Basic research and Clinton's Technology Plan

Abstract

References made by the Clinton administration to a National Technology Policy coupled with talk of technology transfer, manufacturing consortiums, and benchmarking have made many scientists uneasy about the security of basic research funding under the new regime. Adding to this uncertainty have been the efforts by the Senate and the House in both the 102nd and 103rd sessions of Congress to pass a Competitiveness Bill that includes a large increase in funding for commercialization programs administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce.The proposed large increase in R&D funding for the National Institute of Standards and Technology would probably mean flat funding or cuts for the R&D budgets of most other federally funded research programs (reminiscent of fiscal year 1993). Despite these unsubtle messages that applied research and planned development will be favored over fundamental scientific research, both George Brown (D‐Calif.), chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, and Jack Gibbons, the president's new science and technology advisor, stated on February 23 that none of their proposed programs are in any way meant to detract from the country's basic scientific research efforts.