FY 2000 R&D Budget Outlook
“I’ve never been moved by the idea that you should double anything,” OMB Director Jack Lew told the President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) last Thursday. With his comments, and those of NSF Director Rita Colwell at a separate meeting later that day, it looks like next year will be another year of hard work for those advocating strong federal R&D budgets
Lew, director since July 31, told PCAST that the administration’s commitment to science and technology “is a very deep one.” He values the OSTP/OMB relationship, saying, “you see us here as a team.” Lew claimed that the administration’s approach to R&D through its creation of the Research Fund for America “was very successful,” and helped to correct what he said were past funding deficiencies.
The administration will favor long-term, potentially high-payoff investments in the FY 2000 budget submission, Lew said. Peer-reviewed programs, those entailing collaborative relationships,and high priority activities are characteristics the administration is seeking.
Lew addressed the contradiction between the budget surplus and spending constraints. Proclaiming it “a very tight budget year,” Lew cautioned PCAST that total FY 2000 discretionary spending will not rise. The administration will not spend the surplus “until we fix social security.” Spending caps remain in place, and referring to the requirement to offset spending increases, Lew said “the burden is high when you have to pay for it.” The administration supports these constraints, he added.
PCAST co-chair John Young asked Lew for his impressions on the recently passed Senate bill calling for a doubling of most federal R&D spending over twelve years. Lew said “it’s easy to pass something like that... Resolutions are unconstrained by the need to pay the bills.” He hastened to add that he did not want his remarks to be misinterpreted as a signal -- although it is interesting that Lew’s presentation was one of the few PCAST sessions open to the public.
Turning his attention to the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA), Lew said, “we believe very strongly in the GPRA.” He admitted that “the unit of output is not terribly clear,” and while saying that OMB was “trying not to be rigid about it,” Lew felt “if you care about a program” you should try to find a way to measure it.
“We’ve got to make the case to the American people” about the importance of basic research to later advances in technology, Lew said. He told PCAST that Congress is a mirror of public opinion.
In the next few days, OMB will start meeting with agencies in the first formal stage of budget deliberations, which are expected to last about one month. One of the agencies it will meet with is the National Science Foundation, whose director addressed the National Science Board late Thursday afternoon on the “environment for NSF planning and budget.”
NSF Director Colwell used the word “distortion” in commenting on increases for the NIH budget as compared with other basic science budgets. Describing the link between physics and health, she told board members that the average person does not understand the connection between basic research and the quality of life for many Americans. “We aren’t getting this message across,” “we don’t have the grassroots” support, “we have to engage the citizenry,” Colwell said.
A senior official briefed NSB members on the FY 2000 congressional outlook. On the positive side: the recently-passed bill authorizing a doubling of R&D spending, the Ehlers science policy report, the administration’s previously-stated projected growth in future R&D budgets, favorable congressional rhetoric, and “very good” efforts by the science community. Other signs are mixed, or unknown. The budget agreement spending cap means there will be no growth in total discretionary spending. Budget flexibility will be limited. The resignation of Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), the official said, is the loss of a very active R&D proponent. Incoming Speaker Bob Livingston (R-LA) was described in positive terms. Also changing is the chair of the House VA, HUD, Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, with Jerry Lewis (R-CA) (who will head the National Security panel) being replaced by James Walsh (R-NY). GPRA will take on increasing importance. The official doesn’t know what OMB’s plans are for NSF in FY 2000. There are, he said, “many unknowns.”
