will be a low nine-figure cut in revenue based on 2023 numbers. (MIT main campus only, not including Lincoln Lab.) That would be a cut of between 10 and 20% of the on-campus research budget. (There are a bunch of cross cutting factors and I’m not any kind of an accountant, so I’m not got to pretend to any precision here). Any way you slice that, it’s a lot of science that doesn’t get done, just on this one campus.
geg6
@tobie:
He’s a marketer whose purpose is a con. He’s Trump but twenty-five years younger. Like knows like and that is their bond. Just have to find a way to saw away at that bond to have them scratching each other’s eyes out. Smarter people than me will have to figure out how to do that.
Elizabelle
@different-church-lady: I saw that.
Wondered what the Spanish words for schadenfreude and FAFO are.
Dumbshits. Florida really has a problem with rightwing Latino voters.
To jackals: a lot of these Venezuelans are not citizens, and were (hopefully) not actually voting for The Felon. But they supported him. How charming.
Many live in Doral (near one of The Felon’s golf courses), which is nicknamed Doralzuela (35% of its residents are from Venezuela).
FWIW, leopard in Spanish is Leopardo.
Ksmiami
@Elizabelle: my pity left the door in November; now, I only will help the victims that supported Harris and the Dems. The
others FAd and now can FO
Elizabelle
@Ksmiami: I feel the same.
NaijaGal
@artem1s: When I worked at Brigham and Women’s, the indirect cost rate was at 80-something percent! RAND’s indirect is (was?) 99%. These are outliers though.
mwing
Hi- research Administrator here, I can talk to indirect costs in particular, and not just because I AM ONE.
First and main thing: If you have an IDC rate of 60% it DOES NOT MEAN THAT 60% OF A GRANT GOES TO OVERHEAD! It’s 37.5%
Sorry for yelling.
So, the IDC rate at my school is 60% which is totally normal. What that actually means is, if we apply for $100,000 in direct cost funding, we get to tack on an additional $60,000 to cover the electric and the janitors and people like me.
But $60,000 divided by $160,000 is 37.5%, that’s the percent of total grant $ that goes to overhead.
There is a good reason why IDC rates are expressed this way in the profession, but that’s not how normal people think, they never think, on hearing a percent: “percent of what?”. They just assume its the what that it would be if they were saying it.
Other stuff: IDC rate agreements are public, you can get basically any schools on 10 seconds on google or the FDP site. They are negotiated with either DHHS or ONR on a semi-annual basis based on actual accounting expenses from the particular institution, with a bunch of stuff excepted- none of this is in any way hidden or covert, it’s all right out there!
The issue with NIH lowering it’s rate is that schools who have a lot of NIH-funded research literally won’t be able to afford to continue accepting those research grants- they can’t cover the overhead- which is real-research-related expenses- from other sources.
Another completely weird thing is that- all federal agencies (mostly there are exceptions for specific kinds of grants) accept the same negotiated rate. Having one agency suddenly be a much, much worse deal would be unprecedented and would totally distort the research landscape. Like, DOD funds some medical research, people will be like, can I change my focus enough to get in on a DoD program instead of NIH?
On the other hand, if the other agencies adopt the same 15% rate it would just destroy the federally-funded research landscape as we know it generally. I don’t think that will happen, because for example, I can’t see anyone ordering DOD to do so. They don’t fund research as a favor to the universities, DOD funds research because they get stuff they want from doing so
Lastly, I think what happened was, the Project 2025 guys really did think that the IDC that universities get was way more than needed and was being used to fund weird liberal and DEI stuff. (Not making this up they literally published it) So they were like, hey lets get rid of this freaking liberal slush fund!
But they don’t really know how anything works and did not think it through.
Also even I can’t explain why just NIH in particular, unless they’re…still mad about COVID?
mwing
@NaijaGal: Yup, hospitals are high!
And it’s where you get into the outliers that it becomes so obvious that this can’t mean what people think it means- obviously you don’t have 99 out of 100 Rand grant $ going to overhead.
But because most institutions rates aren’t outliers, people can believe that, say, 55% of a grant goes to overhead, when what that rate actually means is that about 35% of total grant $ goes to overhead
SFAW
“King Musk” or “Emperor Elon”? Inquiring minds etc.
Alliteration always helps with spreading memes, I think.
And always remember: you can’t spell “Felon” without “Elon.”
Ohio Mom
@Ruckus: Oh, I think us everyday folk will still be taxed, someone has to make the interest payments in the national debt.
We’ll be paying down the debt AND paying for things that used to be public services: the weather report, former parks, schooling at all levels, the list goes on, plus paying more for traditionally privately produced diced goods and services — between the effect of tarriffs and inflation in general.
Gloria DryGarden
@Elizabelle: FAFO, In Spanish
”vas a joder, vas a averigüar.” Or shorter version. “Jodas, averigües.”
mind you, joder is pretty much equivalent to fuck, so NSFW.
That subjunctive tense because of the future/ conditional/ command mix. Please, any native spanish speakers, correct me as needed.