Constituents with an interest in the National Science Foundation and
the Department of Energy's Office of Science have two new
opportunities to contact their Members of Congress. A bill has just
been introduced in the Senate that authorizes increases in the budget
for the Office of Science. In the House, a letter to key
appropriators is being circulated that recommends substantially
higher funding for the National Science Foundation. Both of these
time-sensitive efforts will fall short unless constituents act.
It is easy to send an electronic message to your Members of Congress.
Both the House and Senate have web sites that identify your Members
and provide links to e-mail forms. The Senate site is: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
The House site is: http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Security protocols for U.S. mail are time-consuming. Since time is
of the essence, e-mail your message. For tips on communicating with
Congress, see the AIP site at: http://www.aip.org/gov/nb1.html
DOE OFFICE OF SCIENCE:
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will consider the
Research and Development title of its comprehensive energy bill on
April 29. Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), the committee's chairman,
is a strong supporter of the Department of Energy and its science
programs.
The full House of Representatives started consideration of comparable
legislation yesterday. This bill, H.R. 6, contains the provisions of
an authorization bill passed earlier by the House Science Committee.
(See /fyi/2003/047.html
for information on this bill.)
Yesterday, Senators Carl Levin (D-MI), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Jeff
Bingaman (D-NM), and John Warner (R-VA) introduced a yet-unnumbered
bill to increase the annual authorization levels for the Office of
Science. Their strategy is to demonstrate widespread support for a
much larger budget for the Office of Science by obtaining many more
Senate cosponsors for their bill before the April 29 Energy Committee
mark up. Congress will be on spring recess for the next two weeks.
The only way that this new bill will receive the cosponsors that it
needs to be effective is if constituents bring this bill to the
attention of their senators.
The "Energy and Science Research Investment Act of 2003"
explains that "the Office of Science programs, in constant dollars,
have been flat funded for more than a decade . . . [which] has led to
a decline in the number of grants awarded, students trained, and scientists
supported . . . [and] underuse of the facilities that the United States
has invested hundreds of millions of dollars to construct." The
bill charges the Secretary of Energy with conducting a comprehensive
program of fundamental research, strengthening user facilities, maintaining
a leading-edge capability in nanoscience, ensuring a future S&T
workforce, and informing the applied R&D programs of DOE. The annual
authorization levels are heart of the Senate bill, which are very close
to those in the House bill.
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION:
A time-tested way to demonstrate political support on Capitol Hill
is
through the mechanism known as a "Dear Colleague." Members
sharing a
similar position on an issue agree to sign a letter to other key
Members, often following the urging of their constituents. Five
Members initially signed a letter that will be sent to VA, HUD
Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman James Walsh (R-NY) and Ranking
Minority Member Alan Mollohan (D-WV). Both Walsh and Mollohan are
well-known supporters of NSF; this "Dear Colleague" provides
them with
a ready "illustration" of Member support for the foundation
as the
appropriations bill is written.
Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) has been joined by Reps. Eddie Bernice
Johnson (D-TX), Nick Smith (R-MI), Ralph Hall (D-TX), and Rush Holt
(D-
NJ) in supporting this effort. The letter, which they are seeking
other Members' signatures for, begins as follows:
"We are writing as longtime supporters of fundamental scientific
research and education. Science and technology fuel the growth of our
economy, provide the means of our national security, and inspire our
children. Many of the benefits we reap today stem from wise investments
made decades ago. Last year, Congress recognized we must continue to
invest in America's scientific enterprise by overwhelmingly passing
the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-368).
This legislation authorizes a path toward doubling the National Science
Foundation (NSF) over the next five years. In order to meet this goal
we request a funding level of $6.39 billion for Fiscal Year 2004."
The letter cites the "monumental" impact of the research
that NSF has
supported, the programs encouraging a strong S&T workforce, the
importance of the foundation's educational programs, and the successful
effort to increase NIH funding. Regarding this last point, the letter
cites the importance of the physical sciences to health-related
research, and states, "Doubling the NIH's budget has thrown off
the
relative balance in funding between NSF and NIH."
The letter continues: "We believe that it is critical to restore
this balance starting this year, and that it can be accomplished even
during tight budgets. In fact, last year we increased NIH's budget by
$3.6- billion to complete the doubling commitment. This increase is
over half of what we are requesting for NSF's entire budget." The
letter concludes: "We ask you to address this imbalance and
strengthen science and technology research, development, and education
by increasing the NSF budget to $6.39 billion for FY2004. The increase
would be used to expand core science programs, enabling NSF to begin
funding highly ranked grant proposals that are turned down solely for
lack of funding. It would also fund K-12 education programs that are
critical for improving math and science education throughout the country,
as well as large facility projects that have already been approved by
the National Science Board." "We believe that Congress' long-term
goal should be to at least double the NSF's resources, and we respectively
request your support in achieving this goal."
Constituents should refer to Rep. Ehlers' April 10 "Dear Colleague"
letter regarding NSF.
Enlarge text
Shrink text
Print
E-mail
Digg this
Del.icio.us
Furl