II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2217

To provide for continuation of the Federal research investment in a fiscally

sustainable way, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 25, 1998

Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. LIEBERMAN,

Mr. BURNS, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. GRAMM, and Mr. BREAUX) introduced

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To provide for continuation of the Federal research investment in a fiscally sustainable way, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Research In5 vestment Act’’.
2

•S 2217 IS

1 SEC. 2. GENERAL FINDINGS REGARDING FEDERAL INVEST2 MENT IN RESEARCH.

3 (a) VALUE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—The

4 Congress makes the following findings with respect to the

5 value of research and development to the United States:

6 (1) Federal investment in research has resulted

7 in the development of technology that saved lives in

8 the United States and around the world.

9 (2) Research and development investment

10 across all Federal agencies has been effective in cre11 ating technology that has enhanced the American

12 quality of life.

13 (3) The Federal investment in research and de14 velopment conducted or underwritten by both mili15 tary and civilian agencies has produced benefits that

16 have been felt in both the private and public sector.

17 (4) Discoveries across the spectrum of scientific

18 inquiry have the potential to raise the standard of

19 living and the quality of life for all Americans.

20 (5) Science, engineering, and technology play a

21 critical role in shaping the modern world.

22 (6) Studies show that about half of all United

23 States post-World War II economic growth is a di24 rect result of technical innovation; and science, engi25 neering, and technology contribute to the creation of

26 new goods and services, new jobs and new capital.
3

•S 2217 IS

1 (7) Technical innovation is the principal driving

2 force behind the long-term economic growth and in3 creased standards of living of the world’s modern in4 dustrial societies. Other nations are well aware of

5 the pivotal role of science, engineering, and tech6 nology, and they are seeking to exploit it wherever

7 possible to advance their own global competitiveness.

8 (b) STATUS OF THE FEDERAL INVESTMENT.—The

9 Congress makes the following findings with respect to the

10 status of the Federal Investment in research and develop11 ment activities:

12 (1) Federal investment of approximately 13 to

13 14 percent of the Federal discretionary budget in re14 search and development over the past 11 years has

15 resulted in a doubling of the nominal amount of

16 Federal funding.

17 (2) Fiscal realities now challenge Congress to

18 steer the Federal government’s role in science, engi19 neering, and technology in a manner that ensures a

20 prudent use of limited public resources. There is

21 both a long-term problem—addressing the ever-in22 creasing level of mandatory spending—and a near23 term challenge—apportioning a dwindling amount of

24 discretionary funding to an increasing range of tar25 gets in science, engineering, and technology. This
4

•S 2217 IS

1 confluence of increased national dependency on tech2 nology, increased targets of opportunity, and de3 creased fiscal flexibility has created a problem of na4 tional urgency. Many indicators show that more

5 funding for science, engineering, and technology is

6 needed but, even with increased funding, priorities

7 must be established among different programs. The

8 United States cannot afford the luxury of fully fund9 ing all deserving programs.

10 (3) Current projections of Federal research

11 funding show a downward trend.

12 SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REGARDING THE LINK BE13 TWEEN THE RESEARCH PROCESS AND USE14 FUL TECHNOLOGY.

15 The Congress makes the following findings:

16 (1) FLOW OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND

17 TECHNOLOGY.—The process of science, engineering,

18 and technology involves many steps. The present

19 Federal science, engineering, and technology struc20 ture reinforces the increasingly artificial distinctions

21 between basic and applied activities. The result too

22 often is a set of discrete programs that each support

23 a narrow phase of research or development and are

24 not coordinated with one another. The government

25 should maximize its investment by encouraging the
5

•S 2217 IS

1 progression of science, engineering, and technology

2 from the earliest stages of research up to a pre-com3 mercialization stage, through funding agencies and

4 vehicles appropriate for each stage. This creates a

5 flow of technology, subject to merit review at each

6 stage, so that promising technology is not lost in a

7 bureaucratic maze.

8 (2) EXCELLENCE IN THE AMERICAN RESEARCH

9 INFRASTRUCTURE.—Federal investment in science,

10 engineering, and technology programs must foster a

11 close relationship between research and education.

12 Investment in research at the university level creates

13 more than simply world-class research. It creates

14 world-class researchers as well. The Federal strategy

15 must continue to reflect this commitment to a strong

16 research infrastructure. Furthermore, the United

17 States must find ways to extend the excellence of its

18 university system to primary and secondary edu19 cational institutions and to better utilize the commu20 nity college system to prepare many students for vo21 cational opportunities in an increasingly technical

22 workplace.

