Hiring freeze, agency reorganizations, and budget blueprint cause concern in scientific community<\/p>\n
NSF funding by directorate, science in the national interest, reauthorizing bills for science agencies<\/p>\n
Caucus grows, Republican climate resolution introduced, \u201cClimate Science Special Report\u201d advances<\/p>\n
Climate Science Day, NSF hearings, bumble bee listed as endangered, delayed EPA rules, and more<\/p>\n
House and Senate hearings, letter to EPA administrator<\/p>\n
Congressional Review Act resolutions passed, regulatory reform bills in Senate, other legislation of interest<\/p>\n
Upcoming meetings and opportunities for public comment<\/p>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n On Monday, March 13, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled \u201cComprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch<\/a>\u201d directing the director of the Office of Management and Budget \u201cto propose a plan to reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies.\u201d That order, combined with the president\u2019s previously announced federal hiring freeze<\/a>, and reinforced by the president\u2019s budget \u201cblueprint\u201d for fiscal year 2018, \u201cAmerica First: A Budget Blueprint To Make America Great Again<\/a>,\u201d released Thursday, March 16, hammers home the administration\u2019s aggressive agenda to reduce the size and role of the federal government. The budget is viewed as \u201cdead on arrival\u201d in Congress.<\/p>\n First-year administration budgets are often called a \u201cblueprint\u201d or \u201cskinny budget,\u201d providing an overview of the president\u2019s budget priorities as the new administration assembles its team and gains expertise on the federal budget intricacies. The president\u2019s blueprint focuses only on federal discretionary spending, ignoring the much larger non-discretionary side of the budget which constitutes approximately 70 percent of federal spending. It has also been criticized for lacking baseline figures, failing to disclose economic assumptions, or address the budget deficit. A more detailed budget proposal is expected in May.<\/p>\n The president\u2019s fiscal year 2018 budget proposes an increase in defense spending by $54 billion with corresponding cuts to discretionary spending. It would make considerable cuts to essentially all federal non-defense discretionary spending, with some of the most significant proposed cuts for science agencies and programs. Many of those agencies and programs are prized by Members of Congress and their constituents, such as the Appalachian Regional Commission<\/a>, the National Endowment for the Arts<\/a>, and the $73 million national Sea Grant program<\/a>.<\/p>\n Like all presidential budget proposals, a first-year blueprint is subject to change as it is taken up by Congress, and this one more so than in past years. Representative Don Young (R-AK), senior member of the House Natural Resources Committee, commented, \u201cThis budget isn\u2019t going anywhere. The president has an obligation to propose a budget, but it\u2019s Congress\u2019 responsibility to write the budget and set spending.\u201d<\/p>\n Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), a leading member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, noted, \u201cWe will not balance the budget by cutting discretionary spending, which is only 31 percent of spending and is already under control because of earlier budget acts.\u201d<\/p>\n Predictably, many in Congress have voiced concern about the president\u2019s budget priorities. Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Energy and Natural Resources chairman, and Maize Hirono (D-HI) organized a bipartisan letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney<\/a>, signed by the six senators representing Alaska, Maine, and Hawaii, opposing the president\u2019s budget cut to the NOAA Sea Grant program and the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service<\/a>.<\/p>\n Chair of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee Lamar Smith (R-TX) supports the budget, \u201cToday President Trump took the first step in rebalancing and reprioritizing the federal budget. For far too long, vital programs have fallen by the wayside while climate funding continues to escalate. Hard decisions have to be made to better protect American taxpayers. This new budget continues to fund priority basic research that will enable policy makers to make informed decisions based on sound science.\u201d<\/p>\n Observers have also noted that the president\u2019s budget blueprint shows a lack of influence of the agency secretaries. On arriving at Interior, Secretary Zinke promised to fight against a suggested 10 percent budget cut. The president\u2019s blueprint targets Interior for a 12 percent cut. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt had sought a $7 billion budget, but will get only $5.7 billion if Congress adopts President Trump\u2019s blueprint. In confirmation hearings, Pruitt voiced support for the Chesapeake Bay Restoration Program<\/a> only to see it targeted for elimination in the blueprint. Zinke is a confirmed advocate for the Land and Water Conservation Fund<\/a>, which is facing a cutback from its current $900 million authorization to only $330 million.