Amendment would reduce funding for political science research
A new proposal before the Senate would shift federal funding away from political science research, a move that would have drastic consequences for several programs at Hopkins.
Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma introduced the amendment, which would redistribute funding provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF).
In the amendment, Coburn wrote that this change "ensures that more federal resources are directed towards supporting practical science."
Siba Grovogui, head of the International Studies departmentat Hopkins, expressed disdain for Coburn's amendment, calling the proposal "preposterous."
Grovogui is overseeing an undergraduate research fellowship in Chad that will explore the various legal, social and health-related effects of a proposed oil pipeline on the surrounding communities. This research program will receive approximately $250,000 from the NSF as a Law and Social Sciences project.
"This project will explore the rule of law in Chad. How can we know about the legal systems in other countries without conducting political science research? It is foolish to cut grants to this type of research as it can have effects on U.S. national security," Grovogui said.
He stressed in particular the comparative nature of political science research - especially its importance to the understanding of the various forms of government "beyond our shores."
A reduction in federal funding to political science research would require international relations, political science and comparative studies researchers to rely on private institutions for funding. These insttutions, according to Grovogui, "are not as comprehensive."
Jane Bennett, chair of the political science department, said that aside from Grovogui's fellowship in Chad, the NSF did not fund research at the Hopkins departmental level.
However, she said that some graduate students apply for doctoral dissertation grants from the NSF.
"There are not any now but there have been some in the past," she said.
Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma introduced the amendment, which would redistribute funding provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF).
In the amendment, Coburn wrote that this change "ensures that more federal resources are directed towards supporting practical science."
Siba Grovogui, head of the International Studies departmentat Hopkins, expressed disdain for Coburn's amendment, calling the proposal "preposterous."
Grovogui is overseeing an undergraduate research fellowship in Chad that will explore the various legal, social and health-related effects of a proposed oil pipeline on the surrounding communities. This research program will receive approximately $250,000 from the NSF as a Law and Social Sciences project.
"This project will explore the rule of law in Chad. How can we know about the legal systems in other countries without conducting political science research? It is foolish to cut grants to this type of research as it can have effects on U.S. national security," Grovogui said.
He stressed in particular the comparative nature of political science research - especially its importance to the understanding of the various forms of government "beyond our shores."
A reduction in federal funding to political science research would require international relations, political science and comparative studies researchers to rely on private institutions for funding. These insttutions, according to Grovogui, "are not as comprehensive."
Jane Bennett, chair of the political science department, said that aside from Grovogui's fellowship in Chad, the NSF did not fund research at the Hopkins departmental level.
However, she said that some graduate students apply for doctoral dissertation grants from the NSF.
"There are not any now but there have been some in the past," she said.
Be the first to comment on this story