President Clinton’s budget recommends a record 17 %
increase in funding for the National Science Foundation. The House of Representatives
Science Committee supports this increase. For NSF to get this increase, Congress must
provide a sufficient "302 (b) allocation" to cover the funding requested for NSF
as well as other science agencies like NASA, NOAA, NIST, DOE and NIH.
Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) is circulating a sign on
letter among the House members trying to ensure a sufficient 302 (b) allocation. Your
representative is being asked to sign the Ehlers letter on science funding.
Please contact your congress member right away and encourage
him or her to do so. The letter can be very short as long as it contains the message,
"please sign the Ehlers letter on science funding." The rest of the letter
should include a statement about the importance of providing sufficient funding for the
NSF.
- Below is a copy of the letter sent by Representative Ehlers to
his colleagues and a copy of the draft letter which he is asking them to sign. Note, while
he asks his colleagues to respond by Wednesday March 22, 2000, it is not too late for them
to respond.
Dear Colleague:
Once again, basic scientific research is jeopardized in the
FY 2001 appropriations process. Your support is needed to ensure it isn’t
shortchanged!
I am concerned that funding for science may take a back seat
to other important congressional priorities. Please join me in asking our appropriations
leadership to provide sufficient funding for science.
I have attached a letter to Chairman Young and Ranking Member
Obey asking them to give science a high priority. If you would like to sign the letter,
you may contact Scott Lockledge in my office at 5-3831. Please respond by Wednesday March
22, 2000.
Sincerely,
Vernon J. Ehlers
Member of Congress
The Honorable C.W. Bill Young
Chairman, House Appropriations Committee
United States House of Representatives
2407 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable David R. Obey
Ranking Minority Member, House Appropriations Committee
United States House of Representatives
2314 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Sirs:
We ask you in the strongest words possible, to assign a high
priority to basic scientific research in the FY 2001 appropriations process. In
particular, we ask you to ensure that the appropriations subcommittees funding key
agencies are provided with sufficient 302b allocations to allow adequate funding for both
national priorities and science. We are particularly concerned that the research conducted
by the National Science Foundation, NASA, NOAA, NIST, the Department of Energy, and the
National Institute of Health is adequately supported.
As you know, within the appropriations subcommittees, science
competes with other high priority items such as veteran’s health care, housing, and
education programs such as headstart. If faced with limited budget allocations, we are
concerned that funding for science may take a back seat to these other important
congressional priorities. As stated in Unlocking Our Future: Toward a New National
Science Policy, a report adopted by the full House, "To maintain our
nation’s economic strength and international competitiveness, Congress should make
stable and substantial federal funding for fundamental scientific research a high
priority."
Shortchanging science in this year’s appropriations
process would be particularly worrisome given that much of our current economic success
results from past federal investment made in basic research. In June of last year, Alan
Greenspan noted that: "Something special is happening in the U.S. Economy’s
remarkable run of economic growth that appears to have its roots in ongoing advances in
technology." Just last month, Alfred R. Berkeley, III, President of the NASDAQ
Stock Market, Inc., stated that, "Historically, we have seen that discoveries made
in science and engineering arenas have propelled our economy forward by paving the way for
breakthroughs in technology that in turn spawn entirely new industries."
We must also work to ensure balanced growth in research
support across all scientific disciplines. This is particularly important because
breakthroughs in one area of science often lead to unexpected breakthroughs in other
areas. For example, many recent advances in biomedical research would not have been
possible were it not for knowledge obtained first through advances in the physical
sciences and engineering.
Mr. Speaker, we understand the limitations facing you in this
year’s appropriations process. However, we have a responsibility to ensure our
nation’s continued prosperity and the most sensible way to do this is by investment
in basic scientific research. Failure to do so is the equivalent of eating seed corn
necessary for our future economic success. With this in mind, we urge your consideration
of our request.
Sincerely,
CC: The Honorable Dennis Hastert, Speaker
