(This analysis is part of a
AAAS effort to enumerate congressionally designated, performer-specific
R&D projects not appearing in agency budget requests (earmarks)
in final FY 2006 appropriations bills. The complete series of AAAS
R&D Funding Updates, including continually updated analyses of
R&D by agency in FY 2006 appropriations, is available on the AAAS
R&D Web Site (http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd) in the “FY
2006 R&D” or the “What’s New” sections.)
- Despite
tough times in the federal budget, R&D earmarks set a new record
in 2006, climbing to $2.4 billion in final FY 2006 appropriations,
up 13 percent from last year’s previous record (see Table
B and Figure 1).
- Although these
congressionally earmarked projects amount to only 1.7 percent of total
R&D, they are concentrated in a few key agencies and programs. Five
agencies (USDA, $331 million; NASA, $317 million; DOE, $524 million;
NOAA in Commerce, $184 million; and DOD, $852 million) receive 94 percent
of the total R&D earmarks, while NIH, NSF, and DHS remain earmark-free.
In some programs, earmarks make up more than 1 out of every 5 dollars.
- Even as the overall
federal R&D investment stagnates, R&D earmarks show remarkable
growth, up 63 percent since 2003.
FY 2006 R&D Earmarks in FY 2006 Appropriations: Another Record Year
On December 30, President Bush and Congress completed
appropriations nearly three months late, but they succeeded in their
goal of cutting overall domestic discretionary spending by 1 percent
compared to last year, and added in another 1 percent cut at the last
minute for all discretionary programs including defense. As a result,
many indicators of the federal R&D investment trend downward, with
cuts to key agencies and programs. But despite, or perhaps because of,
tight budgets, congressionally designated, performer-specific R&D
projects (R&D earmarks) continue to set new records. House versions
of the 12 FY 2006 appropriations bills contained $1.2 billion in earmarks,
while the Senate versions contained $1.5 billion, but the final total
far exceeds them both with a grand total of $2.4 billion in R&D
earmarks, up a dramatic 13 percent from last year’s total (see Table
B). (For full details of total federal R&D in FY 2006, please see
Congressional Action on R&D
in the FY 2006 Budget and its accompanying
preview, available on the AAAS R&D Web site).
Within federal
appropriations for R&D are R&D earmarks of unrequested,
congressionally designated performer-specific R&D projects contained
in legislative language or committee report language attached to appropriations
bills. These projects have been added to agencies’ requested budgets
as part of the annual give-and-take between Congress and the Executive
Branch over the size and shape of agencies’ budgets.
- R&D earmarks total $2.4 billion in FY 2006. Although these projects
amount to only 1.7 percent of total R&D, they are concentrated in
a few key agencies and programs (see Table
B). Five agencies (the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA; $331
million), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA; $317
million), the Department of Energy (DOE; $524 million); the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the Department of
Defense (DOD; $852 million) receive 94 percent of the total R&D
earmarks.
- FY 2006 earmarks are up 13 percent from $2.1 billion in FY 2005, and
are up 63 percent compared to 2003 (see Table
B and Figure 1). Within a record R&D investment of $134.8
billion in FY 2006, up just 1.7 percent, R&D earmarks once again
grow far faster than R&D spending as a whole. The increase is due
to an explosion in R&D earmarks in DOE, NASA, USDA, and NOAA, with
only DOD recording a drop in earmarking compared to last year.
Figure 1.
(click on image for PDF)
- In energy R&D, DOE biological research, extramural agricultural
research, and NOAA R&D, earmarks make up more than 1 out of every 5 R&D
dollars.
- The USDA earmarks total $331 million, up 38 percent from last year. These
include $165 million, up dramatically from the last few years, for nearly
250 itemized extramural research projects, mostly in the Special Research
Grants program, with another $86 million allocated in the Agricultural
Research Service (ARS) for intramural research projects. Congress earmarks
$72 million for intramural R&D facilities construction in FY 2006
for projects not in the agency budget request, offsetting these earmarks
with a reduction in funding for the one requested construction project
in Iowa. R&D earmarks
total 26 percent of all extramural R&D in the Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), making these a
significant drain on resources that might have gone to competitively
awarded research grants or formula-based research funding, and they
increase by nearly 12 percent even as the total portfolio declines slightly
in 2006.
