[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
News Article: Senate Appropriations Hearing of DOE Office of Science
I received this through another list server and
thought it would be of interest. Particularly:
"The members of this subcommittee continue to give
considerable attention to nuclear energy, and like
their Senate counterparts, are not very pleased with
the Administration's request for research in this
area. . . ."
================================
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science
Policy News
Number 34: March 18, 2004
Key Senate Appropriations Hearing for DOE Office of
Science
The bottom line from yesterday's ninety-minute House
appropriations subcommittee hearing on the Department
of Energy's Office of Science budget request was
expressed early in Chairman Hobson's opening remarks,
and it was not encouraging. After saying that the
Office of Science supported some of the most important
work in the Department of Energy, and that it would be
one of his priorities if he had more money, the
chairman made a discouraging prediction. Explaining
that the full House was now working on a budget
resolution that would freeze discretionary spending in
the next fiscal year, Hobson told the DOE witnesses
that finding money above the Administration's request
would be very difficult, and warned that the final
appropriation might be even less than what the
Administration requested. That FY 2005 request for
the Office of Science is a cut of 2.0% or $68.5
million from the current year budget of $3,500.2
million.
Chairman David Hobson (R-Ohio) is now in his second
year as the head of this all-important subcommittee.
>From his remarks at yesterday's and last year's
hearings, and most notably, the bill that his
subcommittee wrote last year (with a recommended
increase of 6.7%), it is clear that Hobson
enthusiastically supports the Office of Science. But
the chairman, like almost all of the other
appropriations subcommittee chairmen, has little or no
new money to work with. When the Administration
decided to send Congress a budget request allowing
only a one-half of one percent increase in
discretionary spending, the result, if followed on
Capitol Hill, is that any significant increase in
spending for a program will be at the direct expense
of another program. Finding such offsetting programs
cuts is very difficult.
The primary Administration witness at this hearing was
Robert Card, Under Secretary of Energy for Energy,
Science and Environment. Accompanying him at the
witness table was Office of Science Director Raymond
Orbach; Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy David Garman; Office of Nuclear
Energy, Science and Technology Director William
Magwood; and Office of Electric Transmission and
Distribution Director Jimmy Glotfelty. Card briefly
summarized his seventeen-page written testimony, which
described the programs that are under his direction.
None of the other witnesses were scheduled to deliver
opening remarks.
The members of this subcommittee continue to give
considerable attention to nuclear energy, and like
their Senate counterparts, are not very pleased with
the Administration's request for research in this
area. The members asked about nuclear power research,
especially if it involved facilities in their
districts. Several members had questions for Orbach.
Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) asked about the allocation
of fusion energy sciences funding to domestic fusion
programs and ITER. Orbach replied that care is being
taken to ensure that funding is provided for research
on ITER-like machines in the United States. When
pressed about the current status of ITER negotiations,
Orbach said that the United States' 10% share of the
facilities cost is the same as that for five of the
other six international partners, and that the U.S. is
"fully equal with other partners." A decision is in
the works about the site for ITER.
Peter Visclosky (D-Indiana) asked Orbach a series of
pointed questions about how the determination is made
when universities are allowed to compete for research
in programs such as the human genome project.
Visclosky, from economically-distressed northwest
Indiana, said that many of his colleagues representing
similar districts are interested in finding ways to
increase economic opportunities. The congressman
would like to see a wider dispersal of scientific
talent and facilities across the United States.
Chairman Hobson asked about the Office of Science's
Advanced Scientific Computing Initiative. Hobson
feels that this is a very important program, but
wanted assurances that it was not only the Office of
Science that was paying for the development of these
new machines.
During his round of questioning, Zach Wamp
(R-Tennessee) praised the Spallation Neutron Source
now being built at Oak Ridge, explaining that it was
on time and on budget. Wamp was worried about the
implementation of the Office of Science twenty-year
facility plan, and said, "we're not going to have
enough money to fund what needs to be funded." In his
answer, Orbach said that the Administration's budget
request would provide enough money to start the top
five facilities in the twenty-year plan.
As the hearing moved toward its conclusion, Chairman
Hobson made a number of points. He said "I support
science in general," and later praised Orbach for the
presentation of "a good marketing plan" demonstrating
"science was lacking." He was critical of the Office
of Management and Budget for how it put together the
DOE budget, saying that they were "playing God with
this bill." Hobson was very displeased with remarks
to the media that Glotfelty made about earmarking in
the FY 2004 bill.
Then a bell rang in the committee room signaling that
Members had to report to the House floor to cast a
vote. Good-naturedly, Hobson told the witnesses that
they "were saved the bell," and the hearing would have
to adjourn. With this and the Senate hearing (see
http://www.aip.org/enews/fyi/2004/025.html ) on the
Office of Science completed, action now moves behind
closed doors to craft the FY 2005 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations bill.
###############
Richard M. Jones
Media and Government Relations Division
The American Institute of Physics
fyi@aip.org http://www.aip.org/gov
(301) 209-3094
##END##########
=====
+++++++++++++++++++
""A fanatic is one who cannot change his mind and won't change the subject." Winston Churchill
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
http://mail.yahoo.com
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,
with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/