<\/p>\n ESA has created a Budget Tracker<\/a> for its members that is monitoring the federal appropriations process for Fiscal Year 2018 with detailed information. Some agencies of particular interest to the ESA community include the EPA, which is facing a 31 percent budget cut, Commerce (16 percent, primarily from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration budget), Interior (12.5 percent), Agriculture (21 percent), and the Department of Energy Office of Science (17 percent).<\/p>\n Details for the National Science Foundation<\/a> (NSF) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention<\/a> (CDC), among other federal science agencies, are not included in the budget. It does, however, identify a $500 million block grant, carved out of the CDC\u2019s budget, to \u201cincrease state flexibility and focus on the leading public health challenges to each state.\u201d<\/p>\n Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology released its \u201cViews and Estimates\u201d letter for FY 2018<\/a> on March 10, 2017.\u00a0 This official letter is an important piece of the larger federal budget puzzle that is pieced together each year by Congress. The Science Committee oversees agency R&D budgets totaling over $42 billion. While the committee does not appropriate funds, it is very influential in how the appropriators set federal agency spending levels each year because they can only fund what is legislated in authorizing bills. The letter follows the committee\u2019s continued focus on reducing regulatory authority of the federal agencies and promoting scientific research in the national interest while reforming \u201cfederal science agency programs to increase the impact of taxpayer-funded research.\u201d<\/p>\n However, exactly how much of the Science Committee\u2019s plans will actually go into effect in the FY 2018 federal budget is uncertain, and\u00a0 the FY 2018 budget process is just beginning. The president released his FY 2018 skinny budget, which Congress has labeled \u201cdead on arrival\u201d due to its extreme budget cuts for agencies.\u00a0 The Senate will release its version of the 12 appropriations bills, as will the House. The bills will be worked out during the conference process. Once the bills are finalized and move out of conference, it is up to the president to sign the appropriations bills into law.<\/p>\n The letter says the committee expects this year to reauthorize the National Science Foundation, NASA, the Department of Energy\u2019s Office of Science, National Institute of Standards and Technology, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research data, and weather programs, among others. The committee also states that it seeks \u201cto increase support for basic research in the physical sciences.\u201d<\/p>\n If the committee is successful in advancing its legislative agenda to authorize the agencies, NSF research funding would be appropriated at the directorate level with 70 percent of the research funding allocated to Biological Directorate, Mathematical and Physical Science Directorate, the Computer and Information Science and Engineering Directorate, and the Engineering Directorate. Starkly missing from the list are the Geosciences Directorate and the Social and Behavioral Science Directorate. The letter also seeks to ensure that federally-funded research conducted through NSF is in the national interest.<\/p>\n ESA and the larger scientific community strongly oppose funding by directorate. NSF\u2019s research plan is informed by decadal studies and input from the scientific community. Efforts to fund by directorate would politicize NSF\u2019s research. In previous years, the committee has unsuccessfully sought to fund NSF by directorate. However, with a new administration and Congress, the odds of Congress successfully funding NSF by directorate increase.<\/p>\n In the letter, the Department of Energy Office of Science would allocate funding for national labs by basic research programs with an offset of reduced funding for the Biological and Environmental Sciences, and it would prioritize Basic Energy Sciences, Advanced Computing Sciences, and Fusion Energy Sciences. Authorized funding for NOAA would be slated for weather research and observation by reducing NOAA climate change programs and satellite systems.<\/p>\n NASA, NSF, NOAA, NIST, DOE, EPA, and Interior\u2019s USGS all contribute to the $2 billion of spending for the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).\u00a0 After a full assessment of a government-wide review of climate change research, the Science Committee would only authorize funds for the USGCRP if the new administration found the research useful or non-duplicative of other federally-funded research.<\/p>\n Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n The Climate Solutions Caucus, a bipartisan group in the House of Representatives that aims to address the challenges, causes, and impacts of the changing climate, is showing renewed vigor in the 115th<\/span>\u00a0Congress. Founded in the 114th<\/span>\u00a0Congress by Florida Representatives Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) and Ted Deutch (D-FL), the caucus has seen an influx of new members, bringing their number to 30, evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. \u00a0It is sometimes called the \u201cNoah\u2019s Ark\u201d caucus as it adds members in bipartisan pairs.<\/p>\n Republican Representative Daryl Issa (R-CA), formerly identified as a prominent \u201cclimate denier,\u201d joined on March 1, along with his Democratic Southern California colleague Representative Juan Vargas (D-CA). In a statement announcing his caucus membership, Issa said, \u201cFiscal responsibility and good stewardship of our natural resources don\u2019t have to be mutually exclusive.