Science - USA (2022-06-10)

PHOTO: SUSAN WALSH/AP PHOTO/BLOOMBERG/GETTY IMAGES

1146 10 JUNE 2022 • VOL 376 ISSUE 6598 science.org SCIENCE

T

op research universities in a handful

of U.S. states conduct the majority of

research funded by the National Sci-

ence Foundation (NSF), whereas in-

stitutions in half the country receive

only crumbs.

The Senate and House of Representatives

both want to redress the imbalance, but law-

makers in the two chambers have proposed

different solutions. Those dueling visions

must be reconciled in negotiations now un-

derway to finalize a massive bill aimed at

bolstering U.S. competitiveness with China

in research and high-tech manufacturing

that is a top priority for President Joe Biden.

The U.S. Senate thinks the

solution is to mandate an eight-

fold increase in an existing

initiative—the Established Pro-

gram to Stimulate Competitive

Research (EPSCoR)—that serves

only the have-not jurisdictions

(25 states, Puerto Rico, Guam, and

the Virgin Islands). To finance

that huge growth in EPSCoR,

NSF would need to shrink core

research programs in which the

money is awarded competitively.

More than 200 universities

and more than 100 members of

Congress have launched a last-

minute fight to remove the Sen-

ate language from the final bill.

“Arbitrarily walling off a sizable

percentage of a science agency’s

budget from a sizable majority of the

country’s research institutions would fun-

damentally reduce the entire nation’s sci-

entific capacity,” warned 18 senators and

78 House members in a 24 May letter that

echoes a 2 April plea to lawmakers from

a coalition of institutions in non-ESPCoR

states. Curtailing existing NSF programs,

they say, would harm many less research-

intensive institutions located outside of

have-not states.

The critics prefer the House approach. It

has proposed new programs to help poorly

funded institutions in every state. But the

Senate version may have the upper hand

in negotiations. It is tucked into the U.S.

Innovation and Competition Act (USICA),

which passed in June 2021 with strong bi-

partisan support. The House version, the

America COMPETES Act, was approved

by a narrow margin in February with only

Democratic members in favor.

NSF says roughly 13% of its research

funds now go to institutions in EPSCoR

states. But only about one-fifth of that

comes directly from EPSCoR. The bulk

is awarded competitively through NSF’s

regular research and training programs.

The Senate bill would allocate 20% of

NSF’s overall budget, currently $8.8 bil-

lion, to EPSCoR. If the rule were in place

now, it would hike EPSCoR’s budget from

$215 million to roughly $1.75 billion.

Last month, NSF Director Sethuraman

Panchanathan told a Senate spending

panel he has “an aspirational goal” of send-

ing 20% of NSF’s research budget to have-

not states. But that approach to increasing

geographic diversity didn’t satisfy the pan-

el’s chair, Senator Jean Shaheen (D–NH),

who instructed her Senate colleagues ne-

gotiating the bill “to hold tight to the 20%

requirement” for EPSCoR itself.

Shaheen was one of 33 Senators and

26 House members, all from EPSCoR

states, who last fall signed a letter to ne-

gotiators arguing for preserving the Senate

language. “If the United States is going to

stay a step ahead of China, we need to pro-

mote the scientific talent, expertise, and

capabilities found throughout America,

not just in a handful of states,” asserts

Senator Roger Wicker (R–MS), who spear-

headed the letter and crafted the EPSCoR

provision in the Senate bill.

Senator Maria Cantwell (D–WA), co-

chair of the 107-member negotiating

committee and chair of the Senate com-

merce committee that oversees NSF, has

not taken a position on the set-aside but

says the geographic imbalance “is some-

thing that we have to address.” And last

month, at the conference committee’s first

meeting, she praised Wicker’s “passion for

spending federal research dollars in areas

defined by EPSCoR.”

In contrast, the House’s COMPETES Act

applauds EPSCoR for “improving research

capacity and competitiveness” but gives

the program no specific set-aside. Instead,

it would create several NSF programs

aimed at fostering greater geographic di-

versity in research.

One would let institutions not

in the top 100 recipients of fed-

eral research dollars—in 2020

that meant receiving $255 million

or more—compete for money to

conduct research, recruit faculty,

offer student stipends, and carry

out “other activities necessary to

build research capacity.” Another

would fund joint projects be-

tween research powerhouses and

“emerging research institutions”—

defined as those receiving less than

$35 million annually in federal re-

search funding.

Despite a budget that has

tripled since 2001, EPSCoR has

not reshaped the geography of

NSF’s spending. In 2020, just

five states—California, Massachusetts,

New York, Texas, and Maryland—received

nearly 40% of NSF’s research dollars,

whereas the bottom five—Vermont, West

Virginia, Wyoming, and North and South

Dakota—together got less than 1%.

The Senate’s views on EPSCoR carry

weight because the final bill will need the

backing of most of the 19 Senate Republi-

cans who voted for USICA. Biden has even

renamed the proposed legislation, calling

it the Bipartisan Innovation Act in hopes

of retaining Republican support.

Democratic leaders have asked confer-

ees to reach agreement this month. With

so much to like in the bills, science ad-

vocates also want to see the legislation

enacted—but not at the cost of disrupting

how NSF funds research. j

Senator Maria Cantwell (D–WA, right) is trying to steer a massive bill

through Congress that contains a controversial provision for geographic

diversity in research funding crafted by Senator Roger Wicker (R–MS).

By Jeffrey Mervis

U.S. RESEARCH FUNDING

At NSF, what price geographic diversity?

U.S. innovation bills present Congress with dueling visions for funding have-not states

NEWS | IN DEPTH