Science Committee Wants Minimum 3% Science Funding Increase in FY 2000

About six weeks ago, the Clinton Administration sent its FY 2000 budget to Capitol Hill. The House Science Committee has responded with a document entitled “Views and Estimates of the Committee on Science for Fiscal Year 2000.” The conclusion as expressed by committee chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI): “The report’s minimum three percent increase for science programs illustrates this Committee’s determination to provide responsible and realistic funding increases for science.”This minimum 3 percent increase is in line with the Clinton Administration’s request.

The full 13-page report is available on the committee’s website at www.house.gov/science Some of the highlights regarding over- all funding follow; see FYI #37 for excerpts on specific programs:

“Notwithstanding the projections of budget surpluses, competition for scare federal discretionary resources by competing interests requires Congress to stress the fundamental importance of federal science programs to the nation.”

“In this fiscal environment, it is the view of the Committee on Science that funding for basic scientific research should take precedence over activities better conducted by the private sector, which tends to focus more on short-term, applied research.”

“Within this framework, the Committee on Science will continue to support the goal of increasing research funding in a responsible manner. This means that increases must fall within the discretionary budget caps and be predicated upon the following principles....”Five principles are described; see page one of the website report for particulars.

“The [Ehlers] National Science Policy Study stressed the importance of stable funding for fundamental research. Reflecting a similar emphasis, the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2000 budget submission also bolsters basic science efforts, improves education funding, and extends the R&D tax credit.”

“The President’s Fiscal Year 2000 science budget outlines some positive steps in strengthening our science priorities. For example, it includes a responsible 3 percent increase for civilian research and development spending. ...the Committee is concerned that total overall support for defense and non-defense R&D declines by 1 percent in Fiscal Year 2000.”

The report then cites the 2.1 percent increase requested for NIH - much smaller than last year’s request - and states, “vacillating funding levels makes planning difficult and reduces efficiency.”

“We would also note that often success in biomedical research is achieved because of advances in basic understanding in seemingly unrelated fields. The contributions of computer science, physics, mathematics, engineering and other fields to biomedical research illustrate the need to ensure that fundamental science remains an integral part of the federal government’s overall research agenda.”

The bottom line “With a projected $70 billion federal budget surplus and a strong national economy, the Committee on science is supporting efforts to substantially increase R&D funding, and would urge the Committee on the Budget and the Committee on Appropriations to increase funding by at least 3 percent for programs under the Science Committee’s jurisdiction for Fiscal Year 2000. In addition, the Committee remains committed to the goal of stable and sustainable R&D funding over the next five years.”

It would take over 23 years for the R&D budget to double with annual 3 percent increases.