[NEIU Physics Students] [Fwd: FYI #25: Science Committee Hearing on FY 2008 Request]

[Gregory W. Anderson]

-----Forwarded Message-----
From: fyi at aip.org
To: g-anderson at NEIU.EDU
Subject: FYI #25: Science Committee Hearing on FY 2008 Request
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:23:56 -0500

FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 25: February 23, 2007
Web version: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/025.html

House Science Committee Hearing on FY 2008 S&T Request

New House Science and Technology Committee Chairman Bart Gordon
(D-TN) and his colleagues engaged in a thoughtful 90-minute dialogue
last week with John Marburger, the Director of the Office of Science
and Technology Policy.  While there were many areas of apparent
agreement between committee members and Director Marburger, there
were notable areas of disagreement about the Administration's FY
2008 budget request for science and technology.

An often-repeated concern was the Administration's approach to K-12
science and mathematics education.  Citing the National Academies'
Gathering Storm report, Gordon brought up this issue early in his
opening remarks when he said that the report's "number one
recommendation for improving math and science education has been
improving teacher training.  Still, the Administration continues to
ignore these facts and instead has focused 70 percent of the
education component of its competitiveness initiative on the very
narrow area of K-8 math curriculum at the Department of Education -
an agency that already has been overburdened and underfunded . . . .
This is a case of misplaced priorities, and I am hopeful that the
Administration will reconsider scaling out the considerable
experience and success of K-12 programs at NSF."

Gordon had other concerns: the declining share of federal R&D as a
percentage of the nation's GDP, funding decreases for NASA's science
programs, reduced funding for the Commerce Department's
Manufacturing Extension Partnership and the proposed eliminations of
the Advanced Technology Program and DOE's Industrial Technologies
Program.  Chairman Gordon praised the proposed budget increase for
the American Competitiveness Initiative, but said the FY 2008 R&D
request "lacks the priorities and consistency to ensure our
competitiveness now and in the long run."

Ranking Member Ralph Hall (R-TX)  praised the requested increases
for "physical sciences and engineering" for NSF, the Office of
Science, and the NIST research program.  He also spoke approvingly
of the increased requests for the Advanced Energy Initiative and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  "As for NASA, a
3.1 percent increase is good, but it still may not be sufficient to
ensure that we meet the 2014 goal to launch the new Crew Exploration
Vehicle," Hall said, adding that it was worried that additional
reductions in the exploration system program will delay the
transition from the Space Shuttle.

In his opening remarks, Marburger cited the record FY 2008 $142.7
billion request for federal R&D, acknowledging that there has been
significant growth in the budget for defense-related development.
He explained that non-defense R&D would increase almost seven times
faster than overall non-defense discretionary funding in FY 2008.
Later in his remarks he discussed the requested FY 2008 funding
increase for basic research - up almost $1 billion above the
appropriated 2006 level - and told the committee, "it is notable
that this favorable treatment of Basic Research is occurring in a
year of belt-tightening for many other domestic programs, indicating
the high priority this Administration places on the importance of
this activity."  Marburger also spoke of his disappointment in the
FY 2007 $452 million shortfall in funding for the first year of the
American Competitiveness Initiative, and described, as did an
Associate OSTP Director at the budget roll-out earlier this month,
the difficulty of funding the full FY 2008 ACI request.

In his written testimony, Marburger departed from the usual tenor of
such remarks and expressed great concerns about NASA: "Finally, let
me finish by expressing a concern regarding NASA and the budget
danger that lies ahead for this agency. The President's FY 2008
Budget includes a 3.1 percent increase for NASA in 2008 on top of
the President's 3.4 percent requested increase for 2007. However,
the 2007 full-year CR as it stands now cuts NASA $545 million from
the President's request. That leaves NASA at its 2006 level with no
increase and puts at risk the Vision for Space Exploration and
priority Earth and space science missions. Certainly at risk is the
timely development of a new, much more capable U.S. human spacecraft
to follow the Shuttle which will be retired in 2010."

Following the opening remarks, Gordon began by asking Marburger
about K-12 science and math education funding, and objected to the
Administration's emphasis on a K-8 math curriculum.  Gordon wants
more emphasis on teacher training, citing statistics that most
physical science teachers lack a major or certification in this
area.    Gordon also asked why NASA was not included in the American
Competitiveness Initiative, to which Marburger replied  that the
agency has been better funded than NSF, the DOE Office of Science,
and the NIST research program.  There was also discussion about the
federal Earth observing systems, and disagreement if NASA's
five-year budget plan provides enough money.

Ranking Member Hall first spoke of his concerns about the NASA
budget, urging that the Administration and Congress not change their
expectations for the agency's programs.  Hall is worried about the
workforce impacts that the agency's budget constraints will have, a
point that Marburger agreed with as NASA transitions away from the
shuttle.  Marburger admitted "It is certainly going to be difficult
for NASA to achieve what it needs to achieve with the constraints
that are emerging in the budget situation . . . I must say that I
don't have the answers to all of the questions that can be asked . .
. I don't believe that we should retreat from our expectations."
This conversation between Marburger and Hall closely resembled that
in a Senate appropriations hearing on NASA last year (see
http://www.aip.org/fyi/2006/052.html .)  Said Gordon, "there needs
to be more money in this program."

Another committee member asked about the increased funding request
for ITER, Marburger replying that it was the "essential next
step."   Marburger was asked about the health impacts of
nanotechnology, with there being general agreement that public
sentiment could turn against it.  Gordon added that a nanotechnology
hearing will be held later this year.  After discussion of several
other issues, the questioning returned to K-12 science and math
education, particularly the roles of the National Science Foundation
and the Department of Education, Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) telling
Marburger that "this is a major issue."

###############
Richard M. Jones
Media and Government Relations Division
The American Institute of Physics
fyi at aip.org    http://www.aip.org/gov
(301) 209-3095
##END##########

If you no longer wish to receive this content alert for each issue,
please send a blank e-mail to fyi-signoff-request at listserv.aip.org.
-- 
Gregory W. Anderson <g-anderson at neiu.edu>
Northeastern Illinois University