Science and the Federal Budget
By T.J. Augustine
PhD in Chemistry and Master’s Candidate in Public Policy Program
Stanford University
Having averted a government shutdown, Congress will soon begin debate over how to reduce our country’s growing debt. In that debate, some politicians and pundits will certainly argue we cannot afford the current level of Federal investment in science. As graduate students, we will inherent the scientific enterprise over the coming decades. Given that responsibility, we need to understand how today’s budget decisions will impact the future of science.
So where does science fit in the Federal Budget? Funding for science falls primarily into domestic discretionary and defense spending, which together account for about 40% of Federal spending. The remaining 60% consists, primarily, of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the debt. Over time, as our population ages, that 60% is set to increase significantly. So much so, that by 2040, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office and Government Accountability Office both project that the Federal Government will need 100% of its tax revenue to cover Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the debt. That means every dollar spent on science – not to mention national security, infrastructure, or education – will need to be borrowed and will further increase the national debt.
If we can agree that being forced to borrow money in order to fund all investment in science, education, infrastructure, and national defense is a problem, what do we do about this long-term crunch on funding? Some think the answer is for the government to get out of the way and let the free market take over.
If we want the optimum funding for science, it’s a bad idea.
Markets are great for things like food and clothing. You spend money to purchase the product and you reap virtually all the benefits from its consumption. Science doesn’t really fit that mold. Spending on scientific research results in new products and new ideas. Once a new idea is no longer a secret, it is practically impossible to prevent others from using and benefiting from that idea. As a result, the free market will under-invest in research. In cases such as this, where the market fails, we need the government.
To protect the ability of the government to fund scientific research, we need a solution to today’s fiscal problems that also reduces long-term spending growth. So far, the only plan I have seen that makes a reasonable attempt to tackle the dual necessities of reducing our debt, while maintaining investment in the future is the report by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. It’s not perfect, but I think it’s a good start.
I hope that the Grad Student’s Corner can serve as a place where graduate students discuss issues that are important to them. In my opinion, our country’s debt and the future of science funding should be at the top of the list for young scientists. I hope you contribute your thoughts to this forum! (article submitted 4/11/11)