White House Calls on Science Community to “Increase Public Dialogue”

With the House already in recess and the Senate preparing to leave town tonight, officials of the Clinton Administration are busy drumming up opposition to many of the budget priorities set by Congress in its Budget Resolution and appropriations bills. On August 3, Commerce Secretary Ron Brown held a press briefing to discuss the status of his department and to rally supporters. Yesterday, eight Administration officials gathered in the Old Executive Office Building to give a briefing on the implications for science and technology (S&T) of the competing plans to balance the budget.

Secretary Brown expressed hope that his congressional testimony has “had some impact” in recent hearings on eliminating the Department of Commerce. “Some Republicans had good things to say,” about the department, he said. Brown repeated President Clinton’s promise to veto any legislation that attempts to eliminate Commerce, and noted that the House-passed Commerce appropriations bill was “already in line with the Budget Resolution without getting rid of” the department.

In Thursday’s presentation by Administration officials, National Economic Advisor Laura D’Andrea Tyson compared President Clinton’s strategy for eliminating the budget deficit in ten years with the Congressional majority’s seven-year plan. While both sides were committed to balancing the federal budget, she said, the debate was over how it should be done. “It is important to keep in mind why” we’re trying to balance the budget, Tyson pointed out; “It’s about the nation’s future growth and prosperity.” She cited a general consensus that investments in science and technology do improve the nation’s economic growth, and called cuts to federal S&T programs short-sighted and “inconsistent with the goal.” If we skimp on funding technological innovations today, Tyson warned, we will “end up poorer tomorrow.”

Tyson found it a “great irony” that many of the R&D programs supported by the congressional majority are fully government-funded, while the programs they hope to eliminate are cost-sharing partnerships with the private sector. The completely government-funded projects, she said, have patrons in Congress to protect money flowing to their districts, while the industry-partnership programs are “designed so well, so insulated from politics,” that they have not gained congressional “guardian angels.”

Presidential Science Advisor John Gibbons and a number of agency representatives, including NASA’s Dan Goldin and Arati Prabhakar of NIST, described the effect of Congress’s budget actions on their programs. According to the briefing materials, the congressional majority has proposed reductions to such Administration priorities as Mission to Planet Earth, High Performance Computing and Communications, and the Clean Car Initiative. The Technology Reinvestment Program and NIST’s Advanced Technology Program- both competitive, industry-led partnerships to encourage innovative technologies- have been targeted for elimination in the Budget Resolution, while Clinton’s plan would provide them with steady growth. Other S&T programs favored by the Administration but targeted for cuts by the Congress include renewable energy and energy efficiency programs, high speed rail, air traffic control enhancements, the Environmental Technologies Initiative, and Superfund research into technologies for cleaning up hazardous waste.

The officials indicated that President Clinton was considering vetoing many of the appropriations bills in their present form. A question-and-answer session focused on how Congress could be made to understand and support the portfolio of federal S&T programs. Gibbons exhorted the audience to get involved, saying, “The next 30 to 45 days are absolutely critical. [This is the] time to raise awareness, increase public dialogue.” A member of the audience noted that the speakers were “preaching to the choir” of the importance of such programs. Gibbons responded, “First of all, the role of the choir is to sing!”