About 100 University faculty and students curious of the federal government’s role in science and technology received a better understanding Tuesday evening, as part of the Chancellor’s Distinguished Lectureship Series.
John Marburger III, science adviser to President Bush and director of the U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, explained how billions of dollars in science-related funding contributes to technological advancements in America.
Marburger, who said he briefs President George W. Bush regularly, said the 1957 Soviet launch of Spudnik – the first artificial satellite launched into orbit – caused a tremendous global attitude change in science spending.
In 1957, the federal government allotted about $2 billion to science. The planned 2006 budget shows an estimated $45 billion. The agencies benefitting from these allocations, such as NASA, show similar budget increases.
Hundreds of agencies such as the National Institute of Health, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy compete each year to get science and technology funding, Marburger said.
Marburger said federal agencies submit their funding requests each year to the White House Office of Management and Budget.
“It’s not started in Congress,” he said.
After the budget is negotiated between OMB and federal agency heads, the president sends it to Congress. Thirteen appropriations subcommittees coordinate proper distribution with the House and Senate Appropriations committee chairs.
“You’d think the result of all this would be chaos,” Marburger said. “But amazingly the development of science has been steady over the decades. Congress gives about the same fraction of spending to science each year.”
Marburger said the United States spends more than all European countries and one and a half times as much as the next largest producer, Japan, in science research and development.
He said the bulk of scientific research funding to universities – such as those under the LSU System – comes through the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health.
One audience member asked Marburger why countries in the European Union and Asia spend more than the U.S. on physical sciences – natural sciences dealing with non-living materials. Marburger responded that the statistics are misleading because state governments contribute large amounts, too.
For example, he said spending on nanotechnology – an emerging field based on the ability to assemble materials atom by atom – is at about $1 billion at the federal level, but individual states spend about $400 million, almost half of what the federal government puts in.
After touring the campus with Chancellor Sean O’ Keefe on Tuesday, Marburger said scientific areas of the University are well-positioned for scientific breakthroughs.
Cornelius Toole, computer science graduate student, said he attended the seminar because of his personal belief that science and technology policy effects everyone in their daily lives.
“I got an overall picture of how his advisory office works and how science policy decisions are made,” Toole said.
Joseph Howell, assistant food industry development coordinator for the AgCenter, said he came to the lecture for a better idea of how the government handles science.
Howell, 58, who spent more than 20 years working in Africa and Asia, said those in foreign countries do not hear about U.S. contributions to science and technology as much as they hear issues dealing with the Supreme Court, the War in Iraq and even American pop music.
“You don’t hear about it a lot,” Howell said. “Yet our future as a society is based on science.”
Contact Chris Day at [email protected]