\u201d He added, \u201cI\u2019m pleased to join the Climate Solutions Caucus as a bipartisan opportunity for collaboration and also for its focus on economically viable solutions.\u201d<\/p>\n Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY) joined the caucus on January 23 and on March 13 introduced H.Res.195<\/a>, \u201cExpressing the commitment of the House of Representatives to conservative environmental stewardship,\u201d leading a group of 16 Republican cosponsors. The resolution emphasizes that \u201cit is a conservative principle to protect, conserve, and be good stewards of our environment.\u201d Stefanik was an original cosponsor of an identical resolution, H.Res.424<\/a>, introduced by Representative Christopher Gibson (R-NY) in the 114th<\/sup> Congress.<\/p>\n In floor remarks on the introduction of the resolution, Stefanik noted, \u201cClean energy innovation is key to addressing the serious issue of climate change. This resolution brings together the priority of addressing the risks of climate change with the importance of protecting and creating American jobs. Innovation and clean energy are key to solving both. New York\u2019s 21st district is the proud home of the Adirondacks and we understand that protecting our environment plays an important role in promoting economic growth and opportunity. No matter what side of the aisle you\u2019re on, we all have a significant responsibility to protect our environment from avoidable damage.\u201d<\/p>\n The resolution specifically refers to the \u201c2014 Quadrennial Defense Review,\u201d which states that the effects of a changing climate are \u201cthreat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions.\u201d<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine<\/a> (NAS), on March 14 released its \u201cReview of the Draft Climate Science Special Report<\/a>.\u201d The NAS review praised the Climate Science Special Report (CSSR) authors \u201cfor producing an impressive, timely, and generally well-written draft report\u201d and was \u201cimpressed with the breadth, accuracy, and rigor of the draft CSSR.\u201d \u00a0The CSSR was released by the U.S. Global Change Research Program<\/a> (USGCRP) on December 22, 2016, but it has now been removed from the program\u2019s website.<\/p>\n Thomas Lovejoy, of George Mason University and a leading conservation biologist, commented, \u201cThe National Academy of Science\u2019s review of the U.S. Global Change Research Program\u2019s Special Report not surprisingly reaffirms the basic science of climate change. Indeed every national academy in the world has concluded climate change is real and a serious threat to human well-being.\u201d<\/p>\n The Climate Science Special Report is intended to help support the USGCRP\u2019s quadrennial development of the National Climate Assessment<\/a>, legislatively mandated by the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The last National Climate Assessment was published in 2014 with a new assessment, currently under development, due in 2018.<\/p>\n Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n ESA News:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n ESA endorses the March for Science House Science, Space and Technology Committee holds hearings<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n On March 9, NSF Director France C\u00f3rdova testified before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology\u2019s Subcommittee on Research and Technology at the first of two hearings on NSF. The focus of the first hearing was overview and oversight. NSF Inspector General Allison Lerner also testified. The second hearing, \u201cNational Science Foundation Part II: Future Opportunities and Challenges for Science,\u201d was held on March 21.<\/strong> Witnesses included Dr. Joan Ferrini-Mundy<\/a>, NSF acting chief operating officer, and Dr. Maria Zuber<\/a>, chair, National Science Board, among others.<\/p>\n Two upcoming full committee hearings are scheduled for next week: Prioritizing Basic Research at the Department of Energy on March 28 and Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method<\/a> on March 29.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Nomination hearing for Agriculture secretary March 23<\/a><\/strong> FWS lists rusty patched bumble bee on endangered species list<\/a><\/strong> EPA delays effective dates of 5 rules<\/a><\/strong> Federal dollars no longer fund the majority of US basic research<\/a><\/strong> National Park Service visitation sets record<\/a><\/strong> \u00a0<\/span> Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n Senate Environment and Public Works hearing on invasive species House Natural Resources Committee hearing on marine monuments Senator urges Pruitt to continue climate work Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n Congress has passed two more joint resolutions to overturn Obama-era regulations with a simple majority using the Congressional Review Act. H.J.Res.57<\/a>, passed on March 9, provides for congressional disapproval of a Department of Education rule relating to accountability and State plans under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This rule addressed accountability ratings such as school ratings and indicators of school quality besides test scores. H.J.Res.69<\/a>, passed on March 21, provides for congressional disapproval of a Fish and Wildlife Service rule on the take of wildlife on national wildlife refuges in Alaska. This rule limited how certain predatory animals could be killed and gave the government more control over managing animal populations. The joint resolutions now go to the president. Once signed, they will undo these two rules.