AAAS Science & Technology Policy Forum 2006
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/07419050610692262 |
| Published date | 01 July 2006 |
| Pages | 16-18 |
| Date | 01 July 2006 |
| Author | G. Arthur Mihram |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science |
AAAS Science & Technology Policy
Forum 2006
G. Arthur Mihram
16 LIBRARY HITECH NEWS Number 6 2006, pp. 16-18, #Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 0741-9058, DOI 10.1108/07419050610692262
The 31st Annual Science &
Technology Policy Forum of the
American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS) was
held again in Washington, DC, this year
at the Washington Court Hotel on 20-21
April 2006.
Approximately 450 scientists and
representatives of industrial and
academic specialties attended the forum
this year. The forum, formerly the AAAS
Colloquium, is part of the AAAS's R&D
Budget and Policy Program, one of eight
Programs on Science and Policy,
including (e.g.) its Dialogue on Science,
Ethics, and Religion.
The AAAS published and distributed
to each registranta copy of AAAS Report
XXXI: Research & Development FY
2007, containing primarily preparations
by the AAAS's Budgetand Policy Staff.
For example, the forum's essentially
introductory presentation, by Kei
Koizumi, director of the AAAS's
Budget and Policy Program, appears in
this book, the paper attempting to
``predict'' governmental expen ditures of
R&D through the year 2011 budget. For
full-text onlineaccess or for ordering the
book, see end of this report.
Ommen's address
The AAAS's Board of Directors'
Chairman, Professor Gilbert S. Ommen
(University of Michigan: Internal
Medicine, Human Genetics, and Public
Health) presented the forum's
welcoming address. Though only 15
minutes in duration, Professor Ommen
moved quickly through a number of
policy-bearing issues.
Indeed, his remarks began to have a
bit of a calming effecton the participants
when he related that the current
expenditures of the Federal Government
on science and technology are being
limited as a result of the earlier
perceived need, dueto the projections of
Year 2001 to double the NSF's budget,
to provide more funding to the ``war on
terror''. He still chose to use the word
``investment'' to apply to expenditures
via the NSF, the NIST,the DOE, and the
program on mathematics and science
education, these four being the
dominating expenditures in science and
technology. He was particularly critical
of the manner in which the current
budgetary recommendation from the
executive branch has received very little
circulation (1,000 copies only) and had
been released during the Christmas
holiday period in December 2005.
He found inspiring a quotation for
Robert F. Kennedy: ``There are those
who look at things the way they are, and
[who] ask `Why?'; I [RFK] look at
things that never were, and ask `Why
not?'. Since Science is that human
activity devoted to the search for the
very explanation for (i.e. for the truth
about) some particular naturally
occurring phenomenon (cf. O.E.D.),
then the quotation, though perhaps
inspiring, probably reveals that
R. Kennedy discounted science in
favour of technology (= the application
of science). Unfortunately, the
emphasis on expenditures as
``investments'' does seem to favor
expenditures prompted by a desire to
gain some (preferably material) good
rather than prompted by a desire to
understand a natural phenomenon ±
even a social predicament ± before
budgetary money is allocated to
``correct'' a particular matter.
Marburger's address
John H. Marburger III, the Science
Advisor to the President, next gave the
Forum's Keynote Address, ostensibly
scheduled so as to provide information
on the President's current ranking of
science projects. He recalled the
American Competitiveness Initiative
(ACI) of the 1990s as a budgetary
algorithm for augmenting our national
trade, adding that the current budgetary
proposal (2006-2007) will add billions
of dollars to education nationally.
He asked the Forum for advice on
targeting better the ACI: ``Q: What does
science policy need today? A: Funding
boards, but with priorities.''
Historically, he connected Federal
science funding to Vannevar Bush's
1945 theme, ``The endless frontier,''
which has since been virtually imposed
on us: that the success of science and
technology in winning the Second
World War can be extended, with
continued funding, both through the
Cold War and beyond, noting that, in
the 2000s, the President has
significantly increased the budgets for
science and technology, and not just in
military and medical spending, thereby
ensuring a ``science-and-technology-
based'' economy.
Budget and policy for FY 2007
Mr Marburger had also noted the
work of the US Census Bureau in the
1990s and 2000s, recalling
Congressman Vernon Ehler's report,
Unlocking our Future: Toward a New
National Science Policy (Ehler, 1998).
Following was the first plenary
session: on ``R&D in fiscal year 2007'',
introduced by the AAAS's Kei
Koizumi (Ehler, 1998), but this was
spearheaded by ``The federal budget
landscape: a congressional
perspective'', the presentation of G.
William (Bill) Hoagland, director of
Budget and Appropriations within the
Office of the Senate's Majority Leader,
Doctor Bill Frist of Tennessee.
Though the forum's attention was
apparently to focus on the attitude of
ACI, Mr Hoagland began to set an even
more sincere attitude, first by noting
To continue reading
Request your trial