| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
please distribute widely: editorial
NO SCIENCE, NO SURPLUS
By D. Allan Bromley co-Chair, CSSP Govmt/Public Affairs Comte
Washington Post -Thursday, August 26, 1999; Page A25
"America is on a roll. We're balancing the federal budget,
reforming welfare and making retirement secure. Sound like a
breakthrough in fiscal management? Not exactly. Our awesome
economic success can be traced directly to our past investments
in science.
The problem is, this year's federal budget for science is a
disaster, and it compromises our nation's economic and social
progress. Here are the latest budget numbers: NASA science
is slashed by $678 million; science at the Department of Energy
is cut by $116 million; and the National Science Foundation ends
up with $275 million less than the president requested. Clearly,
Congress has lost sight of the critical role science plays in America.
Federal investments in science pay off -- they produce cutting-
edge ideas and a highly skilled work force. The ideas and the
personnel then feed into high-tech industries to drive the U.S.
economy. It's a straightforward relationship: Industry is attentive
to immediate market pressures; the federal government makes
the venturous investments in university-based research that
ensures long-term competitiveness. So far, it's been a powerful
tandem.
Thirty years ago, the laser and fiber optic cable were born
from federal investments in university research. Over time,
those two discoveries formed the backbone of a multibillion-
dollar telecommunications industry.
The fusion of university research and industrial development
now generates about 5,000 new jobs and contributes a
quarter-billion dollars in taxes to the federal coffer every day.
It accounts for 70 percent of our economic growth. The result
is undeniable. The fusion is primarily responsible for our
booming economy and our growing federal surplus. So the
consequences of a budget cut to science are equally
undeniable: no science, no surplus.
The benefits of the science investment go deeper than just
the surplus. Three years ago this month, welfare underwent
dramatic reform. No one knew what the fallout from that would be.
But the high-tech economy eased the burden. Unemployment
was dropping to a 25-year low, and jobs were being created at
a record pace. As it turned out, half of those jobs were generated
by the high-tech sector.
The legislative challenge before us is patching up Social Security
Again, we'll rely on the science and technology juggernaut. Whether
the solution lies in stimulating private investment or in steady
federal surpluses, the proposals all rely on a familiar friend -- the
strength of our nation's booming economy. And while Congress
dithers, the public already is taking steps of its own.
Americans hold more than $5 trillion in communications
and technology stocks. Our mutual funds, our 401K plans and
IRAs are stuffed full of high-tech investments. The retirement
security of Americans now depends upon the steady flow of
innovations from technology companies. In turn, those
companies rely on the steady flow of discoveries and trained
work force generated by the scientific community. No science,
no savings.
Scientific research at our universities and national labs is
now a foundation of the economy and thereby vital to the
success of social legislation. But rather than reinforcing the
foundation, Congress is eroding it. That action couldn't come
at a worse time. America's science infrastructure is in decay --
aged science buildings on our campuses, dated laboratory
equipment, antiquated computers. During the Bush administration,
the Office of Science and Technology Policy estimated the cost
of rebuilding our science infrastructure at $100 billion. The Clinton
administration has done little to address the problem. The budget
Congress is proposing guarantees continued decay.
Congress must significantly increase science funding. Senators
recognized the need last week when, with the support of Sens.Trent
Lott and Tom Daschle, they passed the Federal Research
Investment Act, which calls for doubling the federal investment inscience by the year 2010. But appropriators haven't followed through.
It's not too late -- budgets won't be settled until October.
For the sake of the country, I hope Congress will recognize the
significant role science plays in society. Without science, there won't
be a surplus...."
Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company
(The writer, presidential science adviser in the Bush administration
and past president of the American Physical Society, is Sterling
Professor of Sciences and Dean of Engineering at Yale University.)
=====cssp====