A bill making its way through the House Science, Space and Technology Committee would set the country’s science agenda by favoring certain disciplines. The bill "seeks greater accountability from the National Science Foundation for the way it spends its $7-billion annual budget — a reasonable goal that few have argued against," writes the Scientific American. "The controversy is over the less-than-scientific approach [it] would take to decide which projects get funded."
In the magazine's May 2014 issue, Neal Lane, senior fellow in science and technology policy, explains what makes this effort to curb science funding dangerous. Lane served as an assistant to the president for science and technology in the Clinton administration and as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy from August 1998 to January 2001. Lane also served as National Science Foundation director and member of the National Science Board (ex officio) from October 1993 to August 1998.
May 9, 2014, 2:06 p.m.