Bureaucratic hurdles to the entry of foreign scientists are seriously hampering US science, according to the presidents of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and the Institute of Medicine (IOM). In a joint statement issued on December 13, the three National Academies officials said that strict new visa policies are preventing US and foreign researchers from meeting and engaging in the free flow of ideas so crucial to science.

The statement's authors warned, "The evidence we have collected from the US scientific community reveals that ongoing research collaborations have been hampered; that outstanding young scientists, engineers, and health researchers have been prevented from or delayed in entering this country; that important international conferences have been canceled or negatively impacted; and that such conferences will be moved out of the United States in the future if the situation is not corrected. Prompt action is needed."

"It's a mess," NAS president Bruce Alberts told The Scientist.

Alberts offered examples of specific incidents, both involving Chinese scientists, which he called "outrageous." In October, several sessions at the International Space Conference in Houston were cancelled because Chinese scientists chairing the sessions had not received visas to enter the US. Also in October, an NAS-sponsored Frontiers of Science workshop for young Chinese researchers was called off entirely because the scientists had not received visas despite having applied for them in early August.

One key problem, Alberts said, is that existing statutes passed in the wake of the September 2001 terrorist attacks make consular officials criminally responsible if someone to whom they've issued a visa commits a terrorist act in the US. Under such strictures, "What is the incentive for that person to give anybody a visa?" asked Alberts, who wants Congress to act to remedy the situation.

He added that he is not interested in blaming anyone, and is not angry, but he does worry about the long-term impact of such restrictions in the development of US science. "The problem is a difficult one," he said. "No one agency is in charge. The State Department, the Justice Department, CIA, FBI, are all involved."

Friday's statement, signed by Alberts as well as NAE president William Wulf and IOM president Harvey Fineberg, suggested a number of solutions to the problem. These include a special visa category for established scientists and having US researchers play a role in "determining areas of particular security concern."

"I've seen the statement from Bruce Alberts and it's right on the money," said Steven Teitlebaum, president of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) and professor of pathology at Washington University. He also agrees with Alberts that Congress should be alerted to the problems arising from these restrictions.

Alberts asserts that the potential hobbling of US research by the current restrictions is already a matter of concern in Washington. "Jack Marburger is worried about this," he said, referring to the President's chief science advisor, John Marburger, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

Neither Marburger nor other OSTP staff members were available to comment on the National Academies' officials' statement. But in Congressional testimony in October, Marburger promised that federal agencies would "routinely monitor" the security apparatus "to ensure the Federal government has struck the right balance between scientific openness and homeland security. We don't wish to turn away scientists unnecessarily."