|
This is from Chemistry and Engineering News, the incredibly conservative (in the non-partisan sense of the word) journal of the American Chemical Society.
<quote>
January 17, 2005 Volume 83, Number 3 p. 32
INSIGHTS FUNDING FOR NSF DOWN Some people wonder if 2005 cut in agency's budget is payback for scientists' political activity BY SUSAN R. MORRISSEY
In December 2002, president george W. Bush signed into law the National Science Foundation Act, an act that supposedly put the agency on course to double its budget by 2007. Two years later, NSF's hopes of seeing any significant budget growth have all but faded as the agency braces for its first budget decrease in almost 10 years.
...
The tight budget aside, some people have expressed a worrisome concern that NSF's budget cut is revenge for the political activity of scientists in the 2004 presidential election. The concern is that because many in the scientific community supported Democratic Sen. John Kerry's failed presidential campaign and because of the outspokenness of scientists against some of the President's policies, all things related to science are on some kind of hit list of the Republican majority.
...
"I don't think one has to conjure up the conspiracy that there were people in the conference or the White House out to get science," Palmer said. "But when you are in a tight bill, particularly NSF in the VA-HUD bill, people may not be looking to hurt you actively, but they're also probably not looking to help you," he stated.
Palmer noted that this impact was evident by looking at where the funding went. For instance, he noted that agencies with a more Democratic constituency, such as NSF and EPA, did poorly. On the other hand, he said that agencies that have a wider support base and are more politically important, like VA and NASA, did fairly well.
<end quote>
There you have it - the NSF has a more Democratic constituency, as does science in general, one presumes. Welcome to the new Dark Ages.
|