From climate change to contraceptives, evolution to sex education in public schools, the Bush Administration had a stranglehold on science. But yesterday, President Obama began to loosen the government’s grip, lifting Bush’s imposed limits on federal funding for new stem cell research.

Bush’s 2001 bans on research funding transformed what should have been an intellectual academic debate into a bipartisan political battle, overstepping his bounds as he drew on moral and religious sentiments supporting his cause. Today, Obama is seeking a return to “sound science,” pledging to weed out all of the political meddling.

While there will most likely not be any instantaneous changes seen from this policy change — as it will take time for the National Institutes of Health to restructure its research funding — the announcement has certainly given the green light to scientists who have been itching to rev their engines and get the research going.

At Cornell alone, 28 professors and researchers participate in the Cornell Stem Cell Program. Under Bush’s bans, a lack of federal funding stunted competition and productivity within the field, and painted a bleak outlook for future generations of biologists and geneticists on East Hill.

Today, questions regarding the ethics of science will be left in the hands of the scientists and ethicists at the NIH, not by the head honchos in Washington. The floodgates are open, and researchers at Cornell and across the nation will be scrambling to meet a September 2010 deadline for grants from a $10.4 billion slice of economic stimulus plan delegated to the NIH.

Opponents of stem cell research have described Obama’s actions as “deadly,” claiming that the destruction of human embryos, which is required to obtain stem cells, is equivalent to murder. But with increased federal funding, the big brains are suggesting that embryonic stem cells might not necessarily be the way of the future.

Last week The Sun cited two 2007 studies in which researchers took ordinary human body cells from adults and developed them into stem cells. These discoveries could pave the way for future health explorations that are not always as controversial as once thought.

Moving forward, we hope to see Obama’s commitment to making “scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology” expanded beyond the scope of stem cell research. Science is compromised when it is left in the hands of politicians whose agendas are framed by bipartisan commitments rather than scientific inquiry.

And for us on the Hill, we’re glad that Obama’s motion will finally propel us forward, allowing the University's researchers to move at the vanguard of intellectual discovery.