- The NASA projects totaling $317 million are up nearly 50 percent from
last year for a new record. Although they make up a relatively small
2.8 percent of the total agency R&D portfolio, they are heavily
concentrated in key program areas. Earmarks make up one-third of total
R&D in Academic Programs, and smaller but significant percentages
in four other programs in earth sciences, aeronautics, space science,
and biological sciences. In a change from past practice, House and Senate
appropriators set aside earmarked funds in their draft appropriations
bills but did not itemize projects; the lists of projects appeared only
in the final NASA budget bill in November.
- The DOD budget contains $852 million R&D earmarks, down slightly from
$1 billion last year but still well above other years. The earmarks
are mostly small ($10 million or less) projects, but significantly most
are for research rather than development or R&D facilities construction,
squeezing basic research and applied research budgets. Earmarks for
“6.1” (basic research) programs total $57 million, or 4 percent of the
total; “6.2” (applied research) earmarks are $228 million, also 4 percent
of the total because of a large number of medical research projects;
and “6.3” earmarks are $319 million or 5 percent of the total. Earmarks
in the “6.4” or higher categories of DOD R&D are only $248 million,
a large dollar total but only 0.4 percent of the total portfolio. Earmarks
have an especially large impact on basic research because overall basic
research funding declines 2.9 percent in 2006 even as earmarks nearly
double, squeezing funding for core programs.
- DOE R&D earmarks nearly double to $524 million. The Office of
Science (OS) budget contains $130 million in R&D earmarks in FY
2006, up dramatically from $78 million last year even though the total
OS budget shrinks in 2006. All of these earmarks are in the Biological
and Environmental Research (BER) program; earmarks account for 22 percent
of the BER budget and leave core BER R&D programs with shrinking
resources. In DOE’s energy R&D, earmarks
eat up whatever increases there are for most energy programs and cut
deeply into core R&D programs. Energy R&D earmarks total $266
million in 2006, more than double the previous record from last year,
and make up 1 out of every 5 R&D dollars. But they are especially
concentrated in some areas, including biomass R&D where they make
up more than 50 percent of total program funds, hydrogen (27 percent),
and wind energy (33 percent), ratios far higher than in previous years.
As a result, there will be enormous cuts to competitively awarded R&D
grants in these areas.
- The NOAA
budget is heavily earmarked in 2006, with 28 percent of the R&D
portfolio going to congressional earmarks for a total of $184 million,
a $76 million increase from last year that dwarfs the $11 million increase
to the overall NOAA R&D portfolio and therefore squeezes core R&D
program funding drastically. Included in the 2006 appropriation is $51
million in earmarked new funds for fisheries and marine mammals R&D
solely for Alaska.
- Some agencies remain earmark-free. The National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) all remain earmark-free in FY
2006. Traditionally, NIH and NSF’s research accounts have been free
of earmarks, although in some years NSF construction projects are earmarked.
FY 2006 is the third year of appropriations for DHS; so far, Congress
has not earmarked R&D projects in DHS.
Definitions: What is an R&D Earmark?
For the purposes
of this analysis, R&D earmarks are defined as “congressionally designated
performer-specific R&D projects not included in agency budget requests.”
The earmarks appear in either legislative language contained in appropriations
bills, in which case they have the force of law, or appear in committee
report language accompanying appropriations bills, in which case they
are technically advisory. For all practical purposes, however, agencies
usually follow the instructions from Congress contained in committee
report language, including earmarks. When Congress designates a specific
performer or performers for a particular R&D project, these are
counted as earmarks; because AAAS definitions of R&D include investments
in R&D facilities construction, the earmarks in this analysis also
include funds provided to specific institutions for investments in R&D
major capital equipment, and also construction funds for specific R&D
facilities.
