Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 37

Thread: Congress and the Trump administration delivers huge increase in science funding

  1. #1
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848

    Congress and the Trump administration delivers huge increase in science funding

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/...ncrease-decade

    Climate science spares from cuts. Green energy got a big boost:

    Here’s a look at some of the top line numbers for key science agencies:

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, receives a $3 billion, 8.3% increase to $37 billion. That is well above the increase proposed by either the House of Representatives or the Senate in their versions of the spending bills, and a blunt rejection of the 22% cut proposed by the White House. Included is an additional $414 million for Alzheimer’s disease research, for a total of $1.8 billion, and a $27 million boost, to $543 million, for clinical and translational science funding. The NIH increase is “beyond words, folks,” tweeted Benjamin Corb, director of public affairs at the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology in Rockville, Maryland.
    The National Science Foundation in Alexandria, Virginia, would get $7.8 billion, a 3.9% or $295 million increase. The agency’s research account would grow by about 5%, to $6.3 billion. The bill notes "this strong investment in basic research reflects the Congress' growing concern that China and other competitors are outpacing the United States in terms of research spending." It also endorses the Senate’s call to build three new oceanographic research vessels.
    The Department of Energy’s Office of Science in Washington, D.C., would receive $6.26 billion, an $868 million increase. That is roughly a 15% increase, rather than the 15% cut the White House proposed. Lawmakers also rejected Trump’s proposal to eliminate the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, and instead gave it a $47 million boost, to $353 million.
    A $457 million, 7.9% increase for NASA science programs, to $6.2 billion. The bill increases the agency’s planetary science program by some 21%, or $382 million, to $2.2 billion. NASA’s earth science programs remain flat at 2017 levels, but the bill rejects the proposed elimination of several earth science missions and maintains funding for the troubled Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope. Overall, NASA gets $20.7 billion, $1.1 billion above 2017.
    Spending at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Silver Spring, Maryland, would grow by $234 million, to $5.9 billion overall. Funding for climate research would remain flat, but the final bill rejects cuts proposed by Trump and the House.
    The National Institute of Standards and Technology ​in Gaithersburg, Maryland, would get $1.2 billion, $247 million above 2017 levels.
    The U.S. Geological Survey in Reston, Virginia, gets $1.1 billion, $63 million above 2017 levels. The bill preserves the agency’s eight climate science centers; the White House had proposed cutting that number in half.
    Research programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C., would grow by $33 million, to $1.2 billion.
    The budget of the Environmental Protection Agency ​in Washington, D.C., remains flat at $8.1 billion, as lawmakers rejected deep proposed cuts.
    The agreement also contains language enabling agencies to move forward with research on the causes of gun violence.

  2. #2
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Makes articles like these look rather premature doesn't it?

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily...science-budget

  3. #3
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,521
    the title for this thread is rather odd.

    look at the article.

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, receives a $3 billion, 8.3% increase to $37 billion. That is well above the increase proposed by either the House of Representatives or the Senate in their versions of the spending bills, and a blunt rejection of the 22% cut proposed by the White House.
    The Department of Energy’s Office of Science in Washington, D.C., would receive $6.26 billion, an $868 million increase. That is roughly a 15% increase, rather than the 15% cut the White House proposed. Lawmakers also rejected Trump’s proposal to eliminate the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, and instead gave it a $47 million boost, to $353 million.
    NASA’s earth science programs remain flat at 2017 levels, but the bill rejects the proposed elimination of several earth science missions and maintains funding for the troubled Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope. Overall, NASA gets $20.7 billion, $1.1 billion above 2017.
    Funding for climate research would remain flat, but the final bill rejects cuts proposed by Trump and the House.
    The bill preserves the agency’s eight climate science centers; the White House had proposed cutting that number in half.
    The budget of the Environmental Protection Agency ​in Washington, D.C., remains flat at $8.1 billion, as lawmakers rejected deep proposed cuts.
    considering that domestic spending increase was the price that the GOP paid to get defense spending increase, plus Trump saying that the only reason why he signed the bill was because of defense spending...your emphasis on whom was responsible for the huge increase in science funding seems strange.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  4. #4
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    the title for this thread is rather odd.

    look at the article.


    considering that domestic spending increase was the price that the GOP paid to get defense spending increase, plus Trump saying that the only reason why he signed the bill was because of defense spending...your emphasis on whom was responsible for the huge increase in science funding seems strange.
    Look at the result.

    If the results are drastically different than what you think was going to happen, time and time again, could it be that there is something deep that you're not understanding about politics and negotiations?

    Could it be that the people you thought had no clue, are actually choosing to play chess instead of checkers?

