IP: FY 2001 DOD S&T and Beyond

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> FYI
> The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy
> News
> Number 170: December 21, 1999
>
> Looking Ahead at the DOD S&T Budget: 2001 and Beyond
>
> If the prediction of a senior defense official is correct, the
> Clinton Administration will seek a FY 2001 budget for defense
> science and technology that is $1 billion less than what
> Congress appropriated this year. Given the fiscal constraints
> facing the Administration, still operating under the budget
> caps, it is "not realistic," this official explained, to expect
> a request equal to this year's appropriation of $8.4 billion.
> If this official is correct, who was speaking on a "non
> attribution" basis, spending for 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 would decline
> 11.9% in the next fiscal year.
>
> These remarks were presented on December 16 at the first meeting
> of the National Research Council's "Committee on Review of the
> Department of Defense Air and Space Systems Science and
> Technology Program."   The defense authorization bill for FY
> 1999 required that a NRC committee be established to "result in
> recommendations on the minimum requirements for maintaining a
> technology base that is sufficient, based on both historical
> developments and future projections, to project superiority in
> air and space weapons systems and information technology."   The
> committee is also to "address the effects on national defense
> and civilian aerospace industries and information technology of
> reducing funding below the goal" that will be determined under
> the first charge.  Staffing issues at the Defense Department are
> also to be examined.  The committee has 14 members, is chaired
> by Eugene E. Covert of MIT, and is to report by December 2000.
>
> Committee members were briefed by congressional defense
> staffers, also speaking on a non attribution basis.  They
> explained that peacekeeping costs are up significantly, while
> the "top line" for the department continues to shrink.  In such
> circumstances, R&D and procurement are the first budgets to be
> cut.  Defense R&D, they charged, is down 14% over the last five
> years.
>
> The congressional staffers said that the Defense Department
> justifies the decline by saying that big systems are moving into
> the procurement phase.  The staffers could not, however, find
> "big ticket items" that would support this contention.  They
> explained that cuts in procurement were more easily identified
> in industrial job losses that were noticed by Members of
> Congress.  In contrast, the impacts of cuts in R&D were more
> difficult to "capture."  The legislative provision requiring
> this NRC committee to examine the level of defense spending was
> a result of bipartisan frustration with cuts in defense R&D.  An
> independent assessment is needed, the congressional staffers
> said, to answer the question, "Is this enough?"  At the
> conclusion of their presentation, they cautioned that there were
> "red flags" in the upcoming FY 2001 budget request.
>
> The NRC members then heard from the senior defense official.  He
> told the committee that reductions in R&D were the equivalent of
> eating the Defense Department's seed corn.  Beginning his
> presentation with a graph showing declines in constant dollars
> since FY 1989 in some 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 budgets, he said that it
> had been "death by a thousand cuts."  Until recently, he
> explained, there had been little support for defense S&T on
> Capitol Hill.  The situation on the Hill has changed, he
> contends, because of 480 jobs that were lost in several
> important states resulting from a $95 million cut in the Air
> Force's core S&T program.  The official said that stability in
> the S&T budget was critical.
>
> The NRC committee clearly has a major task to accomplish, as the
> presenters agreed that no one has yet devised a satisfactory
> system to allocate defense S&T dollars.   The committee's
> overall objective would seem to be aligned with the Department
> of Defense S&T Mission: "To ensure that the warfighters today
> and tomorrow have superior and affordable technology to support
> their missions, and to give them revolutionary war-winning
> capabilities."
>
> ###############
> Richard M. Jones
> Public Information Division
> American Institute of Physics
> fyi () aip org
> (301) 209-3095
> ##END##########