Democratic Leaders in Congress Propose Increases for Scientific Research and Pell Grants in 2007 Budget

By JEFFREY BRAINARD

Article tools

Printer friendly	E-mail article	Subscribe	Order reprints
	Discuss any Chronicle article in our forums
Latest Headlines New Mexico State U. President Fires Off New Allegations in Dispute With Professors Two whose contracts were not renewed by the university, in what they say was a case of discrimination, now say they are also the victims of baseless allegations by the university's president. U. of Iowa Puts Flood Damage at More Than $230-Million Professors Cry Foul as Kean U. Increases Required Office Hours Portfolios Replace Qualifying Exams as Step Toward Dissertations Robots Hit the Ivies Commentary Updating Higher Education's Past: 1940 to 2005

News Headlines From The Chronicle

Democratic leaders in Congress propose increases for scientific research and Pell Grants in 2007 budget

U. of Wisconsin discusses its plan to consider applicants' race systemwide and gets mixed reviews

Laureate Education agrees to $3.8-billion buyout by private investors

Education Dept. won't open grant process this year for program serving high-need institutions

Brown U. receives $100-million gift for medical school

Virginia State U. pays $600,000 and reinstates professor to settle her lawsuit

Nurse who raised questions about now-discredited research sues Canadian university



Late Monday night Congress's Democratic leadership proposed a spending bill for the rest of the 2007 fiscal year that would provide comparatively large increases for the maximum Pell Grant award and for physical-sciences and biomedical research.

The proposals delivered some welcome news for college officials within an otherwise-austere budget plan that would finance most federal programs at 2006 levels with no cost-of-living increases. The maximum Pell award, for low-income students, would rise by 6 percent, to $4,310. That level has been stuck at $4,050 for the past four years, while its purchasing power has been eroded by inflation.

Programs benefiting higher education would get some of the largest increases of any programs outside the Defense Department, but the news was not entirely rosy for colleges. To free up funds for other priorities, Democratic leaders proposed no earmarks, the controversial appropriations steered by members of Congress to constituents for specific projects.

The bill, which totals $463.5-billion, would be especially generous to scientific research. The research budget of the National Science Foundation would rise by nearly 8 percent, to $4.7-billion. Spending for the Energy Department's Office of Science would increase by about 6 percent, to $3.8-billion. Spending for the National Institutes of Health, the largest source of funds for university research, would rise by 2.1 percent, or $620-million, to $28.9-billion.

The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on Wednesday on the measure, which is a compromise worked out by the Appropriations Committees of the House and the Senate. Lawmakers are scrambling to meet a deadline of February 15 to wrap up appropriations for the 2007 fiscal year, which began last October 1 and ends on September 30. Congress adjourned its last session in December, under Republican control, without finishing most of the annual appropriations bills that finance the federal government.

Raising spending for the Pell program and for scientific research was among the top budget priorities announced by Democrats during and since their successful campaign last fall to take control of Congress. The Democrats said the federal government should increase aid to college students to help them cope with rising tuitions.

The idea of increasing research budgets at the National Science Foundation and Energy Department has developed a broad base of support among members of both parties as well as industry and academic leaders. President Bush proposed doubling spending over a decade on physical-sciences research at those agencies beginning in the 2007 fiscal year. Advocates for that spending say it is vital to preserve America's global lead in the development of lucrative, technology-based products.

The proposed 2-percent increase for the National Institutes of Health would lag behind the inflation rate projected for this year for biomedical-research costs. Nonetheless, "I think most people were girding for a year of flat funding," said Jon Retzlaff, director of federal relations for the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. The proposed increase, he said, "is a real victory."

What's more, the proposal specifically gives the NIH $69-million, which the Bush administration had proposed cutting, to begin a major project on children's health, the National Children's Study. That effort would track the health of 100,000 children from birth to adulthood in a search for cures for autism, diabetes, and other diseases that can strike in childhood. Planning for the Congressionally authorized study began in 2000, and enrollment of study participants was to have begun this year at seven academic medical centers.

Congress faces a deadline of February 15 to act on the new spending proposal because lawmakers in December extended financing for federal programs at 2006 levels only through that date, as a temporary, stopgap measure. Before Congress adjourned, two appropriations bills for 2007, to finance the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, were enacted.

After the Democrats took control of Congress this month, the party's leaders said there was too little time to pass the 11 bills left undone. Instead, Democratic leaders have said a single spending bill for 2007 would be their best shot to clean up the unfinished business left them by the Republicans and to quickly move on to consider President Bush's budget for 2008, which he is to propose next week.

As for earmarks, the wording of the new proposal would explicitly remove from federal agencies any obligation to continue financing projects supported by Congressional earmarks in the 2006 fiscal year. Some university officials have hoped that federal agencies would decide voluntarily to continue providing money in 2007 for some of those projects if agencies deemed them meritorious. Critics of earmarks call them "pork-barrel spending" and say they generally support efforts of dubious quality, including, in some cases, scientific research, laboratory construction, and other campus projects.

Members of Congress could still try to amend the spending compromise unveiled on Monday to provide additional money for their priorities. But it appears unlikely they will succeed: More spending cannot be added to the bill without violating agreed-upon caps. And any substantial reworking of the bill could delay final approval past the February 15 expiration of the temporary spending measure now in place, triggering a shutdown of the federal government.

• Senate Joins House to Cut the Secrecy That Hides Congressional Earmarks (1/17/2007)

• Moratorium on Earmarks in 2007 Puts Pork Lovers in Academe on a Diet (1/12/2007)

• Democrats' Plan to Hold Spending at '06 Levels Will Eliminate Earmarks, Cost Academe in Other Ways (12/13/2006)