AIP FYI #32: House Science Committee Responds to Administration’s FY 2004 Request

One gauge of congressional opinion regarding an administration’s
budget request for science and technology is provided by an inside-
the-Beltway document known as the House Science Committee’s “Views
and Estimates.” Issued every year, this analysis gives an early
indication of how Congress may respond to the S&T request. What
follows are selections from this recently-issued FY 2004 document
pertaining to physics-related budgets. See the committee’s web site
at http://www.house.gov/science/ for the full text. Twenty of 25
Republican and five of 22 Democratic members of the House Science
Committee signed this report. A future FYI will include selections
from the Democrats’ Views and Estimates. Note that for space
considerations, paragraphs have been combined. Selections are in the
order that they appeared.

ROLE OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR S&T: “While the percentage of national
R&D sponsored by the federal government has declined in recent years,
the federal role remains essential. Indeed, as competitive pressures
have led many industrial enterprises to focus research on projects
with shorter-term benefits, longer-term research depends more than
ever on federal support.”

NANOTECHNOLOGY: “The Administration proposes increasing spending on
nanotechnology by 10 percent. This promising, broadly applicable
technology field merits the additional spending. The Committee plans
to report out authorizing legislation for the nanotechnology
initiative (H.R. 766) later this spring.”

CLIMATE CHANGE: “The Administration proposes spending about $1.75
billion on climate change science, an amount equivalent to FY 03
enacted levels. The Committee believes this is an adequate
investment in this important research. The Committee supports the
proposal to dedicate $182 million to the Climate Change Research
Initiative (CCRI), compared to last year’s $40 million request.
However, the Committee notes that much of the increase appears to be
the result of the reclassification of several ongoing research
programs” “The Committee commends the Administration for working to
develop a strategic plan to guide all federal research activities
regarding climate, including the CCRI. The Committee plans to work
with the Administration to complete the plan this year and ensure
that areas of climate research the plan identifies as priorities
receive adequate funding.”

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS): “While the Committee is
generally supportive of the scale of the proposed budget for DHS, the
Administration has not yet provided enough information to fully
evaluate the proposed budget, despite repeated requests dating back
several months. Important questions remain regarding the new
Department’s R&D agenda and how it will be carried out.” “The
Committee is concerned that the primary early focus of DHS R&D will
be on development, with basic research comprising only 5 percent, or
$47 million, of the DHS R&D request. More information is needed on
the R&D agenda both within and outside the Department to determine if
this is adequate, especially given the proposed cuts in basic
research at the Department of Defense.”

PHYSICAL SCIENCES AND THE R&D FUNDING BALANCE: “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, continue to dwarf the remainder of
the R&D budget. While the budget documents acknowledge the need to
increase support for the physical sciences, the proposed spending
levels would not allow that to occur, especially when compared to the
enacted levels for FY 03.” “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 would decrease
substantially from FY 03 requested levels.”

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY: “The Committee strongly believes that the
Administration’s FY 04 budget request for DOE’s Office of Science,
which funds 40 percent of the Nation’s physical science research, is
inadequate. The budget proposes funding the Office at $3.3 billion,
essentially the same level provided by the Omnibus Appropriations for
FY 03. This is significantly less than the $3.8 billion the House
conferees proposed providing to the Office for FY 04 in last year’s
comprehensive Energy Bill (H.R. 4). The proposal also falls short of
the goal of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST), which recommended in its 2002 report that the FY
04 budget request begin bringing funding for the physical sciences
into parity with that of the life sciences.” “The Committee is
particularly concerned about the future of the Office of Science’s
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 supports the
inclusion of $12 million in the Office of Science request for the
United States to rejoin international negotiations aimed at building
ITER, a burning plasma physics experiment intended to lead eventually
to the development of fusion as a commercially viable energy source.
The Committee also supports the request for $64 million, also within
the Office of Science, for nanoscale science including funding for
instrumentation and construction of several nanoscale research
centers. The Committee is concerned, however, that without an
increase in the Office of Science’s total budget, existing programs
will be cut to provide the necessary increases for these new
initiatives.”

NIST: “The Administration proposes to spend $387.6 million for the
core NIST laboratory functions (the Scientific and Technical Research
and Services account) in FY04 an increase of $28.2 million, or 8
percent, over FY 03. The Committee is pleased with this request, and
in particular supports the new initiatives in nanotechnology and
homeland security for which the Administration has requested funding.
However, the Committee believes that more funding should be provided
to NIST to implement the significant new responsibilities Congress
has recently given it.” “The Committee is also pleased with the
Administration’s proposed construction and maintenance budget for
NIST of $69 million. The budget request provides funding to
undertake much needed improvements at NIST’s laboratory in Boulder,
Colorado. Above all, however, the Committee wants to ensure that the
new Advanced Measurement Laboratory in Gaithersburg, Maryland is
completed as soon as possible. NIST’s FY03 appropriation did not
provide enough funding to keep this facility on schedule for
completion by the end of 2003. If no additional funding can possibly
be provided for its completion this year, the Committee recommends
additional funding for FY 04.” “The Committee takes issue with the
proposal to virtually eliminate funding for the Manufacturing
Extension Partnership (MEP), which helps smaller manufacturers
modernize to remain competitive. In FY 00 alone (the most recent
year for which data is available), the program contributed $2.28
billion in new or retained sales, $480 million in cost savings, and
$873 million in new capital investments. The proposed budget would
end federal support for almost all state MEP centers. This change
would force most centers to shut their doors just as they could be
contributing to economic recovery.” “The Committee continues to
support the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and is disappointed
that it is phased out in the Administration’s budget. The Committee
remains willing to work with the Administration on the ATP reform
package it sent to Congress late last year.”

