[PEN-L:5153] Follow-up re NSF Funding Crisis

[dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx (Doug Henwood)]

>From another list - Doug Henwood


>Please feel free to scroll to mid section of this post where action
>directives can be found.  APA has developed a letter that can be used as
>a format for your own letter, should you desire to forward one.  There
>are also other suggestions noted that might also be fairly simply to
>follow.
>
>Tammy Mann, Ph.D.
>SPSSI Fellow
>202-336-6068
>txm.apa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>*********Forwarded Message Follows
>*****************************************
>             American Psychological Association
>                  Science Advocate Network
>
>
>            !!!!! LEGISLATIVE ACTION ALERT !!!!!
>
>     House Budget Resolution Targets Social, Behavioral
>                and Economic Sciences at NSF
>
>The House and Senate Budget Committees approved the spending
>blueprint for FY 1996 last week.  This budget resolution
>determines the size of the federal budget for FY 1996, sets
>out spending priorities and provides guidance to the House and
>Senate Appropriations committees on how the federal budget
>should be allocated.  The House and Senate budget resolutions
>are accompanied by report language that goes into more detail
>on the fiscal assumptions made by the Committees in arriving
>at the recommended budget numbers.
>
>Included in the House Budget report language is the following
>statement regarding the recommendations for NSF: "This
>proposal assumes that while science and technology must
>contribute to the immediate fiscal reality, they must also
>provide for the opportunities that must be developed in the
>future.  In order for the technological revolution to
>continue, a strong, fundamental science is needed.  Therefore,
>the proposal assumes that basic research should be
>prioritized.  For instance, NSF CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND RELATED
>ACTIVITIES WITH THE EXCLUSION OF SOCIAL, BEHAVIORAL AND
>ECONOMIC STUDIES [capitals added] and the critical
>technologies institute, can be provided at their current
>levels plus three percent growth.  No reductions are assumed
>to NSF basic research in the physical sciences.  Education and
>Human Resources can be maintained and Academic Research
>Infrastructure is assumed at President Clinton's requested
>level."
>
>        Rep. Robert Walker Throws Fuel on the Flames
>
>This disturbing language from the House Budget Committee was
>followed by statements from Rep. Robert Walker (R-PA) at a
>news conference on May 11, where he was quoted as saying that
>the "social, behavioral and economic STUDIES" [capitals added]
>at NSF were fields that NSF had "wandered into . . .[to be]
>politically correct."  Since Rep. Walker is Chair of the House
>Science Committee that authorizes NSF, is a top Republican on
>the House Budget Committee, and part of the House Republican
>leadership -- his remarks were taken very seriously concerning
>House Republican plans for behavioral and social science at
>NSF.
>
>                      *****************
>                      * APA Mobilizes *
>                      *****************
>
>
>In immediate response to these developments, APA has done the
>following:
>
>
>      --- SENT THE FOLLOWING LETTER TO REP. WALKER ---
>
>
>The Honorable Robert S. Walker
>Chair
>House Science Committee
>2320 Rayburn House Office Bldg.
>Washington, DC 20515-6301
>
>Dear Mr. Chairman:
>
>I am writing on behalf of the American Psychological
>Association (APA), a scientific and professional organization
>of 132,000 psychologists, to object to your characterization
>of the behavioral and social sciences at the National Science
>Foundation (NSF).  In the May 12 Washington Post you were
>quoted as saying that the "social, behavioral and economic
>studies" (italics added) at NSF were fields that NSF had
>"wandered into . . .[to be] politically correct."  I would
>like to assure you that the behavioral and social sciences at
>NSF were not inadvertent additions meant to satisfy someone's
>notion of "political correctness."
>
>NSF support for basic research in the behavioral and social
>sciences is long-standing, and its importance to the
>scientific knowledge base has long been recognized by the
>wider scientific community that supported the creation of SBE.
>The Social, Behavioral and Economic Science (SBE) Directorate
>was created as a separate entity in 1991 in recognition of the
>maturity of the behavioral and social sciences, and to provide
>greater focus on the research base in these sciences.  This
>research had been supported at NSF for more than 40 years --
>long before the formal organization of these sciences into a
>Directorate.
>
>This followed extensive discussion both within NSF and within
>the research community regarding the merits of creating SBE.
>There was agreement in the biological, behavioral and social
