House and Senate Slash Science Budget Increases

An anonymous reader writes "As reported by Science magazine, Congress has cut science funding increases for fiscal year 2008. This comes in spite of the earlier announced presidential initiative to increase funding for basic research to improve the future economic competitiveness of the United States. At best, funding increases are minor for some agencies such as NIH and NIST. Other agencies received severe cutbacks, like the Department of Energy Office of Science, which received $342 million less than expected. In particular, despite previous international commitments, funding for the ITER fusion reactor experiment is completely cut off. The NOVA neutrino oscillation experiment at Fermilab is also canceled, as well as R&D on the planned International Linear Collider. The Fermilab operating budget is cut by almost 20%, and may result in mass layoffs."

Well, what did you expect?

The US has a debt of trillions of dollars due to the Iraq war. How do you expect to pay that debt?

Re:Well, what did you expect?

Well, I expect them to stop fighting the war, to start with. They had no business over there and they're bankrupting the country over something that isn't important to the country.

Re:Well, what did you expect?

So, what's it like being on the no-fly list?

Re:Well, what did you expect?

So, what's it like being on the no-fly list?

Well, I'm not, but I easily could be, as could yoou or anyone else. There's no system of due process associated with that list. Which leads me to ask, isn't the enemy closer than we think?

Re:Two Theys

The people committing the US to the Iraq War got voted out of Congress last November.

That's not how the US election system works. Only a part of congress got changed,

Even then, the two-party system ensures that you only have a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, who both were for controlling the US public through directing their fears towards a designated enemy. Neither are too interested in finding out why other people hate us so much, and change that.

Re:Two Theys

The main problem there is you're talking about different groups of people with different feelings. Some don't hate Americans at all and are just unhappy with us. Some hate the current administration. Some hate the whole US government, top to bottom. Some hate the American-centric world view lots of people here have. Some hate the growth-before-all economics more than anything. Some hate our involvement in other countries, whether military, economic, or diplomatic. Some hate our Constitution and exactly the principles our country was founded upon. Some hate us specifically because our country is largely populated by Christians and Jews. Some are just jealous of the technological, economic, and military prowess of our country.

Many of these people we could work with, and they'd be happy if we changed some of our more annoying habits. Some of them would even be appeased at what lots of Americans ourselves want the direction of our country to be. Others would take much more work and would mean a much deeper concession on our part. Some we'll never appease and will always hate the US and want all of our people dead. I'm all for working with one end of that spectrum. I think we could make some compromises that would be acceptable to the middle of that spectrum so people wouldn't really care for us but wouldn't want to see our demise. The most violently opposed to the US government, the American people, and our very ideals will never be pleased as long as we exist. I'm not sure what to do about them other than to hit them harder than they hit us, unless we're okay with their goals of destroying us.

As Buckminster Fuller said, the end game in politics is always to pick up a gun. You can't really win at relationships with others. You can just hope to permanently delay losing. Once you've lost your position of friendship or of lukewarm rivalry, you either start over with an even harder struggle to get it back, or you go into a mode of bigger sticks and swifter swings. With an enemy that won't try to talk to you, you can't become friendly. With one who won't talk to you and keeps attacking, you have to fend them off. I think Iraq was well enough contained. I think Iran can probably be contained, and they might (although it's a slight chance) start to open up. They've shown a few promising signs of that. The Taleban had to fall, because there was no rescuing that from where it had been.

Re:Two Theys

I expect the Democratic pork to be even heavier

Congressional pork declined from $29 billion in 2006 to just $13.2 billion in 2007. As can be seen here [cagw.org].

Here's a nice graph [cagw.org] showing how the number of pork projects in the US ...erm, 2007 seems to be less than a fifth of the 2005 number. ...and it's NOW that American Conservatives ask people to 'Tell Congress: Sign the Earmark Reform Pledge!' [americanco...edaily.com]???!!! On a website that openly endorses the website that showed just how bad the right-wing has been these past few years???!!!???

Look: I'm British. So I have to search online to get the American facts beyond the soundbites and insults. But I work from one axiom: Conservatives will not be basing their opinions or policies on truth. Doesn't matter the country, doesn't matter the period in history. And you know what? I can find other examples where it's happened too (like when Conservatives in Britain tried to scare people with MRSA in the 2005 Election, blaming it on the National Health Service and demanding a health service based on the US system. Then the stats came out: you were more than twice as likely to die of MRSA in the US than in England/Wales in 2005, and that was in a year where every news reporter was looking under every mop bucket in British hospitals to find the bug. Seriously. 1,629 deaths amongst 52 million in England/Wales, 18,650 deaths amongst 295 million Americans. Do the maths).

This ain't just opinion. It's opinion based exclusively on cold hard numbers and facts. I expect to get marked down for citing the facts, before I get upped to Insightful.