23 (3) COMMITMENT TO A BROAD RANGE OF RE24 SEARCH INITIATIVES.—An increasingly common

25 theme in many recent technical breakthroughs has
6

•S 2217 IS

1 been the importance of revolutionary innovations

2 that were sparked by overlapping of research dis3 ciplines. The United States must continue to encour4 age this trend by providing and encouraging oppor5 tunities for interdisciplinary projects that foster col6 laboration among fields of research.

7 (4) PARTNERSHIPS AMONG INDUSTRY, UNIVER8 SITIES, AND FEDERAL LABORATORIES.—Each of

9 these contributors to the national science and tech10 nology delivery system has special talents and abili11 ties that complement the others. In addition, each

12 has a central mission that must provide their focus

13 and each has limited resources. The nation’s invest14 ment in science, engineering, and technology can be

15 optimized by seeking opportunities for leveraging the

16 resources and talents of these three major players

17 through partnerships that do not distort the mis18 sions of each partner. For that reason, Federal dol19 lars are wisely spent forming such partnerships.

20 SEC. 4. MAINTENANCE OF FEDERAL RESEARCH EFFORT;

21 GUIDING PRINCIPLES.

22 (a) MAINTAINING UNITED STATES LEADERSHIP IN

23 SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY.—It is im24 perative for the United States to nurture its superb re-
7

•S 2217 IS

1 sources in science, engineering, and technology carefully

2 in order to maintain its own globally competitive position.

3 (b) GUIDING PRINCIPLES.—Federal research and de4 velopment programs should be conducted in accordance

5 with the following guiding principles:

6 (1) GOOD SCIENCE.—Federal science, engineer7 ing, and technology programs include both knowl8 edge-driven science together with its applications,

9 and mission-driven, science-based requirements. In

10 general, both types of programs must be focused,

11 peer- and merit-reviewed, and not unnecessarily du12 plicative, although the details of these attributes

13 must vary with different program objectives.

14 (2) FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY.—The Congress

15 must exercise oversight to ensure that programs

16 funded with scarce Federal dollars are well man17 aged. The United States cannot tolerate waste of

18 money through inefficient management techniques,

19 whether by government agencies, by contractors, or

20 by Congress itself. Fiscal resources would be better

21 utilized if program and project funding levels were

22 predictable across several years to enable better

23 project planning; a benefit of such predictability

24 would be that agencies and Congress can better ex25 ercise oversight responsibilities through comparisons
8

•S 2217 IS

1 of a project’s and program’s progress against care2 fully planned milestones.

3 (3) PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS.—The United

4 States needs to make sure that government pro5 grams achieve their goals. As the Congress crafts

6 science, engineering, and technology legislation, it

7 must include a process for gauging program effec8 tiveness, selecting criteria based on sound scientific

9 judgment and avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy.

10 The Congress should also avoid the trap of measur11 ing the effectiveness of a broad science, engineering,

12 and technology program by passing judgment on in13 dividual projects. Lastly, the Congress must recog14 nize that a negative result in a well-conceived and

15 executed project or program may still be critically

16 important to the funding agency.

17 (4) CRITERIA FOR GOVERNMENT FUNDING.—

18 Program selection for Federal funding should re19 quire a long-term horizon, with specific relevance to

20 a Federal mission requirement, or with broad knowl21 edge-based goals. Additionally, government funding

22 should not compete with or displace the short-term,

23 market-driven, and typically more specific nature of

24 private-sector funding. Government funding should

25 be restricted to pre-competitive activities, leaving
9

•S 2217 IS

1 competitive activities solely for the private sector. As

2 a rule, the government should not invest in commer3 cial technology that is in the product development

4 stage, very close to the broad commercial market5 place, except to meet a specific agency goal. When

6 the government provides funding for any science, en7 gineering, and technology investment program, it

8 must take reasonable steps to ensure that the poten9 tial benefits derived from the program will accrue

10 broadly.

