Views & Estimates :: March 5, 1999

Democratic Views and Estimates on the Budget for Civilian Science and Technology Programs, Fiscal Year 2000

Programs under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science help to spur basic research and technological innovation, contributing to the long-term economic vitality of the American economy. Economic historians estimate that more than half the productivity growth in this century can be tied to technological innovations. Pressed to explain the prolonged economic expansion of the Clinton years, some economists point to the productivity gains from new computing and communications technologies. Beyond its economic effects, innovation, wisely applied, can also contribute to building a more just society.

The investments proposed by the Administration form an adequate basis for new innovation, ideas and processes and we are pleased to join the Majority in endorsing the President's civilian R&D funding levels for fiscal year 2000. In fact, we wish that the Committee's Views and Estimates had gone further in supporting a five-year plan for steady growth in these programs.

While we endorse the funding levels in the Committee's Views and Estimates, there are certain policy statements contained in that document which we cannot endorse. Those positions are portrayed as the Committee's position; to our knowledge, the Committee has yet to take formal policy positions on these matters in the 106th Congress. Some of the policy positions are contrary to positions taken by the Committee last year in legislative negotiations with the Senate. Other positions, such as the complaints about management of the Advanced Technology Program (ATP), seem to be taken without any awareness that the agency has addressed these management issues thoroughly and that the Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology describes the ATP as a "well-managed program" in its most recent report. In short, specific policy positions in the Committee's Views and Estimates should not be taken as dispositive. Rather, the oversight and authorization processes will provide an opportunity for all Members to air these and other issues and try to develop consensus positions for the Committee.

Congressman Ehlers, in his 1998 Science Policy Study, wrote of the need to bridge the "Valley of Death" that exists between basic research results and final commercial development. Despite this acknowledgment in the Science Policy Study, we note that the Majority continues to be selective in its affection for technology development and demonstration programs. In general, they support programs tied to aerospace and oppose programs designed to provide cheaper, cleaner energy, reduce pollution, or spur commercial innovation. As Democrats, we understand that the Federal Government plays a unique role in helping overcome market failures by encouraging innovation and supporting the spread of promising technologies. The Internet and commercial jetliners are both obvious examples of government support for innovation which have had enormously beneficial consequences for the economy and society.

We also believe that economic growth should not be the sole value guiding public policy. Other values and concerns should also inform our choices. Enhancing the quality of life by protecting the environment and providing access to health care; promoting, protecting and expanding opportunity for all our citizens; basic fairness and equity in treatment in the marketplace and in the eyes of the law - these are some of the core values that the Federal Government should defend. We believe that these values should be weighed as we look at investment opportunities in science and technology. We would recommend that the Administration continue to invest in emerging technologies that enhance energy efficiency, keep our environment clean, meet the needs of our elderly, improve our citizens' health, provide stronger education for all of our children and prepare our workers for an ever more challenging technical workplace. As an example, we would strongly suggest that the Administration work with us and with the Budget and Appropriations Committees to restore full funding for education programs at NASA.

On a cautionary note, investments in science, technology, education, worker training or infrastructure will yield inadequate returns to the Nation if the government's fiscal house is not in order. While we are looking forward to the first on-budget surpluses in 30 years, those surpluses, projected for FY2001, hinge upon steady, non-inflationary economic growth with full employment. We strongly encourage the Budget Committee to keep this situation in mind as it undertakes its difficult task and we would suggest the following general guidance.

First, we agree with the President that, after Social Security reform is implemented, 77% of any consolidated surplus must be set aside to save Social Security, strengthen Medicare and buy down the national debt. Attending to the financial health of Social Security is the single most important task facing the government and we strongly urge that steps be taken to provide assurance to our citizens that this cornerstone of our retirement system be financially secure.

Second, we would ask that the Committee be cautious in any move towards a tax cut. Proposals for across-the-board cuts promise to give away on-budget surpluses before we have even run one. Such precipitous action would threaten our long-term fiscal balance. Further, we would suggest that cuts which help our citizens deal with the challenges of child care, education, retirement savings and long-term care for our elderly would make a more intelligent allocation of those funds than a blanket cut. In any case, cuts should not be rushed out of Congress until we have greater assurance that the good economic times that have helped us balance the budget are here to stay.

GEORGE E. BROWN, JR.
BART GORDON
JERRY COSTELLO
JAMES A. BARCIA
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON
LYNN WOOLSEY
ZOE LOFGREN
MIKE DOYLE
SHEILA JACKSON LEE
DEBBIE STABENOW
BOB ETHERIDGE
NICK LAMPSON
JOHN B. LARSON
MARK UDALL
DAVID WU
ANTHONY WEINER
MICHAEL CAPUANO