1 / 25

Federal R&D in FY 2017

Federal R&D in FY 2017. Matt Hourihan October 3, 2016 For the ASU DARPA Young Faculty Awardees AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program http://www.aaas.org/program/rd-budget-and-policy-program. The Federal Budget is Kind Of a Big Deal.

burrus
Télécharger la présentation

Federal R&D in FY 2017

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Federal R&D in FY 2017 Matt Hourihan October 3, 2016 For the ASU DARPA Young Faculty Awardees AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Programhttp://www.aaas.org/program/rd-budget-and-policy-program

  2. The Federal Budget is Kind Of a Big Deal • “Politics is who gets what, when, and how.” - Harold Lasswell • “Budgeting is about values, and it’s about choices.” – Rep. Rosa DeLauro • Every dollar in the budget has its claimants! • Negotiation between competing interests (and their proxies) in a decentralized system • Major impact for R&D and innovation: most basic research, and most university research, is federally funded

  3. From Budget to Appropriations Committees • Budget Resolution limits  Approps Committees  Subcommittees [302(b) allocations] • These caps remain in place all the way to floor, but can be revised as needed • Twelve Appropriations Subcommittees • Nine subcommittees responsible for at least $1 billion of R&D • Approps led by “Cardinals” • Committee Chairs: Rep. Hal Rogers (KY), Sen. Thad Cochran (MS) • Ranking Members: Rep. Nita Lowey (NY), Sen. Barbara Mikulski (MD) • Appropriators will often have their own priorities • “There are three parties: Democrats, Republicans, and appropriators” • “President proposes, Congress disposes”

  4. Defense Bill • Over $500 billion • Tradeoffs: balancing force modernization, readiness, personnel costs, near-term versus long-term RDT&E (and medical research) • Offset Strategy • What to do about war funding?

  5. Agency Highlights: NIH • $33.1 billion program level (+$825 million, +2.6%) • OR • $31.3 billion program level (-$1 billion, -3.1%) • Of the $1.825 billion in mandatory spending: • $825 million for cancer research, BRAIN Initiative, Precision Medicine • Remaining $1 billion to keep all other ICs flat • 17.5% success rate in FY17

  6. Labor, HHS, Education • >$150 billion • Deep divisions – especially Obamacare • Usually one of the hardest to pass, thus usually one of the last out of the gate • Everybody likes NIH lately • Especially Alzheimer’s research • Cancer moonshot? • Success rates?

  7. Commerce, Justice, Science • ~$55 billion • Tradeoffs: Balancing Depts. of Justice and Commerce (including NOAA and NIST), NASA, NSF • Among science programs, NASA’s star is somewhat ascendant • NSF: Modest year all around • Social and geo science funding? Facilities?

  8. Looking Ahead • Good approps progress but regular order broke down, because of course it did • CR through Dec. 9 • Included Zika funding • And full-year MilCon • Next: omnibus (?) negotiations, to lead to legislation in late fall • March: Debt ceiling. Ugh. • FY 2018: Sequester-level spending returns, maybe

  9. For more info… mhouriha@aaas.org 202-326-6607 http://www.aaas.org/program/rd-budget-and-policy-program

More Related