[Washupdates] Washington Update - Congress passes FY11 spending legislation

[Michael Henry]

*Washington Update - Congress passes FY11 spending legislation
April 15, 2011*

Yesterday, more than six months into Fiscal Year 2011, the U.S. House 
and Senate approved FY11 spending legislation to fund the operations of 
the federal government through September 30, 2011, or the end of this 
fiscal year.  In back-to-back floor votes, the House passed the bill 
with bipartisan vote of 260 to 167 while the Senate passed it by a vote 
of 81 to 19.  President Obama supports the deal and is expected to sign 
the bill into law today.

The spending bill was drafted this week based on a bipartisan plan 
negotiated by President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner, and Majority 
Leader Harry Reid, agreed to at the midnight hour on Friday, April 8, 
and effectively averting an imminent government shutdown.  The bill cuts 
a total of $38.5 billion from both mandatory and discretionary spending 
accounts compared to FY10 levels. Compared to other areas of the 
government, science agencies are subject to small reductions, reflecting 
the restrained fiscal climate, but also demonstrating bipartisan 
congressional support for R&D.  However, some specific cuts are significant:

    * *NSF* is funded at $6.874 billion, $53 million or *0.8% less* than
      the level at which it was funded in FY10.  However, taking into
      account $53 million that was transferred from the NSF to the Coast
      Guard in FY10 for icebreaking services, *NSF is essentially being
      flat funded in FY11*.

    * *NOAA* is funded at $4.52 billion, $152 million or *3.0% less*
      than the level at which it was funded in FY10.  Operations,
      Research, and Facilities is funded at $3.185 billion, $119 million
      or 3.6% less, and Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction is
      funded at $1.335 billion, $23 million or 1.7% less. *Of note,
      funding to keep the development of the the Joint Polar Satellite
      System (formerly NPOESS) on track was not appropriated for FY11.
      Development can be expected to be delayed at least 18 additional
      months.*

    * *NASA* is funded at $18.485 billion, $239 million or *1.3% less*
      than the level at which it was funded in FY10.  The bill removes
      restrictions on the human space flight program, allowing NASA to
      move forward with its replacement of the Constellation rocket
      development program as authorized in the NASA Authorization Act
      passed this fall.

    * *DOE Office of Science* is funded at $4.884 billion, $35 million
      or *0.7% less* than the level at which it was funded in FY10.

In addition, the budget negotiations that led to the bill covered a 
number of issues that are directly relevant to the scientific 
community.  In some cases, the bill includes new restrictions on science 
agencies and/or the President, and in other cases restrictions were 
discussed by dropped in the final deal.  Here's what made it into the bill:

    * *NOAA is prohibited from establishing or implementing a Climate
      Service in FY11.*  As you know, NOAA has had plans for more than a
      year now to create a Climate Service line office that builds on
      current climate research capacities to provide authoritative and
      timely climate information and other service products to users who
      need help preparing for the impacts of coming climatic changes. 
      NOAA's plans will now have to be on hold until Congress gives it
      the green light, either through authorizing legislation or
      implicit authorization in an annual appropriations bill.  Funding
      for a NOAA Climate Service is in the President's FY12 budget
      request, so we expect this will be a major topic of conversation
      as the FY12 budget process unfolds.

    * *NASA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
      (OSTP) are prohibited from working in any way with China or
      Chinese companies without specific authorization through a new
      law*.  The restriction applies to any effort to "develop, design,
      plan, promulgate, implement, or execute a bilateral policy,
      program, order, or contract of any kind to participate,
      collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or
      any Chinese-owned company."

    * *Multilateral Assistance to the U.N. International Panel on
      Climate Change (IPCC) & U.N. Framework Convention on Climate
      Change (UNFCCC) is capped at a combined level of $10 million.* 
      For this item, the President had budgeted $12.5 million, and in
      FY10 it received $9 million and in FY09 it received $13 million. 
      In other words, even though our contributions to these programs
      has been capped in the bill, the amount is not far off from what
      our contribution has been in recent years.

    * *The Administration is prohibited from paying the salary of an
      Assistant to the President on Climate Change and Energy.*  This
      effectively precludes the President from rehiring someone to fill
      Carol Browner's former position, a role that was known inside the
      beltway as 'climate czar.'  In that role, Carol Browner worked
      closely with stakeholders and the last Congress to try to shepherd
      climate change legislation through Congress.  Republicans
      criticized the position, along with several other White House
      'czar' positions, for not being subject to the Senate nomination
      process or accountable to Congress in any way.

    * *NSF, NASA, and the Department of Commerce, including NOAA, are
      required to submit spending plans to the House and Senate
      Appropriations Committees within 60 days.*

    * *Despite the insistence of House Republicans, no EPA policy riders
      were successfully included in the bill.*  This means that for now
      the EPA will retain its authority under the Clean Air Act to
      regulate greenhouse gases from stationary sources, and the EPA is
      expected to continue to promulgate regulations to that effect. 
      However, as this remains a controversial and high priority issue
      for some Members of Congress, Congress may again take up this
      question regarding the appropriate scope of EPA's authority.



-- 

Michael S. Henry

Legislative Specialist

mhenry at ucar.edu

303.497.2108 / C: 303.362.3731

University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)

Government Affairs

P.O. Box 3000

Boulder, CO 80307

http://www.ucar.edu/oga/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/washupdates/attachments/20110415/04832562/attachment.html