R&D earmarks
do not appear in federal agencies’ budget requests, which are released
at the beginning of the budget process in February and reflect agency
priorities. These budget requests contain detailed proposed distributions
of agency funds by mission, allocation mechanism, and often by performer.
Earmarks do not appear in agencies’ own budget requests but are added
to agencies’ budgets by Congress during the appropriations process.
Some projects not originally included in agency requests may be initiated
by congressional action in earlier appropriations cycles and may be
renewed at reduced funding levels in agencies’ requests; funds added
to specific performers by Congress above the amounts requested by the
agency are counted as earmarks.
These figures
include earmarks to all categories of R&D performers. While discussion
of the earmarks issue tends to center on earmarks to academic institutions,
this analysis also includes R&D earmarks to other categories of
performers, most prominently federal laboratories. While academic institutions
receive the bulk of the earmarks in Table A, federal laboratories, sometimes
located on university campuses, also receive earmarks as well as some
nonprofits and industrial firms.
The earmarks
counted in this analysis are a subset of R&D in the federal budget
as tracked by AAAS. Thus, the earmarks in this analysis do not include
non-R&D projects that may go to R&D performers, for example
educational or extension projects awarded to universities and colleges.
Some of these earmarks may come from the same budget accounts that fund
R&D earmarks. They also do not include construction funds for non-R&D
facilities, except when they are provided in R&D accounts.
Purpose of the AAAS Analysis
The analysis
is intended to provide timely and unbiased information for further analysis
and debate on the allocation of R&D resources in the federal budget
process, and the R&D Budget and Policy Program undertakes this analysis
to provide timely and relevant information for policymakers and members
of the science and engineering community who are concerned about methods
of allocating R&D resources. It attempts to provide additional information
to supplement existing AAAS coverage of R&D in the appropriations
process. The analysis is not a comprehensive inventory
of earmarks; nor can the analysis break out earmarks by recipient or
by state because of the difficulty in identifying and assigning locations
to multi-performer research consortia or earmarks in which the actual
performer is left intentionally vague. Also, because earmarks are in
the eye of the beholder and are ill-defined (unlike the standardized,
longstanding definitions for R&D used by AAAS and federal agencies)
this analysis relies on AAAS interpretations and judgment calls on a
project-by-project basis of what is or is not an R&D earmark.
This analysis
does not take a position on the relative merits of agency requests vs.
congressional earmarks, or of competitively awarded funds vs. earmarked
funds.
Conclusions
Although the
Bush Administration made restraining congressional earmarks a high priority
in its first term, this earmark-fighting zeal has dwindled to zero in
the second term. President Bush has never used his veto power, and has
signaled his willingness to accept whatever appropriations bills come
his way as long as they meet his overall budget targets. It now seems
clear that when budgets get tight, as they have because of the return
of record-breaking budget deficits, congressional appropriators make
it their first priority to secure earmarked funds to ensure that at
least some money goes to their districts, at the cost of dramatically
reducing competitively awarded funds. Although earmarked funds have
been increasing steadily over the past several decades by all accounts,
the dramatic explosions in R&D earmarks in 2005 and 2006 coincide
with flattening and even declining R&D budgets, meaning that earmarks
cut into competitive programs instead of adding to them.
With the fiscal
situation unlikely to get better in the FY 2007 budget, congressional
appropriators will have to square constituent demands for earmarked
funds against tight spending targets once again. With the Bush Administration
unlikely to expend political capital against earmarking, the push for
earmarking the R&D budget will not abate in the FY 2007 budget;
the only constraint appears to be the balance between earmarks and other
spending, which appears not to be much of a constraint at all.
(Other
AAAS R&D Funding Updates on the AAAS
R&D Web site provide detailed information on R&D in final
FY 2006 appropriations.)
- January 4, 2006
AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program
1200 New York Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 326-6607; -6600
AAAS R&D
web site: www.aaas.org/spp/rd
