Government Briefs

Requests to fund university research facilities, also known as "academic pork," that have become a growing and controversial part of the congressional budget-making process have been trimmed in the 1989 appropriations for the Department of Energy. Only two such projects, totaling $16.6 million, appear in the bill passed May 17 by the House, in contrast to nine projects, worth $73.7 million, that the House approved last year. Loma Linda University’s Proton Beam Cancer Treatment Center ($11.1 million) and Drexel University’s Center for Automated Technologies ($5.5 million) are the lone survivors from last year’s litter, and no new projects are contained in the spending measure, the first of 13 appropriations bills scheduled to come before the House. Beyond simple belt-tightening, the upcoming change in the White House left lawmakers unwilling to go to bat for projects that could be cut next year. here in the bill, the House provides only $100 million of the administration’s $363 million request for the superconducting supercollider, with no funds for construction. Aides said there was little support to move ahead too quickly, or to seek international commitments, on a project that the next administration could decide to scrap. The bill now moves to the Senate, which has expressed similar skepticism about the $5 billion accelerator. A proposal to help researchers from smaller schools develop ideas that could pay off is moving through the Senate. Called the College and University Innovative Research Program by its sponsor, Sen. James Exon (D-Neb.), the program is modeled after the successful g overnment wide Small Business and Innovative Research program for industrial scientists. Like their corporate colleagues, university scientists could receive up to $150,000 to study the feasibility of an idea and up to $500,000 for further R&D. The final commercial phase would be financed by nongovernment funds. The five-year, $5 million pilot project would give preference to scientists from schools "that traditionally receive little federal R&D funding." The amendment is part of the Senate Commerce and Science Committee’s authorization bill for NSF, which would administer the program. When Congress ordered NIH last December to review individual investigators’ applications for AIDS funding in six months or less, NIH realized it had a manpower problem. Now, half a dozen new people have been hired to staff five new study sections, says Don Luecke of NIH’s Division of Research Grants, and new submission deadlines and procedures have been set to permit NIH to complete its two-stage review as quickly as possible. Scientists must now submit 32, rather than six, copies of their application so NIH doesn’t have to waste time copying the material before it is sent out for review. And those researchers who work with animal or human subjects must waive the normal 60-day extension and demonstrate that their application has already been approved by the appropriate institutional review board. About 125 of an expected 500 annual applications were submitted by the first deadline of May 1. The next deadline is September 1. Researchers who choose not to participate in the new system will have their applications reviewed under the normal procedure, which takes an average of nine months from submission to final notification. For all others, NIH expects to meet the Congress’s six-month goal. Review teams hope by the end of June to have completed visits to 49 university programs that have survived the first step in evaluation of the 323 proposals for science and technology centers submitted last winter to NSF. The final goal is to select 12 to 15 winners this fall. The 49 sites to be visited are heavily concentrated along both coasts and have requested an average of $14 million over five years. That’s substantially less than the $4.1 billion requested by the 323 initial applicants, who pitched 46 geoscience proposals, 32 cognitive and information sciences proposals, and more than a score of proposals in each of the following areas: biological sciences, physics and astronomy, materials, surfaces, mathematics, and condensed matter. "To know the world from A to Z," chirps an unseen narrator, "discover science and technology." Then the fellow poses a one-minute-long pop quiz on phenomena ranging from stars to ocean exploration. Maybe you’ve seen the animated version on TV or heard an audio version on radio. Both forms of the lively public service announcement extol the importance of science. No surprise, they were developed by NSF as part of National Science and Technology Week this spring. What sets these public service spots apart is that they violate a basic law of advertising, they don’t tell listeners what to do about their ignorance NSF’s Mary Keeney says the $35,000 spots were produced primarily to grab the attention of young children and their parents, and that NSF is developing plans to build on what it hopes will be heightened public interest in science.

Government Briefs

The Scientist Staff

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of