<\/p>\n Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) introduced a package of four regulatory reform bills on March 8. These bills address various aspects of the federal rulemaking process and seek to improve transparency and accountability.<\/p>\n Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n NASA Advisory Council:<\/strong><\/p>\n Technology, Innovation, and Engineering Committee<\/a><\/strong> (March 28) DOI \u2013 Invasive Species Advisory Committee<\/a><\/strong> (March 29)<\/p>\n DOE \u2013 Environmental Management Advisory Board<\/a><\/strong> (April 4)<\/p>\nBudget Blueprint Slashes Non-Defense Discretionary Budgets<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nHouse Science Committee Seeks to Prioritize Basic Physical Sciences Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nClimate Solutions Caucus Alive and Well<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n<\/a>Quick Reads<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n<\/strong>ESA has joined\u00a0over 28 organizations and scientific societies in supporting the mission of the March for Science<\/a> to publicly communicate science as a pillar of human freedom and prosperity.\u00a0The March rally will be held in Washington, D.C., 22 April on the National Mall with satellite activities scheduled at hundreds of locations throughout the United States and the world over. Read ESA\u2019s\u00a0announcement<\/a><\/strong>, and\u00a0RSVP<\/a> if you plan on participating in the March for Science<\/strong> in Washington, D.C. or in another city.<\/p>\n
\nScientists visit lawmakers to discuss our changing climate
\n<\/strong>Jeff Dukes, director, Purdue Climate Change Research Center and\u00a0Blecher Chair for Environmental Sustainability professor, represented ESA for Climate Science Day 2017. Dukes met with Indiana lawmakers to discuss the impacts of a changing climate and what it means for Indiana citizens. This annual event is a partnership of over ten scientific societies and serves as an outreach event to Congress, bringing over 25 scientists to DC for over sixty meetings with lawmakers.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>Other News:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n
\n<\/a>The hearing for Sonny Perdue, secretary of Agriculture nominee, began March 23 at 10am in the Senate Agriculture Committee.<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>After a delay of the effective date as a result of the January memorandum from the new administration, the final rule listing the rusty patched bumble bee as endangered is effective as of March 21.<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>The EPA is delaying the effective dates of five regulations beyond the delay ordered by the presidential memorandum. The rules, which would have taken effect on March 21, are now delayed until May 22.<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>For the first time since World War II, federal funding no longer funds the majority of basic research in the US \u2013 data show 44% in 2015.<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>For the third year in a row, 2016 visitation to National Parks set a new record. NPS units recorded almost 331 million recreation visits, exceeding 2015 visitation by 23.7 million visits.<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>Congressional Updates<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n<\/strong>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, led by Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY), held a hearing on March 15 titled \u201cExamining Innovative Solutions to Control Invasive Species and Promote Wildlife Conservation<\/a>.\u201d Witnesses included individuals from the Department of the Interior, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, the World Wildlife Fund, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>On March 15, the House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Power, and Oceans held a hearing titled \u201cExamining the Creation and Management of Marine Monuments and Sanctuaries<\/a>.\u201d Majority witnesses commented on the perceived overreach of the Obama administration\u2019s designation of marine monuments, and minority witness testimony discussed the many ecosystem benefits and benefits to people that come with marine reserves.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>On March 13, Senator Tom Carper (D-DE), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, sent a letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt<\/a> urging him to not to repeal critical science-based regulations and standards aimed at addressing climate change. In the letter, Carper also calls on Pruitt to not ignore the reality of climate change or the science supporting it.<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>Legislative Updates<\/strong><\/h2>\n
More Congressional Review Act resolutions pass Congress<\/h3>\n
Regulatory reform bills introduced in Senate<\/h3>\n
\n
<\/h3>\n
Additional legislation introduced in the Senate<\/h3>\n
\n
Legislation introduced in the House<\/h3>\n
\n
\nFrom the Federal Register:<\/h2>\n
Public Meetings:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
\nScience Committee<\/a><\/strong> (April 12-13)<\/p>\n