11 SEC. 5. POLICY STATEMENT.

12 (a) POLICY.—This Act is intended—

13 (1) to encourage, as an overall goal, the dou14 bling of the annual authorized amount of Federal

15 funding for basic scientific, medical, and pre-com16 petitive engineering research over the 12-year period

17 following the date of enactment of this Act;

18 (2) to set a minimum level of investment in

19 order to maintain the high priority that science, en20 gineering, and technology had previously been af21 forded in the Federal budget;

22 (3) to invest in the future of the United States

23 and the people of the United States by expanding

24 the research activities referred to in paragraph (1);
10

•S 2217 IS

1 (4) to enhance the quality of life for all people

2 of the United States; and

3 (5) to guarantee the leadership of the United

4 States in science, engineering, medicine, and tech5 nology.

6 (b) AGENCIES COVERED.—The agencies intended to

7 be covered by this Act are—

8 (1) the National Institutes of Health, within the

9 Department of Health and Human Services;

10 (2) the National Science Foundation;

11 (3) the National Institute for Standards and

12 Technology, within the Department of Commerce;

13 (4) the National Aeronautics and Space Admin14 istration;

15 (5) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad16 ministration, within the Department of Commerce;

17 (6) the Centers for Disease Control, within the

18 Department of Health and Human Services;

19 (7) the Department of Energy (to the extent

20 that it is not engaged in defense-related activities);

21 (8) the Department of Agriculture;

22 (9) the Department of Transportation;

23 (10) the Department of the Interior;

24 (11) the Department of Veterans Affairs;

25 (12) the Smithsonian Institution;
11

•S 2217 IS

1 (13) the Department of Education; and

2 (14) the Environmental Protection Agency (to

3 the extent that it is engaged in science, engineering,

4 and technology activities for basic scientific, medical,

5 or pre-competitive engineering research).

6 (c) HISTORICAL INVESTMENT TREND.—

7 (1) Over the past 20 years, the percentage of

8 the civilian discretionary budget allocated to re9 search and development efforts has increased stead10 ily from approximately 10 percent in 1980 to ap11 proximately 14 percent for fiscal year 1998. The in12 crease in Federal investment in civilian research and

13 development from fiscal years 1988 through 1998

14 resulted in an overall doubling of funding across the

15 major federal research and development agencies.

16 (2) The investment in civilian research and de17 velopment efforts for fiscal year 1998 is 2.11876

18 percent of the overall Federal budget.

19 (d) DAMAGE TO RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE.—A

20 continued trend of funding appropriations equal to or

21 lower than current budgetary levels will lead to permanent

22 damage to the United States research infrastructure. This

23 could threaten American dominance of high-technology in24 dustrial leadership.
12

•S 2217 IS

1 (e) INCREASE FUNDING.—In order to maintain and

2 enhance the economic strength of the United States in the

3 world market, funding levels for fundamental, scientific,

4 and pre-competitive engineering research should be in5 creased to equal approximately 2.6 percent of the total an6 nual budget.

7 (f) FUTURE FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS.—

8 (1) GOALS.—

9 (A) The long-term strategy for research

10 and development funding under this section

11 would be achieved by a steady 2.5 percent an12 nual increase above the rate of inflation

13 throughout a 12-year period.

14 (B) There is a minimum threshold below

15 which long-term harm to both the research in16 frastructure and economic strength of the

17 United States would be caused, therefore it

18 shall be the goal of the President and Congress

19 to prevent the total amount of Federally-funded

20 research and development from falling below

21 2.1 percent of the overall Federal budget at any

22 point in the budget process.

23 (2) INFLATION ASSUMPTION.—The authoriza24 tions contained in paragraph (3) assume that the

25 rate of inflation for each year will be 3 percent.
13

•S 2217 IS

1 (3) AUTHORIZATION.—Therea reautjorized to

2 be appropriated for civilian research and develop3 ment in the agencies listed in subsection (b)—

4 (A) $37,720,000,000 for fiscal year 1999;

5 (B) $39,790,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;

6 (C) $41,980,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;

7 (D) $42,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;

8 (E) $46,720,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;

9 (F) $49,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;

10 (G) $52,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;

11 (H) $54,870,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;

12 (I) $57,880,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;

13 (J) $61,070,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;

14 (K) $64,420,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;

15 and

16 (L) $67,970,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.

17 (g) CONFORMANCE WITH BUDGETARY CAPS.—Not18 withstanding any other provision of law, no funds may be

19 made available under this Act in a manner that does not

20 conform with the discretionary spending caps provided in

21 the most recently adopted concurrent resolution on the

22 budget or threatens the economic stability of the annual

23 budget.

