Bill Introduced Toward Doubling NSF Budget

Members of the House Science Committee introduced legislation this week that would place the National Science Foundation (NSF) on a track to double the agency's budget in five years. The bill, H.R. 4664, authorizes a 15 percent increase for NSF for each of the next three years.

The proposal is similar to the bipartisan effort to double the budget for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which should be completed with the FY 2003 appropriations. While doubling the NIH budget included support from both the Clinton and Bush Administrations, proponents for doubling NSF's budget have yet to win over key people in the Bush White House, including John Marburger, Director of the Office of Science & Technology Policy.

At the American Association for the Advancement of Science's 27th annual Colloquium on Science and Technology Policy on April 11, responding to concerns about balance in the R&D component of the Administration's FY 2003 budget request, Marburger shared "my way of discussing the problem of 'balance,' sometimes expressed as too little funding for NSF compared with NIH, or as too little for the physical sciences compared with the life sciences. I think 'balance' is a

misleading term for the real issue, and it is a dangerous term."

Marburger continued, "If we want to achieve balance in federal science funding, we are going to have to understand how the complicated funding process works, or fails to work, to sustain the essential tools upon which our most exciting and productive areas of science and technology depend. Once the quality of this infrastructure is assured, then the questions of priority and adequacy of funding for the dependent fields remain."

In his prepared statement while introducing H.R. 4664, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) appears to disagree, at least on the timing:

"The thinking behind this bill is simple - but not simpleminded. NSF funds research that is of critical importance to the future of the nation's economy - including such areas as Information Technology and Nanotechnology, which the Administration has emphasized in its budget proposal. NSF funds research that is of critical importance to the nation's security - including work on such vital areas as cybersecurity. NSF funds research that is of critical importance to the nation's health and well-being - including genomics research and climate change research. And last, but far from least, NSF funds research and educational activities that are of critical importance to the nation's students; from the kindergarten classroom to the post-doctoral laboratory, NSF is the agency that ensures that we are improving math, science and engineering education.

"Those are all pretty solid arguments, I think, for rewarding NSF with more than praise. Recognition is nice, but success requires real money. This bill will help NSF get the real money it needs to succeed in all its tasks.

"Congress has quite properly committed to doubling the budget of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and I hope and expect we will complete that doubling this year as the President has requested. But NIH does not and cannot fund the full range of research activities the nation needs to remain prosperous - and healthy. NSF has the broadest research mission of any federal science agency and the clearest educational mission. It needs the funding that goes with that expansive - and expensive - mandate."

The coverage of the bill by the American Institute of Physics (AIP) Bulletin of Science Policy News (FYI #56) suggests "Section 7 of this bill will attract considerable attention. As described by the [House Science] Committee, the objective is to 'provide greater transparency to the process through which major research and facilities construction projects are evaluated, prioritized, and selected for funding.' ...Under this bill, the National Science Board would approve projects for inclusion in a future budget request. The NSF Director would then indicate by number (1, 2, 3, etc.) the relative assigned priority for each project. This list would then be submitted to the Board for approval. The list is to be updated as needed. A detailed report would be submitted to Congress every year."

Co-sponsors of H.R. 4664 include: Science Committee Chairman and Ranking Member Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) and Ralph M. Hall (D-TX), Research Subcommittee Chairman and Ranking Member Nick Smith (R-MI) and Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Environment, Technology, and Standards Subcommittee Chairman and Ranking Member Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) and James Barcia (D-MI), Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-NC), Rep. Constance Morella (R-MD), Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA), Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA), Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), Rep. George Nethercutt (R-WA), Rep. Michael Honda (D-CA), Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), and Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD).

The bill passed a House Science subcommittee yesterday and according to AIP, full Science Committee markup is scheduled for May 22. The bill's text is currently available through: http://www.house.gov/science/welcome.htm