AIP FYI #39: Reading the Tea Leaves: FY 2004 S&T Funding Outlook

A 65-page document passed by the House last week that consists mostly of
numbers and which will never be sent to President Bush provides a first
glimpse of possible parameters of science funding for the next fiscal year.
While devoid of much detail, and requiring some assumptions, the “Concurrent
Resolution on the Budget” outlines what a majority of the House of
Representatives recommends for the fiscal year starting on October 1 for
NASA, NSF, and DOE. As it now stands, the Department of Energy’s Office of
Science would see its budget slashed.

The Concurrent Resolution establishes spending targets for twenty different
categories of federal spending, and sets revenue targets. It does not have
the force of law, and is not sent to the President. Rather, it provides the
basis for how much money each of the thirteen appropriations subcommittees
in the House and Senate will have in crafting their annual spending bills.
Ideally, the House and Senate agree on a final resolution so that the
subcommittees on both sides begin from approximately the same spending
base.

While it may be one of the least well-known documents that Congress works
on, the budget resolution can be very important. Behind each of the figures
in that 65-page document are the broad outlines of how much money will be
spent on programs, and how much money the government will raise through
taxes. Failure to adopt a final resolution can lead to a breakdown in the
passage of the appropriations bills in the fall, which is what happened last
year.

The title of the resolution which the House passed on March 21 reflects the
times we are in: “The Fiscal Year 2004 Wartime Budget Resolution.”
“America’s security is threatened; it must be protected. That is always the
highest priority of any national government; and it is the highest priority
of this budget,” states the resolution’s summary. The resolution seeks to
end deficit spending, and provides a broad outline of how to do so. A key
part of the strategy is the reduction of 1% in total discretionary spending
(which includes all S&T funding) from last year’s level. How this 1%
reduction is to be applied is uneven, with some categories of spending
seeing increases (such as that for national defense which would increase by
an overall 2%) and other categories decreasing. As might be imagined, this
is a very politically contentious document.

One of the twenty categories or “functions” of spending is “Function 250:
General Science, Space, and Technology.” One total number for FY 2004 is
given for NASA, the National Science Foundation, and the DOE Office of
Science. For the current year, these three agencies (with perhaps minor
funding for other programs) have $23.1 billion. The resolution recommends
that next year this figure decline by $300 million to $22.8 billion.

Breaking this recommendation down requires a few calculations and a few
assumptions:

The resolution clearly states that $14.5 billion be provided to NASA, which
when combined with another function of spending yields an increase of 3.1%.

The resolution also clearly states that NSF should receive $5.5 billion, a
3.8% increase over this year.

The total of these two budget recommendations is $20 billion.

Of the $22.8 billion, that leaves $2.8 billion for the Office of Science
and any other science programs in FY 2004. The current Office of Science
budget is $3.3 billion. The difference between this year’s budget and the
resolution’s recommendation is -$500 million, or -15.2%. This calculation
assumes that funding for any other science programs outside of these three
agencies be ignored.

A few caveats: the Senate has not completed its budget resolution, and its
numbers are likely to be different. The Senate’s division of political
power is very narrow, and so their resolution is likely to be more
broadly-based. However, the Senate now has a cost projection for the Iraqi
war before it, and so senators will be looking at the budget and their
resolution from a different perspective. When the Senate completes its
resolution, it will have to conference with the House to reach a final
budget compromise.

It remains to be seen, as well, what effect one party control of the White
House, Senate, and House of Representatives has on the final resolution, and
much more importantly, the appropriations bills this fall. Will the
leadership use this political alignment to force down spending, or will it
find itself approving appropriations bills that will increase overall
spending? That is a question that will not be answered for many months.

Richard M. Jones

Media and Government Relations Division

The American Institute of Physics

fyi@aip.org

(301) 209-3094