Oops, silly me, it was in the very same article. I missed it when I skimmed
through to check...

*TO: After recent mass shootings, hasn't funding for gun violence research
> received more attention?*
> *GM:* There is a proposal in Congress to allow for $10 million in
> research funding. But I suspect it essentially has no chance of making it.
> Even if it did, our Department of Health and Human Services prohibits any
> of the funds from being 
> used<http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/12/gun_violence_research_nra_and_congress_blocked_gun_control_studies_at_cdc.html>,
> and I'm quoting directly here, “to advocate or promote gun 
> control<http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-CE-07-001.html>.”
> That means even if I had money to do the research, it would be a crime to
> talk about the policy implications.

Here's the article he links to:


And here is the grant, with the prohibition mentioned:


I assume this is the relevant bit:

> *Prohibition on Use of CDC Funds for Certain Gun Control Activities*
> The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and
> Related Agencies Appropriations Act specifies that: "None of the funds
> made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease
> Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."
> Anti-Lobbying Act requirements prohibit lobbying Congress with
> appropriated Federal monies. Specifically, this Act prohibits the use of
> Federal funds for direct or indirect communications intended or designed to
> influence a member of Congress with regard to specific Federal legislation.
> This prohibition includes the funding and assistance of public grassroots
> campaigns intended or designed to influence members of Congress with regard
> to specific legislation or appropriation by Congress.
> In addition to the restrictions in the Anti-Lobbying Act, CDC interprets
> the language in the CDC's Appropriations Act to mean that CDC's funds may
> not be spent on political action or other activities designed to affect the
> passage of specific Federal, State, or local legislation intended to
> restrict or control the purchase or use of firearms.
So the implication *seems *to be that if the research discovered that the
best way to stop people being killed and injured by guns was gun control,
it wouldn't be allowed to say so.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to