Nixon budget proposes slight cut ($240 million) in federal R&D (Figures in millions) Selected agencies
Request pending
Defense Department National Aeronautics and Space Administration Health, Education, and Welfare Atomic Energy Commission National Science Foundation Agriculture Interior Transportation Commerce
Revised request
Change
$8,636 3,878
$8,566 3,833
-$70 -45
1,339 1,722 497 290 237 246 85
1,262 1,697 497 289 233 233 80
-77 -25
- ι - 4 -13 - 5
Source: C&EN estimates
President Nixon slashes $240 million from Johnson's $17.1 billion R&D request Federal support of science will suffer further reversal if Congress goes along with President Nixon's revised budget for the coming fiscal year. According to early estimates of the White House Office of Science and Technology, the new fiscal 1970 bud get calls for about a $240 million re duction in the $17.1 billion in re search and development funds re quested by the Johnson Administra tion. But this may not be enough of a cut to satisfy several economy-minded Congressmen who say that the re vised budget still holds a lot of fat. Nevertheless, for the fiscal year be ginning July 1, federal obligations for R&D would total $16.9 billion, less than $100 million over the fiscal 1969 funding level. Hardest hit in the R&D area would be the Defense Department (down $70 million), the National Institutes of Health ($52 million), and the Na tional Aeronautics and Space Admin istration ($45 million). Other agen cies would sustain lesser cuts under Nixon's budget proposals. Some may find solace in the fact that OST says that the budget reductions had "no major effect" on academic science. Of the cuts in overall, agency-byagency budget proposals, the biggest loser was the Atomic Energy Commis sion, which had $78.6 million chopped from the $2.4 billion the agency orig inally requested for fiscal 1970. About $1.45 million of the AEC reduction results from elimination of AEC's once-promising food irradiation program-$700,000 from the biology and medicine program and the rest from isotopes development. Canceling the program aimed at ex tending the shelf life of foods is a mat ter of "budgetary stringency," AEC
Chairman Glenn T. Seaborg explains. On the other hand, the future of food irradiation is not too promising. Dr. Seaborg several days ago told the Joint House-Senate Committee on Atomic Energy that AEC killed the program partly because irradiated foods are nowhere near ready for mar ket testing. Food and Drug Admin istration approval of these foods has become increasingly more difficult to get, and FDA last year suddenly with drew previously approved foods. The cut in the AEC budget request, as is the case with other agencies, is made up of several reductions offset in part by program increases. Other AEC program reductions would include $9 million in purchases of raw uranium concentrates, $4 mil lion in basic research in the physical and biomedical sciences, and $10 mil lion in the light-water breeder reactor program. In addition, AEC proposes to decrease the 200-b.e.v. accelerator project in Illinois by $6 million. This reduction in funding for construction of the accelerator will still leave $96 million of new money for the project in fiscal 1970. AEC cuts would be partly offset by an increase of $8 million to maintain six plutonium production reactors, one more than requested under the Johnson budget. A new project to modify an existing accelerator (HILAC) at AEC's Lawrence Radiation Laboratory would boost the budget by another $2.65 million. The Nixon budget for the space agency proposes a $45 million cut in the $3.9 billion request by Johnson, yet NASA would get an increase of $86 million to step up its Apollo moonlanding program. This would pro vide for 11 moon landings, six more
than Johnson requested. About $46 million of the increase would go to ward producing additional Saturn V launching vehicles. The $86 million increase would be offset by reductions in space science, technology, and research, and in track ing and data acquisition, including $57 million in the Apollo Applications program. NASA administrator Thomas O. Paine is quite pleased with the new NASA budget request. He says that it now represents "the first steps toward a bold U.S. space program within the limits of a wise and carefully drawn budget." Another big loser in the revised fiscal 1970 budget is the National In stitutes of Health, which was trimmed $52 million from the $1.5 billion orig inally requested. Nixon proposes to reduce NIH research grants by $8 million from $642 million in the old budget. This cut would affect gen eral research support grants, grants for general clinical research, and grants for environmental health science insti tutes. Each of these would be held to the 1969 level, though the Johnson team proposed small increases. The Nixon budget asks Congress for a number of reductions in the sci ence funding departments of the Com merce Department. For the National Bureau of Standards, it proposes a budget slightly less than $39 million, a $1.4 million reduction from the orig inal request. The amended budget would reduce funds requested for work on standard reference data, ma terials research, basic standards and measurements, as well as work on re cently authorized programs for fire re search and a study of metric system conversion. It also would reduce, from $5.8 to less than $0.3 million, the amount to be appropriated for the Of fice of State Technical Services, which aids U.S. enterprise in making effective use of scientific develop ments. Some of the $0.3 million would be used to evaluate the dying program. The National Science Foundation, which received its share of wounds during this fiscal year, escaped the Nixon scalpel. Thus, NSF for fiscal 1970 would get the $497 million re quested by the Johnson team, a jump of $97 million over the funding level for fiscal 1969. Despite the Nixon Administration's proposal to cut $4 billion from the Johnson budget, a number of con servative Congressmen say that it should be squeezed further. Rep. Wilbur D. Mills (D.-Ark.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Com mittee, feels the cuts are not enough and suggests that Congress slash another $5 billion. APRIL 28, 1969 C&EN
31
