ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Notebook

'BAD NEWS': APS’s Robert Park believes there is still time to salvage greater science funding from Congress. WORTH FIGHTING FOR: Mary Woolley of Research!America points to surveys indicating the popularity of biomedical research. Science observers were not cheered by the balanced-budget agreement forged by the White House and Congress last month, but they're preaching optimism nonetheless. As of press time, the House and Senate still needed to iron out some minor differences, but it app

The Scientist Staff


'BAD NEWS': APS’s Robert Park believes there is still time to salvage greater science funding from Congress.

WORTH FIGHTING FOR: Mary Woolley of Research!America points to surveys indicating the popularity of biomedical research.
Science observers were not cheered by the balanced-budget agreement forged by the White House and Congress last month, but they're preaching optimism nonetheless. As of press time, the House and Senate still needed to iron out some minor differences, but it appears that federal spending on science will fall by 7 percent by 2002, the target date for a balanced budget. A proposal by Rep. George E. Brown, Jr. (D-Calif.) to increase science funding by 5 percent a year without tax cuts fell in the House by a vote of 339 to 91. "The agreement is bad news for science," wrote Robert L. Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland and the American Physical...

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?
ADVERTISEMENT