[IP] Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executivesapprove]a
<http://www.nytimes.com/>
February 2, 2006
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
By JOHN MARKOFF
<http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=JOHN%20MARKOFF&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=JOHN%20MARKOFF&inline=nyt-per>
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 — President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending
on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives
made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House
officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a
doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical
basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush
would request $910 million for the first year of the research
initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic
research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and
shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in
supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources — subjects
that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been
priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill
lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by
Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of
Intel
<http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&symb=INTC>,
and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems
<http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&symb=CSCO>.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to
research held a series of discussions with administration officials late
last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office
Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former
Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/dick_cheney/index.html?inline=nyt-per>.
A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten,
director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the
administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a
National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of
a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened
American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing
America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft
form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and
science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush
administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how
we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not
certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's
proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional
organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of
fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president
before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about
the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or
declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown
particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which
he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett
said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student
in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader
in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international
peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and
help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state
officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to
respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic
research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the
Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici,
Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar
Alexander
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/lamar_alexander/index.html?inline=nyt-per>,
Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland.
A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/joseph_i_lieberman/index.html?inline=nyt-per>,
Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush
in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very
bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics
of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week.
The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10
years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent
annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10
years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director
for computer and information science and engineering, said the
president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's
budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on
the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this
administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental
science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those
who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A.
Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California,
Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a
professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the
president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little
applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just
shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the
legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/