Federal spending on basic scientific research is critical to America's long-term economic competitiveness and growth. But less than two years after agreeing that the United States needs to invest tens of billions of dollars more than ever before in basic research, Congress is already rolling back the program in earnest.
A series of funding bills recently passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden on March 9, 2024 will increase the current fiscal year budget for the National Science Foundation, the nation's major basic science research agency, by 8% compared to the previous year. This will result in more reductions. This leaves NSF's current allocation $6.6 billion below the goal set by Congress for 2022.
And the president's budget proposal for next year, released on March 11, doesn't look much better. Even assuming his request to the NSF is fully funded, my calculations show that Congress has set out a plan to help the U.S. catch up with rapidly growing populations, such as China. A total of $15 billion will remain with the agency. Their science budget.
I'm a sociologist who studies how research universities serve the public good. I am also the executive director of the Institute for Innovation Science, a national university consortium. Members of this consortium are sharing data to help understand, explain, and further expand its benefits.
Our data shows how a lack of funding for basic research, especially in high-priority areas, poses a real threat to the United States' role as a leader in critical technology fields, slowing innovation and reducing the proficiency that high-tech companies need. It shows how difficult it is to recruit workers. To be successful.
promised investment
Less than two years ago, in August 2022, academic researchers like me had reason to celebrate.
Congress had just passed the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act. The science portion of this law promised him one of the largest federal investments in the National Science Foundation's 74-year history.
The CHIPS Act authorizes the agency $81 billion, pledging to double its budget by 2027 and invest in research that will help “promote social, national, and geopolitical goals for the benefit of all Americans.” He instructed them to tackle the issues.
But there was one very big problem. This funding still must be appropriated annually by Congress. Lawmakers these days are not good at such things. Basic research is rapidly falling victim to political dysfunction as lawmakers struggle to keep the lights on.
The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 authorized billions of dollars in new funding to the National Science Foundation over five years. So far, based on appropriations and the fiscal year 2025 proposal, federal investment is expected to be about $15 billion less than Congress's goal.
Significant impact of research
This is a bad thing, because basic research is more important than expected.
For example, the fundamental discoveries that made COVID-19 vaccines possible date back to the early 1960s. These research investments contribute to the health, wealth, and well-being of society, support jobs and local economies, and are critical to the U.S. economy and national security.
Delays in research investment will hurt America's leadership in critical technologies such as artificial intelligence, advanced communications, clean energy, and biotechnology. Less support means less new research work is done, fewer new researchers are trained, and important new discoveries are made elsewhere.
But disruptions to federal research funding also have a direct impact on people's jobs, lives, and the economy.
Companies across the country thrive by selling goods and services needed for research, from pipettes and biological specimens to notebooks and airline tickets. These vendors include high-tech startups, manufacturers, contractors, and even Main Street businesses like your local hardware store. They employ your neighbors and friends and contribute to the economic health of your hometown and country.
Nearly one-third of the $10 billion in federal research funds used by our consortium's 26 universities in 2022 directly supported U.S. employers, including:
- A Detroit welding shop that sells gas used in experiments by many laboratories, funded by the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department of Defense, and Department of Energy.
- A Dallas-based construction company is building an advanced vaccine and drug development facility at the expense of the Department of Health and Human Services.
- More than a dozen Utah companies, including surveyors, engineers, construction companies and trucking companies, are working on a Department of Energy project aimed at groundbreaking geothermal energy development.
When Congress undercuts basic research, it also hurts these companies and people who aren't normally involved in academic science and engineering. Construction and manufacturing companies earn more than $2 billion each year from federally funded research conducted by consortium members.
jobs and innovation
Suspensions or cuts in research funding would also slow the flow of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) talent from universities to U.S. companies. A highly trained workforce is essential to U.S. leadership in key areas such as corporate innovation and AI, and companies rely on recruitment to secure research expertise.
In 2022, federal research grants paid the wages of approximately 122,500 people at universities who shared data with my lab. More than half of them were students or trainees. Our data shows that they work in many different types of jobs, but are especially important to big tech companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Intel.
From these same data, we can estimate that more than 300,000 people working at U.S. universities in 2022 were paid from federal research funds. Threats to federal research investments are putting academic jobs at risk.
It also has a negative impact on private sector innovation, as even the most successful companies need to hire people with specialized research skills. Most people learn these skills by working on university research projects, and most of those projects are federally funded.
high stakes
Unless Congress moves to fund basic science research to meet the goals of CHIPS and the Science Act and make up for the $11.6 billion already behind schedule, the long-term impact on U.S. competitiveness will be severe. There is a possibility that it will become.
Over time, companies will find fewer skilled job candidates, and academic and corporate researchers will produce fewer discoveries. Fewer high-tech startups means slower economic growth. In the age of AI, America's competitiveness will decline. This would make reality one of the concerns that led lawmakers to pass CHIPS and the Science Act.
Ultimately, lawmakers will decide whether to deliver on promises to invest more in research that supports jobs across the economy and America's innovation, competitiveness, and economic growth. For now, that promise looks pretty dicey.
Jason Owen Smith is a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
