Contact: Fritz Chaleff

(202) 225-0508

ANOTHER VIEW: Consistent science funding could spur economy

Scientific Funding Could Be a Prescription for U.S. Economic Woes

It is no secret that America is in the midst of the worst economic climate since the stagflation days of the 1970s. With San Diego County's unemployment rate at 9.3 percent and on the rise, consumer confidence declining and retirement investments losing nearly half their value across the board, Americans are demanding solutions to our ailing economy.

During the past few weeks, President Barack Obama and Congress have attempted to solve the problem through various fiscal policies, including aid to failing banks and auto companies as well as a $787 billion economic stimulus package that included $21.5 billion for federal research and development ---- $10.4 billion of which was for the National Institutes of Health and $3 billion for the National Science Foundation. Arguments can be made on whether or not $787 billion was necessary; one thing that should not be argued is the need for a robust bipartisan investment in science and technology to jump start our economy.

Throughout our nation's history, science and technology have been a catalyst in helping the United States transcend some of its darkest economic periods.

According to Niall Ferguson in his essay "What 'Chimerica' Hath Wrought," part of the reason the United States has come through disastrous financial crises before is that our country has long been "the world's most benign environment for technological innovation and entrepreneurship."

Ferguson notes that "the Depression saw a 30 percent contraction in economic output and 25 percent unemployment. But throughout the 1930s American companies continued to pioneer new ways of making and doing things: think of DuPont (nylon), RCA (radio) and IBM (accounting machines)." Similarly the high rate of inflation of the 1970s did not deter some of the world's largest computer firms from being started (Microsoft, Apple). Investing in today's scientific infrastructure is no exception to this.

Funding for the NIH and NSF has the power to spur the kind of investments that put us on the path to our future economic recovery.

In fiscal year 2007, on average, each dollar of NIH funding generated roughly two and a half dollars in state economic output. This means that the $22.8 billion NIH received in 2007 generated $50.54 billion in new state business activity. Furthermore, NIH grants and contracts created and supported more than 350,000 jobs and generated wages in excess of $18 billion throughout the United States.

The National Science Foundation, which funds 50 percent of the non-medical basic research funded at academic institutions by federal agencies, has a similar return on investment to the NIH.

Research started at the National Science Foundation has been instrumental in the success of many successful American companies. From a digital library initiative grant awarded to Stanford University came Internet legend Google. An NSF small business innovation research grant led to the development of one of our nation's leading alternative fuel producers, Virent, which is now creating a "green gasoline" from non-food crops that will reduce CO2 emissions ... without driving up food costs.

And a series of under $1 million grants to the University of Illinois led to the creation of Mosaic, the first Web browser, which popularized the Internet and had a direct hand in creating the hundreds of thousands of jobs supported today by the electronic economy supported by the World Wide Web.

However, for these funding initiatives to truly make an impact upon our economy, they cannot exist in a vacuum or at a single point in time. Our government's "peak and valley" pattern of scientific funding must be replaced with a steady consistent funding stream. It is disruptive to the flow of the scientific process if funding levels are flying high one year only to be followed the next year with a crash landing. If we are truly to harness the best that our researchers have to offer we must settle on consistent funding levels that are both fiscally responsible, prudent and scientifically sound. We must also recognize this funding as part of our national responsibility to promote the progress of science, a responsibility justified in Article I of the United States Constitution.

Nearly 70 years ago, President Franklin D. Roosevelt dedicated the first building at the National Institutes of Health with the immortal words "We cannot be a strong nation unless we are a healthy nation." With a sustained commitment to resources for our nation's scientific enterprise, we can have both.

(####)

______Home | In the News List_