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION: “The FY04 budget request for NSF is
$5.481 billion, an increase of $452.9 million or 9 percent over the
FY03 request, but only 3 percent more than the FY03 appropriated
level. As a result, when compared to the actual FY03 appropriated
amounts, the high priority for NSF funding expressed in the
President’s budget (which was submitted before the FY03 appropriation
was completed) fades to nearly flat funding when adjusted for
inflation. Moreover, the FY04 budget request falls far short of the
$6.39 billion authorized by the 107th Congress for NSF education and
research activities in FY04.” “The Committee believes that NSF
should receive $6.390 billion in FY04, the amount authorized by the
National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-368).
This request would increase funding for NSF’s core science programs,
such as information technology and nanoscale science and engineering
research, and it would enable NSF to begin fully funding K-12
education programs and the large facility projects that have already
been approved by the National Science Board.” “The Committee is
pleased that the budget requests $200 million to complete the third
year of funding for the Mathematics and Science Education Partnership
Program. While the requested level is lower than the amount
authorized last year by the National Science Foundation Act of 2002
(P.L. 107-368), it does restore recent funding cuts and it increases
the overall level to accommodate the high number of quality
applications.” “Finally, the Committee is pleased that the budget
request for NSF’s education programs increases the stipend level for
graduate students in research or teaching fellowships from $25,000 to
$30,000.”

NASA: “The Administration has proposed $15.469 billion for NASA in
FY04, an increase of less than 1 percent above NASA’s FY03
appropriation of $15.335 billion. Unfortunately, as a result of the
tragic loss of the Space Shuttle, it is impossible at this time to
credibly assess the proposed funding levels contained in significant
portions of NASA’s FY04 budget request.” “On February 1, 2003, the
Space Shuttle Columbia was destroyed during re-entry and the seven
astronauts on-board were killed. Following the accident, NASA
grounded the Shuttle fleet indefinitely pending an investigation by a
team of outside experts. Clearly, the accident and subsequent
grounding of the Shuttle will have a significant effect on NASA’s
proposed FY04 budget request for the Shuttle program and the programs
that rely on the Shuttle, specifically the International Space
Station (ISS), and the ISS research program which is contained in the
Office of Biological and Physical Research. In total, these programs
account for approximately $6.6 billion of NASA’s $15.5 billion
budget. It is too early in the investigation to accurately predict
what NASA’s FY04 budget requirements will be for these programs.”
“NASA hoped to achieve U.S. core complete assembly of the ISS
[International Space Station] by spring 2004 and have 12 research
racks in operation. However, these plans are being re-assessed as
well. Therefore, the Committee cannot adequately address whether the
Administration’s $1.71 billion FY04 budget request for ISS assembly
and operations is justified. While the ISS has been an item of
concern for the Committee, NASA has made significant progress this
past year in establishing more credible cost estimates and management
processes for the program.” “The Administration requested $972 .7
million in FY04 for NASA’s Biological and Physical Research program,
which is a 6.5 percent increase over the FY03 request, as calculated
using full cost. This budget reflects NASA’s commitment to the
Research Maximization and Prioritization (ReMAP) Task Force
recommendations to increase the priority and productivity of science
on the Space Station. NASA management should be commended for
providing more stability to the Space Station research program.
However, the loss of the Columbia and grounding of the Space Shuttle
fleet will impact NASA’s ability to conduct this research.” “Three
major NASA programs, Space Science, Earth Science, and Aeronautics
are not directly affected by the grounding of the Space Shuttle
fleet. The Administration’s FY04 budget request for NASA’s Space
Science enterprise is $4.01 billion. The Committee strongly supports
NASA’s Space Science program and the Administration’s request,
including Project Prometheus for space nuclear power and propulsion
systems, optical communications, and the Beyond Einstein initiative.”
“The Committee supports the Administration’s request of $1.55 billion
for NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise and applauds NASA’s work with the
interagency climate change science program. However, the Committee
is concerned that the Administration is requesting only $75 million
in FY04 for NASA’s Earth Science Application programs, despite its
proven track record of high payoff endeavors, including improved
weather forecasting, disaster management, terrain mapping, and
aviation safety. The Committee is also concerned that the
Administration is not adequately transitioning NASA’s technology
efforts, such as space radar and weather monitoring sensors, into
operational capabilities.”

Richard M. Jones

Media and Government Relations Division

The American Institute of Physics

fyi@aip.org

(301) 209-3094