|
NSF & Congress
Hearing
Summary: House Science Committee Hears Details of Bush's FY 02
Civilian R&D Budget
April 25, 2001
On Wednesday April 25, 2001, the House Science Committee convened a hearing
on the proposed civilian R&D budget for FY 02. The witnesses were NSF Director
Rita Colwell, NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin, Acting Director of the Department
of Energy's Office of Science James Decker and NOAA Acting Administrator
Scott Gudes. The hearing focused on the agencies' proposed budgets, interagency
collaborations and investment priorities. Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY)
started the session by voicing his concern over the agencies' slim budgets--a
sentiment that was echoed by nearly all of the members of the Committee.
In their opening statements the witnesses outlined their agencies' priorities
as set in the President's FY 02 budget proposal. After thanking Boehlert
and the Committee for their long-term support, Colwell noted that the
$4.47 billion NSF request is 1.3 percent over last year's budget. Highlights
include initiating math and science partnerships towards improving K-12
education, raising graduate fellowship stipends and an increased investment
in interdisciplinary mathematics research. Furthermore, NSF bolsters
funding in four priority areas; Biocomplexity in the Environment, IT
research, Nanotechnology and Learning for the 21st Century. Colwell concluded
by saying that "this budget lays the foundation for sustained increases
over the long term."
The question and answer session started with all panelists agreeing
on the power and effectiveness of interagency collaborations. Goldin
emphasized the importance of informal, personal interactions to the success
of any such effort. Throughout the session, nanotechnology was cited
as an area of effective interagency cooperation. Rep. Nick Smith (R-MI)
suggested looking beyond federal agencies and including universities,
industries and foreign countries in working collaborations.
Turning to NSF's Math and Science Partnerships Initiative (MSPI), Boehlert
and Smith sought details on the redirection of $110 million to fund the
$200 million program. Colwell explained that MSPI gives NSF the opportunity
to examine our systemic education efforts, focus on the best practices
and use them in this new program. Colwell also assured Reps. Lynn Woolsey
(D-CA) and Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) that the new education effort
would specifically seek to benefit women and underrepresented minorities.
Beyond education, NSF research programs also generated the interest
of the Committee. Woolsey voiced her concern that a 1.3 percent increase
might jeopardize the progress of science in Antarctica. Colwell replied
that the NSF will maintain the momentum of Antarctic research and that
the weather had been the biggest detriment towards updating the South
Pole infrastructure. Rep. Constance Morella (R-MD) then asked about the
blue ribbon panel exploring the idea of bringing NSF's astronomy programs
to NASA. Goldin said that astronomy has been a fruitful area of collaboration
between NASA and NSF and that it was the independent panel's job to decide
any changes in jurisdiction. Finally, Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) aired his
support for NSF investments in the social sciences and the National Ecological
Observatory Network project, which was absent from the FY 02 budget.
In closing Boehlert asked witnesses to detail their priorities for additional
congressional appropriations. Colwell replied that NSF sees need in increasing
stipends for postdoctoral fellows and graduate students, supporting mathematics
research and increasing overall grant size and duration to maximize returns
from the federal investment. Future NSF plans also include a focus on
social, behavioral and economic sciences research. While Boehlert and
colleagues pledged to rally Congress for increased funding for research
and education, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) cautioned that smart decisions,
effective collaborations and accountability must come hand in hand with
any additional money.
See also:
|
