Congress Prepares to Draft Appropriations Bills for Science Agencies

April 13, 2007 – Shortly after returning from its spring recess, Congress will begin drafting the appropriations bills that provide funding for federal science agencies for fiscal year 2008.  Congress has had mixed reactions to the President’s R&D budget proposal for FY 2008.  “While the President’s budget includes some important funding increases, it lacks the priorities and consistency to ensure our competitiveness now and in the long run,” said House Committee on Science and Technology Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN). 

President Bush proposed record funding for research and development in fiscal year 2008.  Total federal funding for R&D would increase by 1.4 percent to $142.9 billion.  However, funding for research would decline by 2.0 percent or $1.1 billion to $55.4 billion.  The decrease in funding for research would be more than offset by a larger increase in funding for development, particularly weapons development programs at the Department of Defense and human space vehicle development programs at NASA.  After accounting for inflation, funding for research would decline for the fourth year in a row. 

Last year, President Bush announced a ten-year plan to double the budgets of three science agencies – the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology core programs – as part of his American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI).  Programs that are part of the ACI would receive large increases in funding under the President’s FY 2008 budget proposal, but many agencies that are not part of the ACI would suffer cuts in their research budgets. 

Many members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have endorsed the President’s request for large increases in funding for the National Science Foundation (8.7 percent) and the Department of Energy’s Office of Science (16.0 percent).  In contrast, members of Congress have expressed displeasure with the President’s proposals to cut R&D funding at other agencies.  Agencies that would receive less R&D funding include the U.S. Department of Agriculture (-10.8 percent), NOAA (-9.5 percent), U.S. Geological Survey (-4.0 percent), and EPA (-3.1 percent).  

National Science Foundation.  The President’s budget proposal would increase funding for the National Science Foundation (NSF) by 8.7 percent to $6.4 billion in FY 2008.  The proposed increase in funding would keep NSF on track to double its budget over ten years.  In a display of strong bipartisan support, 44 Senators and 87 Representatives signed letters supporting the President’s FY 2008 budget request for the National Science Foundation. 

Science education has been a focus of Congressional oversight of NSF.  Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV), Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science, said “I’m pleased to see a robust request,” but he expressed concern that that the budget for Education and Human Resources had “not been proportionately increased.” He said “education was a stepchild in this request.”  Likewise, Ranking Member Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) expressed concern about the next generation of science teachers in light of declining funding for Education and Human Resources at NSF. 

Under the President’s budget proposal, some of NSF’s disciplinary directorates would grow significantly faster than others.  Increases in funding for mathematical and physical sciences (8.9 percent), computer science (9.0 percent), and engineering (8.7 percent) would be greater than those for geosciences (6.3 percent), biological sciences (4.1 percent), and social sciences (3.9 percent).  Large increases in funding proposed for the physical sciences and engineering reflect the explicit priority given to these fields in the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative. 

Environmental Protection Agency.  The President’s budget proposal would cut R&D funding for EPA by 3.1 percent to $540 million in FY 2008.  This cut would bring EPA’s R&D budget to its lowest level in more than two decades, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.  Funding for EPA’s Science to Achieve Results (STAR) programs, which provide extramural research grants and graduate student fellowships, have suffered disproportionate cuts in recent years.    

Rep. Nick Lampson (D-TX), Chairman of the House Science and Technology Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, said, “The bottom line is, this [EPA] budget is inadequate to support the kind of research and development enterprise we need to find creative solutions to environmental problems.”  Emphasizing that the proposed cut is part of a troubling trend, Rep. Lambert said, “EPA cannot advance environmental research with a retreating budget.” 

Subcommittee Ranking Member Bob Inglis (R-SC) spoke of the importance of R&D in developing environmental regulations.  “By investing in EPA’s scientific research and development today, we can get better regulations for tomorrow.”  Testifying on behalf of the National Council for Science and the Environment, Bruce Coull said “Without investment in science and in scientists, there can be no science-based decision making.”

U.S. Geological Survey.  The President’s budget proposal would cut R&D funding for the U.S. Geological Survey by 4.0 percent to $547 million.  The President’s budget proposal would cut funding for the Mineral Resources program by more than $20 million and eliminate all funding for the Water Resources Research Institutes ($6.4 million in FY 2006).  Congress has repeatedly restored funding for these programs in recent years. 

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior and Environment expressed bipartisan support for the U.S. Geological Survey.  Chairman Norman Dicks (D-WA) commended the USGS for its “scientific excellence” and Ranking Minority Member Todd Tiahrt (R-KS), praised the agency for producing “sound science.” 

Rep. Dicks said he would "like to know why the Administration again wants to cut funding” for the Mineral Resources Program when “Congress has repeatedly expressed interest in this program.”  Members of committee also opposed the elimination of funding for the Water Resources Research Institutes.  Rep. James Moran (D-VA) noted that this program was recently authorized by Congress. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  The President’s budget proposal would cut R&D funding for NOAA by 9.5 percent to $544 million in FY 2008.  The budget includes $123 million in new funds to support the President’s Ocean Action Plan.  NOAA received a late boost in funding for FY 2007 and detailed budget data on the allocation of these funds across programs are not yet available.  Based on preliminary data, the President’s FY 2008 budget request reduces funding for NOAA’s office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research by 3 percent or $11 million compared to the FY 2007 enacted level.  Within this budget, funding for climate research would increase by $23 million or 13.5 percent; most of the increase would be accomplished by redirecting funds from congressionally mandated projects. 

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science, convened a hearing on NOAA’s budget proposal and said that Congress would focus on the “climate crisis” but she expressed fears of “spending more for less science.”   Congress is concerned that massive cost overruns and schedule delays for the NPOESS satellite program will draw funds from other areas of NOAA.  Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), said, “There's a $4.1 billion gap between the original cost estimate and the projected expense.”  It is not clear how the ballooning satellite costs would be accommodated in the agency’s five-year budget plan. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture.  The President’s budget proposal would cut the USDA R&D portfolio by 10.8 percent to $2.0 billion in FY 2008.  Forest Service R&D funding would decline by 5.3 percent to $305 million.  Agricultural Research Service R&D funding, which largely supports intramural research, would decline by 9.3 percent to $1.0 billion. 

R&D funding for the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES), which largely supports extramural research, would fall by 18.3 percent to $534 million.  Large increases and decreases are proposed within the CSREES budget.  R&D funding for the National Research Initiative, USDA’s main competitive research grants program, would increase by 34.8 percent to $257 million.  In contrast, funding for the Hatch Act program, which includes formula-distributed research funds, would decline by 49 percent to $164 million.  Congress has rejected previous attempts to increase CSREES funding for competitive research grants at the expense of formula funding or Congressional earmarks. 

Outlook.  In February, Congress increased funding for science and technology in the full-year continuing resolution for FY 2007.  In March, the Senate passed an amendment to the FY 2008 budget resolution by a vote of 97-1 to increase funding for research.  Likewise, the House passed a budget resolution that includes more than $450 million above the level requested by the President for scientific research and education in FY 2008.  Supportive language in budget resolutions does not necessarily translate into increased appropriations for science agencies.  However, these and other developments reflect strong bipartisan support for science in the House and Senate. 

Data sources for this article include the American Association for the Advancement of Science, White House Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, agency budget documents, American Institute of Physics, and Energy and Environment Study Institute.    

Craig Schiffries, Ph.D.
Director of Science Policy and Senior Scientist
National Council for Science and the Environment
1707 H Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, D.C. 20006
Tel: 202-530-5810
E-mail: policy@NCSEonline.org