Thursday, December 30, 2010

U.S. Government Funding for Research and Development

Source: Scientific American

"Federal research spending has decreased in recent years, although proportionally, money for life sciences has risen. The relative support for other disciplines has stayed roughly the same. Some members of the new Congress have already vowed to cut all non-military research.'


There was a significant component of funding for science and technology in the 2009 stimulus package, but there will be a major problem in maintaining funding for research and development in the future as the legislative and executive branches of government struggle to reduce deficits and reduce the national debt as a percentage of GDP. 


Think about the budget process. The U.S. Government fiscal year starts in September, with the budget submitted to the Congress by the White House in January. (The 2012 budget is in the final stages of drafting by the administration now.) Thus the Bush administration that took office in 2001, could only marginally affect the budget for 2002, and 2003 was the first year that the Bush administration was able to fully put a budget in place; similarly, 2011 will be the the first year that the Obama administration will have fully planned a proposed budget, but that budget is still limping along on continuing resolutions.


Essentially the Bush administration not only did not increase R&D spending, but left it slightly lower than it found it. The Obama administration has indicated strong support for science and technology, but will be facing a Republican House of Representatives in 2011-12. It the Bush administration history is any guide, Obama will have a tough job supporting research and development funding increases.


That is too bad as there seems to be broad agreement among economists and the S&T community that increases in government funding of R&D are vital not only in areas such as energy technologies, disease prevention and cure, and global warming, but also for the continued competitiveness of the American economy.

No comments: