Taxpayer rights

["Joseph J. Esposito" <espositoj@worldnet.att.net>]

>Recently, there has been much discussion about the rights of taxpayers to
access the published results of research funded through taxpayer dollars.
Which makes sense!

JE:  It makes half-sense or partial sense, but it does not make horse
sense. Putting aside the intriguing geopolitical question of whether these
rights extend beyond American borders to nontaxpayers, the problem with
this policy is that it creates an unfunded mandate.  Open Access in
whatever form (self-archiving, institutional archiving, author-pays online
journals, etc.) will drain capital from scholarly publishing, even as it
radically increases the number of papers in circulation.  Hosting,
searching, peer review--all these things cost money.  Is the NIH proposing
to add these costs to every grant application, costs that will continue to
rise with the volume of research?  Does anyone really believe that
depositing a paper in a national (global?) archive will be a complete
substitute for all that is currently garnered from the formal publication
process?

I commented in an earlier posting that it is "eminently reasonable" for
the NIH to make stipulations as to publication requirements for funded
research. That does not make it smart or wise.

Joe Esposito