Reaction From Capitol Hill to FY 2008 S&T Funding Levels

Reaction to the recently-enacted FY 2008 budgets for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s research program has been, with few exceptions, strongly negative. As reviewed in FYI #124, The Task Force on the Future of American Innovation, Association of American Universities, and the Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America have expressed sharp disagreement with the funding outcome (see http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/124.html .) In addition, the American Physical Society released a critical statement that notes:

There has been sharp reaction from Capitol Hill. Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-MI) criticized the outcome (see http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/mi03_ehlers/omnibus_statement.html for his entire statement): As previously reviewed in http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/121.html, the final funding bill made very significant cuts to the request for the High Energy Physics program at the DOE Office of Science. The International Linear Collider received only 25 percent of the request, and Congress included no funding for the NOvA activity at the Tevatron. Fermilab Director Pier Oddone told the lab’s employees on December 20 that the $320 million that the lab will receive for FY 2008 is $52 million less than what it expected. This will cause an “immediate stop of ILC [http://ilc.fnal.gov/] and SCRF [ http://ilc.fnal.gov/accelerators/cavity_program.html], and NoVA [ http://www-nova.fnal.gov/]. Oddone described the need to “re-size the laboratory . . . the size of the problem is about 200 FTEs,” and a “rolling furlough” of approximately two days a month.

In response to these cuts, Senate Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-IL), Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) and Representative Judy Biggert (R-IL) are meeting with the appropriations and authorization committees and the Department of Energy “to address the current funding situation and avoid potential layoffs during fiscal year 2008.” They sent a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Jim Nussle urging that the Administration “increase the [FY 2009] funding request for the Office of Science, particularly for the HEP program.” Their entire letter, and the accompanying press release, can be read at http://durbin.senate.gov/showRelease.cfm?releaseId=289862

On December 19, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) released a letter on “The Innovation Agenda and the Omnibus.” In this letter, the Speaker states:

A statement accompanying this letter explains that the House Democrats’ Innovation Agenda proposes to double funding for NSF, NIST, and the DOE Office of Science within 10 years, requiring funding increases of 7 percent annually. It then states: “The National Institute of Standards and Technology (received an 11% increase) is on track to meet the Innovation Agenda’s goal to double in 10 years. The Department of Energy’s Office of Science (received a 6% increase) is very close to meeting that goal. Unfortunately, the National Science Foundation (funded at a 2.5% increase) falls short of the 7% goal to be on track for doubling within 10 years.”

As explained in http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/121.html, the FY 2008 budget for the Office of Science contained many earmarks. Subtracting these earmarks results in a budget increase of 2.6 percent for the Office of Science. In addition, the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative and the Democrats’ Innovation Agenda set different “doubling” goals for the National Institute of Standards and Technology. A 2007 Office of Management and Budget document on the American Competitiveness Initiative refers to “the President’s commitment to begin doubling basic research in the key physical sciences agencies” and later refers to “the Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology labs, in accord with the ACI doubling commitment.” In contrast, the Innovation Agenda states: “Double funding for the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the Department of Energy’s Office of Science within the next 10 years and make a long-term, sustained commitment to these crucial investments in basic research and development and those at other agencies that serve as the building blocks of technological advancement.” Note that the Innovation Agenda does not limit the NIST doubling to basic research or its labs. The total NIST budget rose by 11.7 percent in the FY 2008 appropriations bill. However, NIST’s Scientific and Technical Research Services budget - which funds its labs conducting basic research - rose by 1.4 percent (see http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/123.html .)