Running the Numbers On R&D Earmarks

Colleges and universities received close to $2.25 billion from Congressional earmarks this year according to a new study released this week by The Chronicle of Higher Education. According to the report, legislators designated money to more than 2,300 projects at 920 institutions, a 25 percent increase in the number of colleges and universities receiving money in 2003. A large chunk, $1.6 billion of it, will go towards scientific research at some 500 institutions.

Academic earmarks are just one way to bankroll scientific research. The American Association for the Advancement of Science found almost $4.5 billion worth of R&D earmarks for Federal agencies in the 2008 appropriations bill. Sans the Department of Defense, congressional members designated $939 million towards specific R&D projects, much of these earmarks falling to the Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health remained earmark-free, relying on a competitive, peer-reviewed method for distributing funds.

The AAAS analysis, released in January, found R&D earmarks concentrated in certain areas of the country, with the top ten states receiving 44 percent of all the pork funds. The report indicates that these ten are generally the most populous states and are represented by influential appropriators.

The AAAS also found appropriators added $893 million in non-defense R&D earmarks while adding only $786 million to the President’s R&D budget. In other words, legislative appropriators cut the President’s 2008 budget request to make room for earmarks–although Congress did give some R&D programs more than what was requested.

Because this is the first year Congress is required to identify the sponsor of an earmark, researchers at The Chronicle were able to see just how pork is distributed and by whom. Their findings: earmark distribution is largely bipartisan and linked to the legislator’s seniority, especially within appropriations subcommittees. While subcommittee chairpersons and ranking members make up less than one-tenth of Congress, the report finds they were responsible for approximately half of the academic earmarks in 2008.

Mention congressional earmarks and you are bound to hear praise, condemnation, and everything in between. Here is a quick look at varying perspectives on the issue as it regards scientific research:

• The Chronicle report also uncovers a “dirty little secret”: While college officials complain earmarks undermine peer-reviewed grants, they pursue them in private. How about giving up earmarks voluntarily? Not any time soon. In the 1980s, the Association of American Universities asked its members the same question, but their efforts to curb the practice failed as most schools continued to receive earmarks anyway.
• Dan Greenberg, writing on the The Chronicle’s Brainstorm blog, defends earmarks, arguing that a peer-reviewed competitive appropriations method creates a world of “haves and have-nots” among research universities. He says universities with the best capabilities win out in a peer-review process and that earmarks have helped level the field and improve scientific resources across the country.
• Henry Kelly at Scientist & Engineers for America believes most earmarks are used for good quality research but points out how the previous year’s earmark amounts are not included in the President’s “baseline budget.” This sleight-of-hand accounting creates an illusion of increased funding in the President’s budget request, while in reality they are below the previous year’s earmarked budget.
• Critics who spoke with The Chronicle argue that earmarks stifle competition necessary to foster continued U.S. leadership in science. Reporters talked with Dr. James Savage at the University of Virginia, whose work on earmarks suggests that universities which secure noncompetitive grants actually drop in the rankings for total research money

The future of earmarks is unknown. The current presidential candidates support a moratorium on earmarks but face a messy battle with Congress, which has rejected such measures in the past.

For in-depth looks at the numbers by agency, see the AAAS data; to search for specific earmarks by state and institution, search The Chronicle’s database.

Tags: funding

Comments on this article

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.