    Everything in this administration is an negotiation, and every position is a negotiating position.

    Oh, and btw, a number of those law makers pushing most successfully for the funding increases were Republicans. Even the the climate science and green energy funding.

  5. #5
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,425
    Trump administration delivers huge increase in science funding
    Was this not said in the original mix? Or, are you implying, that the Trump position was a very sly and devious ploy to force Congress to increase funding?

    Wait a minute. Didin't Trump say he wished he had the line item veto, as while he got an increase in defense spending he got increases in other areas because of the Democrats?

    I really need to simplify my thinking so I can get on the same level as POTUS...

  6. #6
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Look at the result.
    .
    So, how’s that deficit-cutting ideology working out for you, Speaker Ryan? Are the deep revenue cuts delivering all the extra growth needed to keep up with the military money hole? Any sign of a fiscally responsible GOPer in the House?

    No...?

    I’m just askin’ . . . the People’s Bank wants to know how much more US debt they should plan to buy, to, you know, “manage” the trade balance.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  7. #7
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Was this not said in the original mix? Or, are you implying, that the Trump position was a very sly and devious ploy to force Congress to increase funding?

    Wait a minute. Didin't Trump say he wished he had the line item veto, as while he got an increase in defense spending he got increases in other areas because of the Democrats?

    I really need to simplify my thinking so I can get on the same level as POTUS...
    The administration set up what was on the agenda. Congress determined whether it went up or down.

    Congressional Democrats helped push for the defense spending increase. Congressional Republicans helped push back on science.

    What was on the agenda all went up due to the negotiations. What was not got left in the dust.

    Think about it.
    Last edited by citanon; 30 Mar 18, at 08:18.

  8. #8
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post

    Think about it.

    So, what you're saying is that nobody in Congress likes anything the President proposes?

    OK, I'll buy that.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  9. #9
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    So, what you're saying is that nobody in Congress likes anything the President proposes?

    OK, I'll buy that.
    DOR, if the butt hurt was any more palpable, you'd have to apply hemorrhoid cream.

    For context, total Federal R&D spending will rise by $20.1 billion out of a total domestic spending increase of $52 (if the accounting is correct).

    Other big winners include senior services:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardg.../#7aec96c22f47

  10. #10
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,458
    The real loser here are taxpayers. yeah, yeah, I know we got a tax "cut," but eventually all this spending needs to get paid for. Money doesn't grow on trees.

    I am not particularly interested in either bigger spending on climate science programs or more weapons systems. I'm really interested in keeping some more of money, though.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  11. #11
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,521
    Look at the result.

    If the results are drastically different than what you think was going to happen, time and time again, could it be that there is something deep that you're not understanding about politics and negotiations?

    Could it be that the people you thought had no clue, are actually choosing to play chess instead of checkers?

    Everything in this administration is an negotiation, and every position is a negotiating position.
    basically the WH got the opposite of just about everything it wanted, and you're touting it as some sort of amazing administration 4-d chess playing because they really actually wanted to increase science funding all along...lol.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  12. #12
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,237
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    basically the WH got the opposite of just about everything it wanted, and you're touting it as some sort of amazing administration 4-d chess playing because they really actually wanted to increase science funding all along...lol.
    Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious to anybody that science funding is at the bottom of this Administration's priorities. It's laying there with things like "the truth" and "reality".
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  13. #13
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious to anybody that science funding is at the bottom of this Administration's priorities. It's laying there with things like "the truth" and "reality".
    If this is what happens at the bottom of the priorities list, may it pray continue to reside there!

  14. #14
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,521
    If this is what happens at the bottom of the priorities list, may it pray continue to reside there!
    you're correct, but not because the administration was actually fighting FOR science funding.

    it's just that they didn't -care enough- about the extra spending to fight AGAINST it...at this point in time. remember, Trump was threatening to veto the spending bill, and said that this was the last one of the sort he would sign. he only did it because Mattis was making a personal plea for military spending stability.

    so here's hoping that the administration gets rolled like this again and again, because that's the only way science is going to get funded.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  15. #15
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,425
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    The administration set up what was on the agenda.

    Think about it.
    I have and I recall that Trump was pretty clear what he wanted which was increased defense spending and his wall.

    I have to think about whether or not he knows any science.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30 Jan 13,, 03:40
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 28 Jun 08,, 01:25
  3. Boeing Delivers EA-18G
    By Shuttlecat in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12 Oct 07,, 13:25
  4. Allawi delivers ‘thank you’ to Congress
    By Major_Armstrong in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24 Sep 04,, 01:06

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •