AIP FYI #39: House Science Committee Recommendations on S&T Spending

One of the steps in the annual budget cycle for S&T
appropriations is the document known as the “Views and
Estimates” of the House Science Committee. While the Science
Committee does not write the appropriations bills for the
Department of Energy’s Office of Science, the National Science
Foundation, and NASA, it does influence the ultimate outcome
of these budgets. Portions of the Committee’s “Views and
Estimates” follow. The entire document, and other additional
views, including those of the committee’s Democrats, can be
accessed at http://www.house.gov/science/welcome.htm

PRESIDENTIAL INITIATIVES:

“The Administration’s budget highlights four ‘multi-agency R&D
priorities’ – work on anti-terrorism, networking and
information technology, nanotechnology, and climate change.
The Committee strongly endorses these initiatives, and agrees
that they deserve priority in funding.”

FEDERAL RESEARCH PORTFOLIO:

“While the Committee believes that the Administration has
chosen the appropriate priorities for the federal R&D budget,
it is nonetheless concerned that the biomedical sciences, in
general, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), in
particular, are growing out of all proportion to any other
element of the R&D budget. Indeed, just the increase proposed
for the NIH in FY03 is larger than the entire proposed
research budget for NSF. While the Committee supports the
doubling of NIH, it is concerned that unless the needs of
other agencies are addressed, many scientific opportunities
will be missed and even health research itself will be
retarded.

“Similarly, while Defense Department development programs are
critical to our national security, those programs alone cannot
create a stable and secure American society or even ensure our
protection from enemy attacks over the long-term. Yet while
the Pentagon is slated to receive a 12 percent increase, basic
and applied research in the Defense Department are flat, and
numerous programs in other agencies that unarguably contribute
to Homeland Security receive tepid increases.

“The Committee will continue to review the balance within the
federal research portfolio. The Committee looks forward to
working with the Administration and our Congressional
colleagues to develop ways to determine whether the current
portfolio is too heavily weighted toward NIH, and, if it is,
to figure out what a balanced portfolio would be.”

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION:

“The FY03 budget request for NSF is $5.04 billion, $239.91
million – or 5 percent – over the FY02 appropriation.
However, $76 million of the increase does not represent new
spending, but rather is existing funding associated with three
programs the Administration proposes to transfer to NSF the
Sea Grant program, now at the National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); hydrology programs now at
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS); and certain environmental
education programs, now at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).

“The transfers are unlikely to occur, and, in any event, none
of the transferred money would be available to strengthen
existing NSF programs or create new ones. After subtracting
the transfers, NSF is left with an actual proposed increase of
about 3.4 percent or about 1 percent above inflation. This is
not a significant increase for an agency charged with ensuring
the overall health of the nation’s university research
enterprise an agency that the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has held up as a model of good management.

“The Committee believes that NSF needs an increase (exclusive
of any transfers) of at least $420 million, or 8.8 percent,
over FY02 levels. This request would increase funding for
NSF’s core science programs, enabling NSF to begin funding
highly ranked grant proposals that are turned down solely for
lack of funding; fully fund K-12 education programs that have
been authorized by the House; and would fund large facility
projects that have already been approved by the National
Science Board.”

Regarding the $200 million NSF request for the Mathematics and
Science Partnership program, the document states that the
committee “fully supports this request.” Also, “The Committee
fully supports the proposed increase in graduate fellowship
stipends from $21,500 to $25,000 in the current budget
request.”

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF SCIENCE PROGRAMS:

“The Committee is particularly concerned about the future of
the Office of Science, which funds user facilities and
academic research. In recent years, funding limitations have
forced many user facilities to restrict the number of hours
they are available to researchers, causing investments that
have cost taxpayers billions to sit idle. In addition, many
DOE facilities are deteriorating and staff are nearing
retirement, producing a looming problem that the Committee
believes must be addressed with increased resources.

“The Committee continues to closely monitor the construction
of the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, especially in light of a recent report by DOE’s
Inspector General indicating that capabilities and facilities
have been pared back to keep the program under budget.”

“The Administration’s request for the Fusion Energy Sciences
Program is $257.3 million, far short of the $335 million
approved by the House in H.R. 4 [energy legislation].
Fusion’s potential to wean the Nation from fossil fuels is
tremendous, but much research remains to be done before that
potential can be realized. The Committee notes with approval
that the Administration is reassessing the potential U.S. role
in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor
(ITER), which may significantly advance the science by
achieving sustained-burning plasma. The Committee believes
that U.S. participation in such important international
research endeavors deserves serious consideration.

“Finally, the Committee supports the Administration’s proposal
to spend $40 million in DOE on a National Climate Change
Technology Initiative. The Committee is concerned, however,
that DOE has not highlighted this proposal in its budget
presentations and seems unable to provide any detail on how or
where it will be carried out. This important initiative needs
to become a focus within DOE if it is to be successful.”

NASA:

“The Administration proposes to increase funding for NASA by
0.7 percent in FY03, from $14.9 billion in FY02 to $15 billion
in FY03. The Committee supports the level of the
Administration’s request.

“The item of greatest concern in the NASA budget is the future
of the International Space Station (ISS). The Committee
continues to support development of the Space Station within
the $25 billion cost cap enacted during the 106th Congress
(P.L 106-391). The Committee applauds the Administration for
reviewing the costs of the Space Station and for its
commitment to solving the financial and program management
problems as outlined by the ISS Management and Cost Evaluation
(IMCE) Task Force.

“However, many critical decisions regarding the ISS remain to
be made. NASA has not yet implemented many of the management
reforms the IMCE recommended, and NASA has not yet identified
the criteria that will be used to evaluate the Space Station
program. In addition, the Research Maximization and
Prioritization (REMAP) Task Force NASA established to evaluate
ISS research priorities will not announce its findings until
August.

“Despite the uncertainty, the budget assumes $560 million in
unspecified savings over the next five years; without those
savings the three-person ‘Core Complete’ Space Station cannot
be assembled within the $25 billion cost cap.”

“The Committee appreciates the Administration’s commitment to
space and Earth science. The Committee, noting the
cancellation of the Pluto-Kuiper mission and the deferment of
the Europa mission, agrees that NASA should develop an
integrated science strategy for exploring the outer planets.
The Committee believes that investments in new technology,
such as the Nuclear Systems Initiative, could significantly
reduce spacecraft travel time and enable a more robust
planetary exploration program.”

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY:

“The Administration budget proposes to spend $389 million for
the core NIST laboratory functions (the Scientific and
Technical Research and Services account) in FY03 an increase
of $68 million over FY02. The Committee is pleased with this
generous request, but believes that in light of the focus on
homeland security, additional funding could be provided for
NIST’s computer security efforts and for its investigation
into the World Trade Center collapse, which could yield new
ways to strengthen buildings to withstand terrorist attacks
and natural disasters.

“The Committee is also pleased that the budget request
provides funding to complete the construction of the Advanced
Measurement Lab in Gaithersburg and to undertake much needed
improvements at NIST’s laboratory in Boulder, Colorado.

“The Committee takes issue with the proposal to sharply reduce
funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP),
which helps smaller manufacturers modernize to remain
competitive. . . .”

“The Committee looks forward to working with the
Administration on its proposed reforms to the Advanced
Technology Program (ATP), which may at last help put the
program on a path to stable funding.”

###############

Richard M. Jones

Media and Government Relations Division

The American Institute of Physics

fyi@aip.org

(301) 209-3095

http://www.aip.org/gov

##END##########