>science community that this was the best way to support this
>valuable research.  In none of the many discussions and
>meetings held on the creation of SBE was there any hint of the
>impetus being "political correctness."  I can assure you that
>any such arguments would have held little sway with the
>biologists who were instrumental in the creation of SBE.
>Thus, in no way did NSF "wander" into its support for the
>behavioral and social sciences.
>
>The many contributions of behavioral and social science
>research to the nation's health, well-being, and standard of
>living are numerous.  For example, NSF-supported
>psychologists, doing research in cognitive neuroscience, have
>contributed to our understanding of how the brain produces
>thoughts, emotions and action.  The last 20 years have seen a
>rapid growth in the quantity and quality of relevant research
>findings, so that hardly a week passes without an important
>new finding.  As we have come to understand more about
>brain/behavior relationships, new light has been shed on the
>diagnosis and treatment of cognitive and emotional disorders
>such as schizophrenia, depression and dyslexia.
>
>NSF has also supported work in infant cognitive and perceptual
>development which showed that, counter to prevailing ideas,
>infants have complex, functioning sensory and perceptual
>systems.  This led to demonstrations that the outcomes for
>preterm infants were much better if they were handled and
>stimulated, and that some visual problems could be detected
>and corrected during infancy.
>
>APA and others in the behavioral and social science community
>would be pleased to provide you with even more examples of the
>fruits of NSF-supported basic research in the behavioral and
>social sciences.  I urge you to consider these examples as you
>deliberate on the House budget resolution and the
>reauthorization of NSF.  Please call Elizabeth Baldwin in our
>Public Policy Office at (202)-336-5932 if you or your staff
>have any questions or would like detailed information on NSF
>supported behavioral research.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Robert J. Resnick, PhD
>President
>
>
>            --- ORGANIZES GRASSROOTS RESPONSE ---
>
>
>-- In addition to helping spread the word on these recent
>developments in Congress to the psychological research
>community via electronic means, APA also organized a first
>class mailing to the psychological research community in
>Pennsylvania.  This mailing to almost 1,000 psychologists
>urges them to write to Rep. Walker (who is from Pennsylvania)
>regarding his remarks on behavioral and social science at NSF.
>
>
>    --- RESPONDS WITH OTHER SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS ---
>
>
>-- In cooperation with other behavioral and social science
>organizations, APA is soliciting support from other scientific
>disciplines.
>
>-- APA is helping arrange, and will participate in, a "Hill
>blitz" of visits to Congressional offices.  These visits will
>emphasize the importance of continued federal support for
>behavioral and social science research at NSF.  This will
>include not only the relevant members of the House and Senate
>Budget Committees, but the House and Senate Appropriations
>Subcommittees, and House and Senate NSF authorization
>committees (House Science Committee and Senate Labor and Human
>Resources and Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation
>Committees).
>
>
>               *******************************
>               * !!!!! WHAT YOU CAN DO !!!!! *
>               *******************************
>
>1-- On your institution's letterhead, send a letter to The
>Honorable Robert S. Walker, Chair, House Science Committee,
>2320 Rayburn House Office Bldg., Washington, DC 20515-6301.
>Point out the fact that the behavioral and social sciences,
>are indeed sciences -- not "studies" as he believes.  It would
>be valuable to comment on your own NSF sponsored research, or
>that of your colleagues, as examples.  Point out the value of
>federal support for behavioral and social science at NSF.
>Research funding priorities should be left to NSF, which has
>done an excellent job in supporting the nation's best
>research.
>
>2-- Send a copy of your letter to Rep. Walker to your
>Congressman and Senators, requesting their support.  These
>letters can be sent to: The Honorable (full name), United
>States Senate, Washington, DC 20510; and The Honorable (full
>name), United States House of Representatives, Washington, DC
>20515.
>
>                            * * *
>
>PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR LETTER to us at SAN@xxxxxxx or mail
>to SAN, APA, 750 First St. NE, Washington, DC 20002.
>
>If you have any questions, comments or relevant information to
>share on NSF, please contact Elizabeth Baldwin in APA's Public
>Policy Office at eab.apa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx