Proposed federal funding cuts on research spending will likely hit close to home at Vanderbilt.

by Bart Gordon
Balancing research, teaching, and service is a hard necessity for faculty success in academic institutions, and the current federal budget outlook is not making that task any easier. Jeff Vincent’s recent "View from Washington" [The Vanderbilt Register, March 7-20, 2005] may not be the funding outlook faculty and researchers of Vanderbilt University want to see coming from Washington, but unfortunately his assessment is right on target. What happens in Washington directly affects how, when and if you are able to perform your research. So I want to take Mr. Vincent’s well-stated case a step further and enlist you in the fight to secure sufficient federal science funding.

As ranking minority member of the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee on Science (which has jurisdiction over most science agencies including the National Science Foundation), I am familiar with the realities of our country’s current fiscal crisis and attempts to “remedy” that situation by cutting “lesser priorities.” Federal science research and development funding is clearly being labeled a “lesser priority” in the coming fiscal year, and I assure you that some members of Congress on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm.

If this were a one-year problem, I might not be writing this column. In fact, the reality of the fiscal crisis is one which federally funded researchers, including those at universities, could be facing indefinitely. I see this short-sightedness by the current Administration to invest in federally funded research and development as a shot to the heart of America’s economy and competitiveness.

We must not forget in all this talk about reduced funding for U.S. research and development activities that the key groups directly affected by the cuts will ultimately be our kids, their teachers, our schools, universities and states. Over the past 50 years, half of U.S. economic productivity can be attributed to technological innovation and the science that supported it – innovation that you at Vanderbilt and academic researchers across the country have helped build and cultivate. As the largest contributor to basic research, the federal government can and must recognize this research for the value it provides in educating our students, building our industries and maintaining our global competitiveness.

At a February 2004 congressional hearing, the president’s science advisor testified before my committee that “this Administration understands that science and technology are major drivers of economic growth.” Yet, the proposed FY06 federal research budget directly contradicts the Administration’s supposed understanding.

This is all the more disheartening given that we fought and won a battle in 2002 when President Bush signed into law an authorization doubling the NSF budget over five years.  The Administration’s proposed FY06 budget for the NSF missed this mark by $2.91 billion, or 34 percent. Cumulatively, the NSF is now $5.8 billion below its doubling path.

Just as Mr. Vincent noted, right now the Administration’s FY06 budget numbers are only a non-binding request. Congress will decide the final budget. Based on the Administration’s blueprints, members of Congress, myself included on the frontlines, will be debating and hopefully reprioritizing the federal budget over the next few months. I am fully committed to obtaining sufficient funding for science R&D within current budget constraints and without jeopardizing other federal programs that are equally vital to our national economy and future well-being.

This boils down to a question of priorities. Why should science and technology research and development be an essential national priority? You and I already know the answer; now we must communicate it to all who will listen. Priorities are set by informed consumers – like you – who are vocal and visibly politically active. This is where you can make a difference in the fight to secure the sufficient federal science funding you rely on.

Will you always be successful? Maybe, maybe not. But being heard should be your objective. It’s a cumulative process, and that process has to start somewhere. I will be fighting right along with you. Faculty, staff and researchers must make their presence known and felt on the importance of science and technology research and development funding. Talk with and write to members of Congress, agency officials, and Administration policymakers.

If this Administration continues to chip away at our nation’s research investments we jeopardize our economic strength and technological competitiveness. Nothing fuels long-term economic growth more than science and technology. We must look to research and development as an investment in our future, and some of us in Congress stand ready to work with you to make sure that our valuable research universities are not weakened by short-sighted budgets.

Rep. Bart Gordon represents Tennessee’s 6th Congressional District. He is currently serving his 11th term in the U.S. Congress. He serves as ranking minority member on the U.S. House Committee on Science.

Posted 4/4/05