24 (h) BALANCED RESEARCH PORTFOLIO.—Because of

25 the interdependent nature of the scientific and engineering
14

•S 2217 IS

1 disciplines, the aggregate funding levels authorized by the

2 section assume that the Federal research portfolio will be

3 well-balanced among the various scientific and engineering

4 disciplines.

5 SEC. 6. PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST.

6 The President of the United States shall, in coordina7 tion with the President’s annual budget request, include

8 a report that parallels Congress’ commitment to support

9 Federally-funded research and development by provid10 ing—

11 (1) a detailed summary of the total level of

12 funding for research and development programs

13 throughout all civilian agencies;

14 (2) a focused strategy that reflects the funding

15 projections of this Act for each future fiscal year

16 until 2010, including specific targets for each agency

17 that funds civilian research and development; and

18 (3) an analysis which details funding levels

19 across Federal agencies by methodology of funding,

20 including grant agreements, procurement contracts,

21 and cooperative agreements (within the meaning

22 given those terms in chapter 63 of title 31, United

23 States Code).
15

•S 2217 IS

1 SEC. 7. COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNTABILITY STUDY FOR

2 FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH

3 (a) STUDY.—The Director of the Office of Science

4 and Technology Policy, in consultation with the Director

5 of the Office of Management and Budget, shall enter into

6 agreement with the National Academy of Sciences for the

7 Academy to conduct a comprehensive study to develop

8 methods for evaluating Federally-funded research and de9 velopment programs. This study shall—

10 (1) recommend processes to determine an ac11 ceptable level of success for Federally-funded re12 search and development programs by—

13 (A) describing the research process in the

14 various scientific and engineering disciplines;

15 (B) describing in the different sciences

16 what measures and what criteria each commu17 nity uses to evaluate the success or failure of a

18 program, and on what time scales these meas19 ures are considered reliable—both for explor20 atory long-range work and for short-range

21 goals; and

22 (C) recommending how these measures

23 may be adapted for use by the Federal govern24 ment to evaluate Federally-funded research and

25 development programs;
16

•S 2217 IS

1 (2) assess the extent to which agencies incor2 porate independent merit-based review into the for3 mulation of the strategic plans of funding agencies

4 and if the quantity or quality of this type of input

5 is unsatisfactory;

6 (3) recommend mechanisms for identifying Fed7 erally-funded research and development programs

8 which are unsuccessful or unproductive;

9 (4) evaluate the extent to which independent,

10 merit-based evaluation of Federally-funded research

11 and development programs and projects achieves the

12 goal of eliminating unsuccessful or unproductive pro13 grams and projects; and

14 (5) investigate and report on the validity of

15 using quantitative performance goals for aspects of

16 programs which relate to administrative manage17 ment of the program and for which such goals would

18 be appropriate, including aspects related to—

19 (A) administrative burden on contractors

20 and recipients of financial assistance awards;

21 (B) administrative burdens on external

22 participants in independent, merit-based evalua23 tions;

24 (C) cost and schedule control for construc25 tion projects funded by the program;
17

•S 2217 IS

1 (D) the ratio of overhead costs of the pro2 gram relative to the amounts expended through

3 the program for equipment and direct funding

4 of research; and

5 (E) the timeliness of program responses to

6 requests for funding, participation, or equip7 ment use.

8 (b) ALTERNATIVE FORMS FOR PERFORMANCE

9 GOALS.—Not later than 6 months after transmitting the

10 report under subsection (a) to Congress, the Director of

11 the Office of Management and Budget, after public notice,

12 public comment, and approval by the Director of the Of13 fice of Science and Technology Policy and in consultation

14 with the National Science and Technology Council shall

15 promulgate one or more alternative forms for performance

16 goals under section 1115(b)(10)(B) of title 31, United

17 States Code, based on the recommendations of the study

18 under subsection (a) of this section. The head of each

19 agency containing a program activity that is a research

20 and development program may apply an alternative form

21 promulgated under this section for a performance goal to

22 such a program activity without further authorization by

23 the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

24 (c) STRATEGIC PLANS.—Not later than one year

25 after promulgation of the alternative performance goals in
18

•S 2217 IS

1 subsection (b) of this section, the head of each agency car2 rying out research and development activities, upon updat3 ing or revising a strategic plan under subsection 306(b)

4 of title 5, United States Code, shall describe the current

5 and future use of methods for determining an acceptable

6 level of success as recommended by the study under sub7 section (a).

