FY 2000 Defense R&D Appropriation Signed Into Law
The Army, Navy, and Air Force each have their own science and technology program budgets. There is also a separate defense- wide S&T program budget. The below figures represent total budgets by category:
Basic Research, 6.1: The combined 6.1 budget (all branches and defense-wide) increases 5.7%, or $62.8 million, from $1,107.9 million in FY 1999 to $1,170.7 million in FY 2000.
Applied Research, 6.2: The combined 6.2 budget increases 6.6%, or $207.6 million, from $3,150.8 million to $3,358.4 million.
Advanced Technology Development, 6.3: The combined 6.3 budget increases 8.5%, or $302.0 million, from $3,532.4 million to $3,834.4 million.
Another perspective is the total 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budget. It increases 7.3%, or $572.4 million, from $7,791.1 million to $8,363.5 million.
Yet another perspective is to look at the FY 20000 Science and Technology Budget by branch:
Army: The combined 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budget increases 15.5%.
Navy: The combined 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budget increases 12.8%.
Air Force: The combined 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budget increases 9.6%.
Defense-Wide: The combined 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budget increases 0.8%.
There is little or no over-all policy guidance in this appropriations conference report for H.R. 2561. There are several sections in the conference report for S. 1059, the National Defense Authorization Act, that provide policy guidance and recommendations. This authorization bill does as it is intended to do: authorizing how DOD is to use its appropriation. There are many sections on specific S&T programs, as well as more general language. One section of this conference report retains the "sense of Congress" language appearing in the original House bill. This language states "the Secretary of Defense has failed to comply" with congressional sentiment supporting an increase of at least two percent above the rate of inflation for defense science and technology spending for each branch in the budget submission. The conference report specifies that the Secretary make a certification "if the funding objectives are not met, that the budget does not jeopardize the stability of the technology base or increase the risk of failure to maintain technological superiority in future weapons systems." It also requires "the Defense Science Board submit to the Secretary and Congress a report assessing the effects such failure to comply is likely to have on defense science and technology and the national defense."
Another section of the authorization conference report requires a quadrennial report on emerging operational concepts. "The conferees intend that the military capabilities and associated research and development challenges identified by the Secretary will serve as a benchmark for future science and technology investments...." Still another section requires a report by Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology "on actions that the Department of Defense will take to ensure appropriate emphasis on revolutionary technology initiatives, sustain a high-quality national research base, ensure the coordinated development of joint technologies, identify and incorporate commercial technologies, effectively and efficiently manage the transition of new technologies into production, and provide appropriate education and training in technology issues to the department's military leadership."
Up until the President announced that he had signed the appropriations bill, there was speculation that he might veto it. While Clinton criticized accounting and earmarking provisions in the bill, he told reporters he had signed it "because it's crucial to our national security and our military readiness; because the troops that defend our interests abroad deserve the strongest support we can provide here at home." Senior congressional Republicans leaders expressed gratitude that the bill was signed.
Richard M. Jones
Public Information Division
American Institute of Physics