The National Research Investment Act of 1998 (S. 1305)

S. 1305, the National Research Investment Act of 1998, seeks "to invest in the future of the United States by doubling the amount authorized for basic scientific, medical and pre-competitive engineering research." This language represents the compromise worked out by Senators Gramm and Lieberman. The total amount of qualifying research in the following agencies would be doubled over the term of the bill: NIH, NSF, NIST, NASA, NOAA, CDC, DOE, EPA, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Department of Education.

The bill assumes Federal research funding to be $34 billion in FY 1999, doubling to $68 billion in FY 2008, an average increase of 7.2% per year. Why this investment? Per the bill language: to enhance the quality of life for all Americans; guarantee U.S. leadership in science, medicine, and technology; and to restore science and technology as a priority in the Federal budget (in FY 1965, 5.7% of the budget went to non-defense R&D, but only 1.9% in FY 1997).

Implications for Congressional Visits Day

While some of your organizations may have endorsed the unified intersociety statement, you or your organization may not have taken a position on S. 1305. However, many in the research policy community see the bill as a tremendous opportunity to increase within Congress the visibility of Federal support for research and the important role it plays in strengthening our quality of life, national economy, and position of world leadership.

We now face the "nuts and bolts" of turning this bill into law. Obtaining additional Senate cosponsors is a critical next step in the process, as it will build momentum and serve as a catalyst for further action (hearings, etc.). The 1998 Congressional Visits Day is an ideal opportunity to do so.

Supporting Arguments

Per the bill language: to enhance the quality of life for all Americans; guarantee U.S. leadership in science, medicine, and technology; and to restore science and technology as a priority in the Federal budget (in FY 1965, 5.7% of the budget went to non-defense R&D, but only 1.9% in FY 1997).

S. 124:
Senate bill S. 124 was a precursor to S. 1305. Like S. 1305, the bill was introduced by Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX) and called for a doubling of Federal funding for research over the period of ten years. Unlike S.1305, S. 124 had no Senate cosponsors. In an attempt to broaden support for the concept of doubling Federal research funding and to present a more bipartisan front, Senator Gramm reached an agreement with Senator Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT) on new language redefining the types of research to be funded by the bill. Their agreement culminated in S. 1305, which was unveiled at a press conference on October 22, 1997, The legislation was boosted at the press conference by the appearance of two new cosponsors—Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Pete Domenici (R-NM), Chairman of the Budget Committee.

Unified Statement:
In an effort complementary to S.1305, the science, engineering, and mathematics community coalesced around a "unified statement" that also called for a doubling of Federal research funding over the next decade (unlike S. 1305, however, the unified statement included defense research). In an unprecedented display of unity, the leaders of the 109 science, engineering, and mathematics organizations have endorsed the statement. Many of these leaders participated in the October 22nd press conference. The statement, entitled "Decade of Investment" reads:

To secure the economic health and prosperity of the United States as the next century approaches, our national investment in research must be strengthened. The increased competitiveness of the global economy makes such an investment even more important now than in the past. To that end, we call upon the U.S. Congress and the Administration to double the current level of federal investment in research within the next 10 years, starting with fiscal year 1999.

The United States has a critical and long-standing interest in advancing engineering, mathematics, and scientific research and education. The reasons for this are well accepted by industry leaders and public policymakers alike:

Research provides the basis for the nation's productivity and economic growth, sustains its high standard of living and quality of health, and ensures its security.

Research conducted today generates the knowledge from which the future is built and helps develop researchers for the future.

Our nation has developed a dynamic, comprehensive, interdependent research system that has enabled the United States to assume global leadership and enjoy a high standard of living. The research efforts of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, and Transportation; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; the National Institutes of Health; the National Science Foundation and others have provided countless scientific and technological innovations that have formed the foundation for our nation's prosperity.

Even during this time of extraordinary economic growth, it must not be forgotten that tomorrow's health, economic, environmental, and national security needs depend on the choices that are made today. As leaders of the science, engineering, and mathematics communities, we maintain that doubling the nation's research budget during a 10-year period strikes a responsible balance between near-term fiscal goals and long-term economic growth and productivity.

Prepared by David Schutt and Flint Lewis, ACS

Posted: January 16, 1998; Revised February 2, 1998