There have been some contradictory messages about the funding issue circulating
over the net. Here is a more optimistic version:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following memo is a response to the recently posted warning on social
science funding cuts: author is Al Teich, staff director of Committee on
Science, Engineering and Public Policy, American Association for
Advancement of Science, who follows Congressional science policy
developments closely.
From: ATEICH <ateich@aaas.org>
Subject: Rep. Walker's Comments on NSF Budget
Author: ATEICH at AAAS
Date: 5/17/95 10:03 PM
Dear STS-ers,
While it is gratifying to see the STS and social science
communities mobilize in response to a perceived threat to
NSF funding in social and behavioral sciences and related
areas, I am concerned that much of the reaction is based on
a misunderstanding of recent congressional statements.
In his press conference last week, Chairman Walker of the
House Science Committee made some disparaging and, in my
opinion, unwarranted comments about the place of the social
and behavioral sciences in NSF. He said that these areas
would be excluded from the 3% a year growth projected for
NSF research overall contained in the House Budget
Committee's plan. He did NOT say they were targeted for
elimination or severe cuts.
While excluding SBER from the projected growth is not in any
sense desirable, it is a much different scenario than
termination. Since the termination story has gained wide
currency, I have checked with top officials of NSF and with
the staff director of the subcommittee of Walker's committee
that is responsible for NSF's authorization. Both confirm
my interpretation.
Al Teich
AAAS Science and Policy Programs