AIP FYI #50 Congress Ready to Draft FY 2003 DOD Authorization Bills

Next week the House Armed Services Committee is scheduled to
mark up the FY 2003 defense authorization bill. The Senate
Armed Service Committee should complete its work before mid-
May. While the process is months from being completed, the
action taken by both committees will help determine the
parameters for defense S&T spending next year.

Three percent of the defense budget for S&T is the level that
has been recommended by several authorities. This figure was
put forward in the Quadrennial Defense Review Report issued
last September (see FYI #130 in 2001) and advocated in an
earlier Defense Science Board Task Force report. In March,
Under Secretary of Defense Pete Aldridge testified that five-
year plan projects an increase in the S&T investment “to
approach 3% of the total DoD budget.”

Defense S&T’s visibility is increasing. A hearing by the
Senate Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities
earlier this month examined the contributions of science and
technology in combating terrorism and weapons of mass
destruction. Ronald Sega, Director, Defense Research and
Engineering, opened his testimony by saying “Many of the
capabilities and systems that are in the field today are the
result of a conscious decision, years ago, to invest in
Science and Technology (S&T) programs. The future security
and safety of our nation depends in part on a strong research
and development foundation.” Sega cited the utilization of
Nuclear Quadrupole Resonance technology, developed by the02ANaval Research Laboratory, for the detection of bulk
explosives. Sega later described an “investment continuum
that spans basic research through advanced development with
close attention to technology transition. We must seek a
balance across this continuum. Basic research lays the
foundation for tomorrow’s innovative development.”

The latest effort to strengthen defense S&T spending is a
letter that was just sent to Senate Armed Services Committee
Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and Ranking Minority Member John
Warner (R-VA). The letter, signed by Joseph Lieberman (D-
CT), Rick Santorum (R-PA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Edward
Kennedy (D-MA), Wayne Allard (R-CO), Robert Smith (R-NH), Jean
Carnahan (D-MO), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Mark Dayton (D-MN), Pat
Roberts (R-KS), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM),
Ben Nelson (D-NE), and James Inhofe (R-OK), highlights the
importance of defense S&T, and then states:

“It is imperative, therefore, that we act to fund S&T at 3
percent of the total defense budget. Such an action would be
consistent with the recommendations of the Defense
Department’s 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review, as well as the
1998 Defense Science Board Task Force. It would also comport
with Section 316 of the FY 2003 Senate Budget Resolution,
which passed the Budget Committee on March 21, 2002. Section
316 not only affirms the 3 percent funding goal for defense
S&T, it asserts that: ‘[r]obust investment in science and
technology is integral to full realization of the promise of
the hi-tech Revolution in Military Affairs.’ Rather than
meeting or building toward this goal, however, current
Pentagon projections indicate that the S&T budget will
decrease to 2.28 percent by 2007. This trend, if allowed to
continue, will substantially undermine our military and
technological capabilities in the long-term.”

The Bush Administration requested $9,676 million for defense
S&T for FY 2003, or 2.7% of the total budget. This is a
decline of 2.0% from the current year budget (see FYI #14).

Last year, the Administration sought a cut of 2.4% from the
previous year in defense S&T in their revised budget request.
While authorizers would also have made cuts, the appropriators
later took the S&T budget in the other direction. The final
S&T appropriation was up 11% over the previous year, to a
level that was 3.1% of the total defense bill (see FYI #152 in
2001).

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

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##########