Abstract
The year 2020 has been historic in many different ways. The adaptation of science and of scientists to the COVID-19 pandemic, abrupt restrictions on travel and funding, continued tumult in U.S. immigration policy, and confrontations related to institutional and cultural racism have all exerted extreme stress on the global research community. As the year comes to an end, the results of the U.S. election provide new insights into what 2021 may have in store.
Pandemic Policy
The election of Joseph R. Biden as the 46th President of the United States provides an important signal that U.S. public health policy will shift to a more evidence-based approach in the near future. President-elect Biden has indicated that controlling the pandemic is his new administration's top priority and the leaders he has chosen for his transition team indicate that the new policy will be guided by scientific evidence rather than politics.
Specific actions will include a national strategy to expand and standardize testing for SARS-CoV-2 across the U.S. states and to optimize the supply of testing materials and reagents to remove existing barriers to expedient testing and contact tracing, which in tandem are the key to interrupting transmission. In addition to testing, Biden administration has promised to institute national standards for infection control measures, such as masking and social distancing, which have been proven to decrease transmission of the novel coronavirus.
The scale-up and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, which incidentally will include the first mRNA vaccines and perhaps two new recombinant adenovirus vaccines, are a third major priority of the new administration. This will require both active management at the national level and close coordination and communication with state and local public health officials and health care organizations. Similar strategies may be needed for optimal distribution of antiviral therapies and personal protective equipment.
Overall, it seems likely that the nation and the world will benefit from the U.S. administration's return to using rational scientific evidence to set pandemic policy, rather than prioritizing political and economic considerations.
Broader Science and Health Policy
The Biden administration has likewise pledged to be guided by science in a variety of other areas of public health interest. One example is that of global climate change. The health and economic implications of climate change are becoming ever-more apparent. Like the pandemic, climate policy changes made in the United States have broad implications across the world. Biden has pledged to revisit climate policy in the United States based only on scientific evidence. A specific action that he has promised is to immediately rejoin the Paris Accords. Other specific actions remain to be determined.
Another important science-informed policy area is the addressing of health disparities, which result in much poorer outcomes for people of color and for those living in poverty. These disparities are multifactorial, but many are impacted by factors such as access to health care (through health insurance) that was directly addressed in the Obama–Biden administration by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Biden's support for a continued and expanded ACA is one direct action that could have immediate benefit. Another important aspect of health care equity relates to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is essential that the distribution of resources to fight the pandemic, including distribution of testing kits, vaccines, and antivirals, be designed with health equity considerations in mind, so as not to further exacerbate the disparity in COVID-19 outcomes between racial groups that already exist.
Federal Research Funding
The implications of the 2020 elections on federal research funding are very uncertain at this point. As of the writing of this editorial, the Democratic party has won control of both the presidency and the majority in the House of Representatives, but the majority in the U.S. Senate will be determined by the outcome of two runoff elections in the state of Georgia. U.S. government funding policy could well go in different directions depending on which party gains control of the Senate. It does seem likely that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget will be adequately funded in 2021 in either case. However, the magnitude of the funding could be increased if the NIH were to be included in a new economic stimulus package. Another change that could have an effect on the research community would be if there were to be relief funding to U.S. universities.
Immigration Policy
President-elect Biden has pledged to revoke numerous executive orders of the previous administration that sought to block legal immigration into the United States, including that of scientists at the student, postdoctoral, and faculty level. Nation-specific restrictions on Muslim-majority countries and China also will be eliminated. The easing of these restrictions could have great benefits both in the actual flow of personnel and on the level of emotional stress placed on visiting scientists.
In summary, the results of the 2020 U.S. elections are anticipated to have broadly positive effects on the scientific community. There is reason to be hopeful that a return to greater global engagement and cooperation in both science policy and other policy initiatives will be beneficial to global health and economic prosperity in the new year. Perhaps 2020 has taught us all some important lessons in resilience, but the start of 2021 is very heartily welcomed.