October 6, 2000 The Honorable James SensenbrennerChairman, House Science Committee 2320 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Dear Chairman Sensenbrenner: The undersigned industry, academic, and professional organizations urge you to reconsider moving comprehensive legislation this year that sets multi-year budget targets and overall goals for civilian research. Despite its undeniable contribution to the growing economy and federal budget surplus, R&D investment continues to receive low visibility on America’s political landscape. Part of the problem is that—unlike health, defense, education and other priorities—research policy moves in many pieces and thus draws limited attention. We have believed from the beginning that stepping back to lay out some guiding principles and budget goals could give a real boost to civilian research and serve as a springboard for the more critical agency-specific work. Back in February, you were right to point out the importance of stable outyear funding for science in your Committee’s FY 2001 Views and Estimates. Legislation passed by the Senate lays out a long-term goal for civilian R&D to reach 10% of discretionary spending. Equally important, however, are the bill’s cross-agency policy guidelines, which seem largely consistent with your Views and Estimates as well as the committee’s landmark Unlocking our Future science policy study. All of these documents state that Congress has an important role in ensuring a balanced R&D portfolio. They maintain that federal funding should be prioritized, driven by rigorous peer- and merit-review, and restricted to pre-competitive activities. Other common ground includes emphasis on interdisciplinary research, public-private partnerships, and strengthening the link between research and education. Comprehensive legislation would thus provide a marquee-type tool not only to raise the profile of science funding but to codify these important guidelines in a bipartisan, bicameral manner—in a way agency-specific bills cannot. As a cross-agency statement on civilian science, the bill would be an important guidepost for the next administration and Congress. It would also highlight the role of federal research in the national debate on the pool of technically trained workers. Finally, used appropriately, this measure would provide an important backdrop for—and draw more attention to—individual authorization bills, which would continue to provide policy direction and agency-specific funding. Indeed, we believe this could boost the Science Committee’s profile and discourage earmarks. As you know, this effort has the support of major universities, high-tech industry, and over two million scientists and engineers. We believe every effort should be made by both Houses to reach a compromise on this important issue. Thank you again for taking our views into account. Sincerely, American Association of Engineering Societies | Top of Page | Policy Log | Public Policy Forum | IEEE-USA | Last Update: 9 Oct. 2000 Copyright © 2000, The
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. |