Following Science Policy: The Play's the Thing

Reporting on the federal science funding process over the last year has been like watching a drama unfold. Especially since, after careful scrutiny, one gets the impression that the players--the legislators, the administrators, the activists, the lobbyists--can only really carry out their scripted roles. Curtains parted last fall to reveal a soaring economy and an unprecedented budget surplus. There was going to be a research bonanza, a renewed commitment to R&D. Even deficit hawks such as

Paul Smaglik
Aug 30, 1998

Reporting on the federal science funding process over the last year has been like watching a drama unfold. Especially since, after careful scrutiny, one gets the impression that the players--the legislators, the administrators, the activists, the lobbyists--can only really carry out their scripted roles.

Curtains parted last fall to reveal a soaring economy and an unprecedented budget surplus. There was going to be a research bonanza, a renewed commitment to R&D. Even deficit hawks such as Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas) got into the act, cosponsoring resolutions supporting science. Congress was going to double the National Institutes of Health's budget over five years. Lawmakers were going to double all nondefense R&D over 10 years. In a dance of telecommunication choreography, aides of high-ranking members of the House and Senate flooded the fax machines of media outlets with press releases touting their support for science. Months of rhetoric and several budget deadline...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?