It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Sciencemag
Under the request, just four agencies would see increases in basic research spending. (There are two caveats. First, the comparisons are with the 2016 funding levels; the final 2017 budget was enacted in early May, too late for inclusion in the president’s request. Second, these numbers are smaller than the agency’s overall research budget because of definitional issues.)
The military’s basic science account would get a 6%, $117 million boost to $2.24 billion. The Department of Defense is a major funding of academic basic research in mathematics, computer science, and engineering. (When compared with actual 2017 spending, however, it appears the 2018 request represents a 1.7% cut from the $2.28 billion the military is expected to spend on basic research this year.)
* Basic science at NASA would grow by 3%, or $100 million, to $3.71 billion.
* The Smithsonian Institution would get a 4%, or $8 million, boost to $226 million.
* The Department of Veterans Affairs would get a 1%, or $4 million jump to $394 million.
Other agencies would see cuts of between 11% and 19%. Some highlights:
* HHS, the parent agency of NIH, would lose $3.1 billion, a 19% drop to $12.8 billion. HHS is the nation’s single largest under of basic science, primarily in the biomedical arena.
* DOE’s spending would drop by $690 million, or 15%, to about $4 billion. DOE is the nation’s largest funder of basic research in the physical sciences.
* At NSF, basic science would fall by $620 million, or 13%, to $4.3 billion. NSF is a major funding of basic research outside of biomedical science.
* Department of Agriculture spending would fall by $121 million, or 11%, to $952 million.
SciAm
Health and environmental research programmes would see a 46% cut, to US$397 million. The biggest reductions would come from clean-air and climate-change research programmes, whose overall funding would drop from $249 million to $135 million. Science and technology programmes targeted at clean water, land preservation, ecosystems and healthy communities would all see their budgets slashed by tens of millions of dollars.
The budget would eliminate support for the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay restoration initiatives, and cut programmes to help states and Native American tribes tackle pollution by more than 23% to $2.7 billion. Such efforts have been popular among lawmakers in Congress
I'm gonna let you in on something. It doesn't matter who's in power.
Also, one can hardly put it on Trump that the relations with Russia is what it is.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DupontDeux
Also, one can hardly put it on Trump that the relations with Russia is what it is.
People like you, 'can hardly blame Trump' for that?
When you have the Media and Establishment (both Democrat and Republicans) pushing the Russian Collusion hoax, they have tied Trump's hands and feet when it comes to improving relations with Russia.