Re:Well, what did you expect?

There are many ways. The obvious one that everyone will point out is, of course, to not have 5% of the world's people who represent 20% of the world's economy be spending 50% of the world's military expenditures.

Really, though, can you think of a worse place to cut funding? Reading lines like, "The Fermilab operating budget is cut by almost 20%, and may result in mass layoffs" makes me cringe. Sounds like a recipe for Gerald Bull [astronautix.com] times ten.

Re:Well, what did you expect?

This is silly. We have a beam sticking out of one eye, and so we go for a mote in the other? Trillians of dollars won't be paid off by millions of science dollars. Funding for science makes our country richer, in the long run, not poorer.

We should pull out of Iraq, start actually fighting the war in Afghanistan, and fund science up to wazoo.

Re:Well, what did you expect?

It is very important to not only fund science, but make sure to keep the best of the scientists around. Once the best scientists leave for "better opportunities" in EU countries or elsewhere, you can fund your science projects all you want but you'll get no result. Science is about the people and less about the money this way.

You can cut menial jobs one year and ramp them up next year without any problems. Construction would be a good example. On the science side, you can't fire scientists and then think you can get the same results next year when you increase funding once more.

The fusion cuts are the dumb of the dumbest cuts they could make. That program needs all the backing it can get precisely because it is long term. Fusion, long term, is the only thing that can guarantee stable and low cost concentrated energy not to mention all the material and hard science innovations that will spin off of it. All the law makers should be dragged over hot coals for this dumbass move.

It also proves that the agri/oil lobby is stronger than ever and law makers are either stupid or just don't care. The food=>fuel will be a worse environmental boondoggle than the current sub-prime lending chaos for the financial system.

Re:Well, what did you expect?

Thats easy... We just keep devaluing the US dollar while the rest of the world pay for it... In fact, with the US dollar 50% down since 2001, it would seem that we are almost half way there.. Its the American way... :-)

Re:Well, what did you expect?

We just keep devaluing the US dollar while the rest of the world pay for it...

What if the rest of the world stops paying for it? I mean, if oil producing nations like Iran and Venezuela switched its reserved to the Euro and then China slowly stopped buying our debt?

Oh wait...

Re:Well, what did you expect?

Easy, it's not GOING to be repaid. EVER.

Federal bonds have never failed to pay principal and interest. Our national debts are ALWAYS repaid. In fact, we are so reliable at paying our debts that I would argue that the entire world economy is dependent, in part, on the unshaken trust that U.S. national debts are always repaid.

But this is Slashdot, and you were modded "insightful" for being staggeringly, blindingly wrong.

War will save us ...

I'm sure democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan and various pork projects will lead to amazing new scientific discoveries that will radically improve our lives and understanding of the world around us.

Half a trillion dollars (http://www.fcw.com/online/news/151127-1.html [fcw.com]) for what?

To all of you who voted:

This is what happens when elections are decided by single-issue voters, and not by people judging candidates by fitness to serve.

Politics, meet Spite.

I'm sure Congresscritters (and not a few partisans) will blame Iraq. I'm equally sure that partisans and Congresscritters of the other stripe will equally blame "entitlement programs". Truth is, everyone in DC spends tax money like drunken sailors on shore leave... and I apologize in advance for insulting the aforementioned drunken sailors by making the comparison.

Meanwhile, we have two parties more than eager to cut off their noses (and everyone else's) just to spite their collective face.

Idiots. Where's the fscking "reset button"? Would be nice if someone actually gave a damn about term limits, instead of merely promising to institute it or try and claim it to be a bad thing.

Gr.

/P

Hey, what do we need science for anyway?

It's interesting to note that Bush cut taxes and spent huge amounts of money invading a non-threatening country. One could argue that the U.S. government has placed it's priorities in the wrong places. It now appears prudent on the part of other countries who didn't participate in "operation waste money" no to have taken part.
How much has Bush spent on the Iraq debacle?
2003: $48 billion
2004: $59 billion
2005: $81 billion
2006: $94 billion ?
2007: ?
2008: ?
2009: ?
2010: ?

The estimates are that it will end up costing the U.S. over a Trillion. That's money that has gone down a deep, dark drain, right into the coffers of the well connected. That's money that could have been used to help the U.S. rebuild it's aging infrastructure, to correct it's education system, it's aging power grid, it's R&D sector... The list goes on and on.

Sad, really sad.

Science is in fact booming...

As evidenced by the wonderful time machine that's apparently up and running.

There's a Bush running the White House.
There's a KGB agent running the Kremlin.
China is a black box.
We're not getting along with Iran.
There's a White House coverup story on the front page of the paper.

Re:Wow. Accurate reporting. Not

Except for Fermilab - it is really a budget cut to the operating budget so it is wrong again!
The U.S. is abandoning large scale high energy particle physics at this point. Or maybe not ... The ILC was and is never going to be built unless the LHC provides interesting results. People may moan about the delay, but that is the basis.

