| [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Thread Index] | [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Date Index] |
> This may be of interest to US scientists directly, and should give > pause to those in other countries. > > FYI > The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News > Number 90: June 30, 1995 > > Downsizing the Government: Outlook for Federal Science Program Funding > > The House of Representatives and the Senate gave final approval > yesterday to a seven year budget resolution which will dramatically > trim federal spending on science and technology. Speaking in support > of the budget resolution designed to eliminate the federal deficit > by 2002, Rep. Robert S. Walker (R-PA) proclaimed, "We have proven > the naysayers wrong. We have followed through on our promises." > > This budget resolution is a fiscal blueprint to guide federal taxing > and spending over the next seven years. It does not have to be signed > by the president, and does not determine specific program spending, > which is determined by authorization and appropriations > legislation. These bills must be signed by the president, and a > White House spokesman has already predicted "a long, hot summer" > as Washington moves towards the start of the new fiscal year on > October 1. > > For fiscal year 1996, the thirteen appropriations bills now working > their way through Congress are the bills to watch. However, the > budget resolution approved yesterday gives a good indication of > how Congress intends to fund science and technology programs during > the next seven years. These programs are a component of > non-defense discretionary spending (i.e., spending which is > directly controlled by the annual appropriations process.) The > budget resolution calls for $190 billion in savings in > non-defense discretionary spending over seven years, as compared to > a freeze in current spending. > > The American Association for the Advancement of Science has > prepared figures suggesting what future science spending may be under > the budget resolution. In a chart entitled, "Projected Effects of > House Budget Resolution on Nondefense R&D" the AAAS adjusted their > figures to show constant 1995 dollars for comparison purposes. There > are a number of important caveats to these figures. AAAS stresses > that these are preliminary estimates. > These figures are also based on the House version of the budget > resolution, which is somewhat different from the final version that > was approved yesterday by the House and Senate. AAAS made a number > of assumptions in their calculations. Finally, Congress can change > these figures at any point in the future. Our thanks to the AAAS > for their preparation of these figures, and their permission to use > them. > > The below selected figures compare current R&D spending with > projected spending in FY 2002. They are expressed in FY 1995 > dollars adjusted for inflation largely using deflators from the Office > of Management and Budget. > > NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION: > Total NSF R&D declines by 20.7% > Research and Related Activity declines by 10.1% Academic > Research Infrastructure declines by 67.8% Major Research > Equipment declines by 100.0% > Education and Human Resources declines by 20.3% > > DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY: > Total DOE nondefense R&D declines by 47.4% > General Science declines by 26.3% > Energy Supply R&D declines by 47.8% > > NASA: > Total NASA R&D declines by 38.0% > NASA SAT [science, aeronautics, and technology] Space R&D declines > by 37.3% > NASA Human Space Flight declines by 37.2% > NASA Mission Support declines by 21.4% > > DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE: > Total Commerce R&D declines by 50% > NIST Advanced Technology Program declines by 100% NIST > Construction declines by 0.9% > NIST [intramural] Scientific and Technical Research and Services > increases 1.0% > > ############### > Public Information Division > American Institute of Physics > Contact: Richard M. Jones > fyi@aip.org > (301) 209-3095 > ##END########## > > > >
Partial index: