Isn't there a difference between budgeting for R&D and budgeting for
other scientific research? What about fields of science where there
isn't product development going on?
When you have a president who does not believe in evoloution, how can
you believe that he has any respect for science? Anyways, when you believe that global warming is a good thing, then what kind or worldview can you expect?
As a practicing scientist I have the following comments:
1) The administration is stacking the deck in science advisory
panels--removing scientists such as Elizabeth Blackburn who do not
agree with the administration's positions on issues like stem cell
2) The right wing is going on a witch hunt forcing NIH program
administrators to warn scientists not to include words like
homosexual, condom, or prostitute in their grants...a neat trick for
3) Funding levels in all NIH agencies have decreased from the 20
percentile in the late 90s to 12-15% today. This makes it exceedingly
difficult for young researchers like me to get funded. Signs are
pointing to continued difficulty.
The fact is that the present administration has persisted in gradually depleting the NIH funding for basic research in ALL fields except for bioterrorism. This has been most extreme for institutions such as the National Institute of Child Health and Development which sponsors most of the research into childhood disorders and birth defects.