Re:Wow. Accurate reporting.

The problem with your viewpoint is that you ignore inflation. Because the science budget is not keeping up with inflation, a simply maintaining the current level of expenditures is a de facto budget cut. If you were to not get a raise from year to year, you would feel pretty upset about the decrease in your buying power as prices rise due to inflation, but your salary remains the same. Now imagine what is happening to scientists, engineers, and other researchers throughout the country- they are not only not getting a raise, but in many cases are getting a PAYCUT. This makes it difficult to do good fundamental research because people will shy away from careers in academia or the government labs because the pay stinks, and it is becoming more difficult to employ researchers under the principal investigator, as well as run a lab, both day-to-day and in terms of equipment purchases. If we are going to seriously compete in the 21st century and beyond, it is imperative that we properly fund basic research; if we don't, someone else will, and the US will become reliant on others rather than maintain a large degree of self-reliance and autonomy.

Ask yourself

which of the items in the budget generate the most votes for our Congressmen?

Then you will know why science gets the short stick. This isn't about an Administration hostile to science, it is all about a Congress hostile to anything but keeping themselves in office. Heaven knows they would rather stay in office than live under the laws they inflict on us.

Change is not coming to this country until we throw off the shackles of the Democratic and Republican elite. Sure we may find good men and women among them but I can tell you that the last person I would want for President from either party is anyone from Congress. Yet these self appointed masters of us, and I say self appointed because of the games they play with redistricting that diminishes our vote, skillfully play supporters of both parties off each other. Combined with an arrogant elite in the press and upper reaches of society we dutifully play along.

Our education system suffers from the same, the teachers union is more important to members of Congress from the votes it provides than any child. No Child Left Behind became a pariah among these groups because it dared to put children before voters. No, the geeks of this nation here will rail against war in forums and do nothing to change the situation. The war's benefit to the parties in power is that it distracts us from the real crimes going on. Yes wars are bad but the fleecing of America is far worse. The NINE THOUSAND plus earmarks in this bill should convince the voters that while the party in power may change the actions of Congress do not. Yet the public's ire will redirected at corporate America and the evil rich and politicians will rest comfortably in their ivory tower and look down upon us with disdain, confident we are more interested in the next American idol or that Brittney's sister is pregnant.

Re:Seems appropriate

First off, it was $700,000 (thousand, not million) for a bike trail.

Secondly, they are hoping to make a model of this trail as an alternative to automotive transportation.

Thirdly, to Bruce, in Minneapolis, they are converting [midtowngreenway.org] old (heavy) rail corridors to mixed use green-way and light-rail or street car use.

Preserving the Lines

Actually, converting those old, unused railways to hiking trails is a pretty good way to hold onto them. It puts the rights of way into government hands, and preserves them as contiguous rights of way. Otherwise, there'd be little excuse for the government keeping them, so they'd be broken up piecemeal for whatever "privatized" use they were released to.

So in fact the government is doing exactly that. I'd love to see them converted to underground rails. Eventually they probably will, because we ain't never getting those flying cars.

Re:Ron Paul

Universities and Journals are in the business of "selling" knowledge. They have a vested interest in the "production" of new knowledge as it expands their market. So, you see, just because private industry isn't overwhelmingly funding basic research, doesn't mean that it's not funding it at all, nor that there is no market mechanism in place that could take up much of the slack.

For example, there is the issue of things like building a billion dollar super-collider. It has obvious use in theoretical physics, but the question is, how interesting is theoretical physics to the nation? Should Joe the Farmer be forced at gunpoint to pay for high-energy research that he has no interest in? Of course not, he should be able to vote with his wallet on whether or not that research gets done. And if his interest happens to be in pretty pictures from an orbiting telescope, so be it.

That said, I'm still not voting for Ron Paul. Why is it that even vaguely libertarian candidates have to be so loony and supported by even more loony loons.

Re:LOL democratics

I thought they were going to work hard and change things. Kind of like the hippies in the 60's.

1. The Vietnam war is over. Yours isn't, son
2. The Clean Air Act [wikipedia.org]. How's your generation doing with that "global warming" thing?
3. We got the Clean Water Act [wikipedia.org] passed, your generation drinks bottled water
4. Led Zeppelin ... and you got what?
5. We smoked pot, [wikipedia.org] your generation smokes crack [uncyclopedia.org]
6. Our generation knew how to use an apostrophe [angryflower.com] as in "hippies in the '60s" (and how to spell lose, loser)
7. We had Douglas Adams, you have, er...
8. We had Monty Python, you have... Kramer? [wikipedia.org]
9. Hippies had ????????????? Your generation has PROFIT!

Now get off my lawn. And no you can't have your balls back.

-mcgrew