8 (d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

9 (1) DIRECTOR.—The term ‘‘Director’’ means

10 the Director of the Office of Science and Technology

11 Policy.

12 (2) PROGRAM ACTIVITY.— The term ‘‘program

13 activity’’ has the meaning given that term by section

14 1115(f)(6) of title 31, United States Code.

15 (3) INDEPENDENT MERIT-BASED EVALUA16 TION.—The term ‘‘independent merit-based evalua17 tion’’ means review of the scientific or technical

18 quality of research or development, conducted by ex19 perts who are chosen for their knowledge of sci20 entific and technical fields relevant to the evaluation

21 and who—

22 (A) in the case of the review of a program

23 activity, do not derive long-term support from

24 the program activity; or
19

•S 2217 IS

1 (B) in the case of the review of a project

2 proposal, are not seeking funds in competition

3 with the proposal.

4 (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

5 are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the study

6 required by subsection (a) $600,000 for the 18-month pe7 riod beginning October 1, 1998.

8 SEC. 8. EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

9 FOR FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH.

10 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 11 of title 31, United

11 States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the

12 following:

13 ‘‘§ 1120. Accountability for research and develop14 ment programs

15 ‘‘(a) IDENTIFICATION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PRO16 GRAMS.—Based upon program performance reports for

17 each fiscal year submitted to the President under section

18 1116, the Director of the Office of Management and

19 Budget shall identify the civilian research and develop20 ment program activities, or components thereof, which do

21 not meet an acceptable level of success as defined in the

22 study in section 7(a). In carrying out this subsection, the

23 Director and the agency for which the programs are being

24 evaluated may disaggregate program activities to the ex25 tent necessary to increase the effectiveness of the assess-
20

•S 2217 IS

1 ment. Not later than 30 days after the submission of the

2 reports under section 1116, the Director shall furnish a

3 copy of a report listing the program activities or compo4 nent identified under this subsection to the President and

5 the Congress.

6 ‘‘(b) TERMINATION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PROGRAM IF

7 NO IMPROVEMENT SHOWN.—

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para9 graph (2), for each program activity or component

10 that is identified by the Director under subsection

11 (a) as being below the acceptable level of success for

12 2 fiscal years in a row, the head of the agency shall

13 no later than 30 days after the Director submits the

14 second report so identifying the program, submit to

15 the appropriate congressional committees of jurisdic16 tion a concise statement of the steps needed to ter17 minate the program activity or component, together

18 with the legislation needed to put the plan into ef19 fect.

20 ‘‘(2) EXCEPTION.—A program subject to termi21 nation under paragraph (1) shall not be terminated

22 under that paragraph if the Director of the Office

23 of Science and Technology Policy, the Director of

24 the Office of Management and Budget, and the head

25 of the department or agency responsible for the pro-
21

•S 2217 IS

1 gram determine that the program should be contin2 ued. Each time after a program continued under

3 this paragraph is identified in a subsequent annual

4 report, a statement of termination shall be submit5 ted under paragraph (1), unless the Directors renew

6 their joint determination under the preceding sen7 tence.

8 ‘‘(3) REPORT.—The Director shall explain the

9 rationale for not terminating any program continued

10 under paragraph (2) in a written report submitted

11 to the President and the Congress within 30 days

12 after making the determination to continue the pro13 gram.

14 ‘‘(c) TREATMENT OF TERMINATED PROGRAM

15 FUNDS.—A statement of termination under subsection

16 (b)(1) shall recommend a disposition for any funds appro17 priated or obligated to a program activity or component

18 terminated under subsection (b) that remain unexpended

19 and unobligated upon its termination. Nothing in this sub20 section shall be construed to modify any requirement re21 garding the reprogramming or transfer of funds author22 ized or appropriated for a terminated program activity or

23 component.
22

•S 2217 IS

1 ‘‘(d) DIRECTOR DEFINED.—For purposes of this sec2 tion, the term ‘Director’ means the Director of the Office

3 of Management and Budget.’’.

4 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

5 (1) The chapter analysis for chapter 11 of title

6 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at

7 the end thereof the following:

‘‘1120. Accountability for research and development programs’’.

8 (2) Section 1115(f) of title 31, United States

9 Code, is amended by striking ‘‘through 1119,’’ and

10 inserting ‘‘through 1120’’.

Æ