AAS Public Policy Blog

Large amounts of domestic spending, including new veterans’ benefits and money for science, passed the Senate today by a large margin of 75-22. You can read the text of the amendment as it relates to science funding here.

Democrats in the Senate planned to first try to pass a large package of domestic spending, and then if that failed, a smaller amendment geared only toward expanded education benefits for veterans. However, with the larger amendment passing, the second, more focused one was not considered.

The bill now goes back to the House, which failed to pass war funding supplemental but did pass some domestic spending.. Despite numerous searches of roll call votes and amendments, I can’t seem to find the text of the domestic spending amendment the House passed (and is mentioned in the Washington Post article.)

We’ll see how the House responds and if the House can muster a veto-proof margin for any supplemental it passes in finality. A coalition of Republicans against domestic spending, and Democrats against funding the war could mean that the House could not override a supplemental veto.

The AAAS takes a look at the science funding in the domestic spending in the Senate’s version of the supplemental funding bill.

There’s also an AP story on the Senate’s version.

Unlike the House Supplemental which I posted about yesterday, the Senate bill contains $1.2 billion for science programs From the AIP’s FYI newsletter:

Yesterday afternoon the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its version of a bill to provide $193 billion in additional funding for war-fighting costs and other programs. Under this Supplemental Appropriations Bill, a total of $1.2 billion would be allocated for spending this year by NASA, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the National Institutes of Health.

Some numbers, from the FYI newsletter:

• $200 Million for NASA (for space shuttle, manned spaceflight, etc.)
• $200 Million for NSF
• $100 Million for DOE
• $400 Million for NIH

The $1.2 billion number is mentioned in this press release (PDF link). The gory details, which I haven’t had a chance to look at yet, are in this summary of the actual bill language (also a PDF), or even more fun reading, the actual amendment text (PDF).

Where this goes, as far as being passed, or having to be negotiated with the House, all in the face of a veto from the White House, is still up in the air for now.

Macroscopic issues dominated today’s votes on the War supplemental bill. Near as I can tell from looking over the bill text (there are 5 versions listed there, so it’s a bit confusing), there is no science money in the House version. The supplemental bypassed the appropriations committees. The major points concern funding new Veterans Benefits, unemployment benefits, and how to pay for them.

Science funding is clearly not on the radar for any of the major decision-makers in this complicated supplemental / war funding process. Amidst all this, the Bush administration has issued veto threats over additional domestic spending in the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said the the war supplemental funding bill will come up before the Senate next Wednesday. From the Politico:

“We know there is enough money to fund the troops for a considerable period after the Memorial Day recess,” Reid said. “We want to get [the bill] done. And we’ll do our best to get that done, but we’re not going to be pushed into doing something we don’t think is appropriate.”

Meanwhile, the White House has been threatening to veto bills that add additional domestic spending.

Meanwhile, White House budget director Jim Nussle weighed in Thursday with renewed veto threats against rival House and Senate Iraq funding bills, saying the add-ons for veterans and an extension of unemployment benefits were unacceptable. “To just pile them into the troop funding bill because the troop funding bill is necessary is a cynical process that the president has already been very clear about — the fact that he would veto,” Nussle told The Associated Press.

Additionally, certain “blue dog” Democrats are also opposing additional spending in the supplemental, if it’s not paid for with tax increases or other cuts.

In this environment, hoped-for science funding in the supplemental is not looking particularly likely. We’ll see what happens when the bills make it to the floor in the coming week.

Science groups want war cash - Chris Frates - Politico.com. The Politico has a story on the efforts of science groups to put science funding in the upcoming supplemental funding bills that will fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and touches on the disappointment in last year’s budget to realize the science funding increases promised in America COMPETES and the American Competitiveness Initiative.