Budget

President Trump has asked Congress to impose an $18 billion cut in non-defense spending in its appropriations legislation for fiscal year 2017. According to a leaked document, the White House has suggested that about $3 billion be taken from R&D programs. Several key congressional appropriators have said it is too late in the fiscal year to consider such large cuts.

The House Science Committee’s Republican members will seek increased support for basic physical sciences research in the fiscal year 2018 budget cycle, and they are renewing efforts to influence the allocation of research funding at several agencies.

Following the release of President Trump’s budget blueprint, scientific and university community leaders have spoken out in a chorus of opposition and dismay. Congressional leaders are exhibiting a more varied range of reactions.

President Trump’s fiscal year 2018 budget would cut the Department of Energy’s Office of Science by 17 percent, NASA by about 1 percent, and NIH by 18 percent, while the Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy within DOE would be eliminated. The budget outline is silent on NSF and leaves out top-line funding levels for a number of major research agencies and offices.

President Trump’s “blueprint” of his forthcoming fiscal year 2018 budget request reveals that the administration is targeting many federal science agencies for deep cuts. Reactions from congressional leaders have ranged from supportive to muted to outraged.

Following a failed attempt last year, Congress has passed the bipartisan “NASA Transition Authorization Act.” The bill, which emphasizes human space exploration, affirms existing NASA priorities. However, it leaves ambiguous policy concerning contentious issues such as NASA’s Earth science activities.

A draft version of the fiscal year 2018 budget outline for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration proposes a 17 percent cut in funding for the weather and climate agency. NOAA research would face a 26 percent cut, while satellites and data would be cut 22 percent.

Mick Mulvaney, the new director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, has been a leader in efforts to downsize the federal government. During the Senate confirmation process, he said he believes there is a “proper role for federal government in research.”

Two recurring recommendations are for the president to appoint a science advisor and to provide robust funding to federal science agencies and STEM education programs.

At a meeting of the American Physical Society, two physicist-congressmen and a former top federal science official discussed challenges the science community may face in the coming years and sketched out ways to respond.