My email to Senator Collins

First, here is my blog entry on BlueMassGroup:  http://vps28478.inmotionhosting.com/~bluema24/s…

<

p>Absolutely, I favor the House Stimulus Bill because it saves jobs, and puts money into the states, infrastructure and education.

<

p>Tax Credits are useless – no one I know will buy either a house or a car if the Senate version passes.

The states failed to make the easy case that the Federal Government caused the recession by raising rates, so the Federal Government should pay up. Instead the states acted like demanding crybabies because the school budget is getting cut.  

Here’s a copy of an email I received from the American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, which forwarded it from AIBS (American Institute for Biological Sciences).  As many of you know science hasn’t faired particularly well during the past 8 eight years (that’s probably a bit of an understatement).  The stimulus actually specifically  targeted increasing science employment through increasing the budget for the National Science Foundation (NSF, the major government agency funding basic scientific research).  The Nelson-Collins amendment strikes out the NSF. Interestingly, our former director used to say how science isn’t partisan, NSF fared well under Republican and Democratic government.  That was until the Bush era.

<

p>From my personal perspective, if I were lucky enough to get additional grant money from a stimulus package, the first thing I would do is hire more people – that’s how science works – you need skilled hands (and minds) to generate data. And NSF’s peer review system is rigorous (that’s an understatement too) in helping the best ideas and people get resources.

<

p>Email from AIBS:

Scientists may wish to call their Senators TODAY (Thursday, 5 February 2009) to request that they oppose these amendments.  To reach your Senators, call the Senate switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Senator’s office.

Request that your Senator vote NO on the Nelson-Collins Substitute and the Coburn Amendment (No. 175).  

1. Nelson (D-NE) – Collins (R-ME) Alternate Stimulus Bill – could eliminate NSF from current Senate Stimulus Bill

Background:

In today’s New York Times an article “Senate Adds Homebuyer Tax Credit to Stimulus Bill,” page A20, references a substitute stimulus bill being put forth by Senators Nelson (D-NE) and Collins (R-ME). This bill would strip out spending that in their opinion would not provide an immediate boost to the economy.  Money currently designated in the Senate Stimulus Bill for the NSF would be cut by those who support the premise of the Nelson-Collins bill.

The stimulus legislation currently includes $1.4 billion for NSF.

Below is information on how the NSF impacts the economy and other information that helps justify funding NSF in the Senate Stimulus Bill.

NSF has a 50-year history of advancing America’s basic science and engineering enterprise through investments in cutting-edge research and education. This investment has spurred both short- and long-term innovation and created jobs. Economists have concluded that between 60 and 80 percent of America’s economic growth over the past 50 years is attributable to technological innovation.

– NSF Investments create Economic Benefits and Jobs

* Various studies have shown increased economic activity (wages paid) of about 2.5 dollars for every dollar of NSF investment, with associated tax revenue benefits to state and federal governments.  Thus, a $600 million increase in NSF’s budget eventually will result in approximately $1.5 billion in added economic activity to the U.S. economy.

In addition, roughly 200 direct and indirect jobs are created at universities and research institutions for every $1 million invested by NSF. So, $1 billion translates into 200,000 new jobs (both direct and indirect).

* NSF invests 94% of its budget directly into support for research at universities and colleges, in all 50 states. Much of this leads directly to job creation in the short-term, and innovation in the long-term. NSF supports over 2,000 institutions and reaches nearly 200,000 researchers, postdoctoral fellows, trainees, teachers, and students every year.

* Writing in the New York Times, Robert Rubin and Jared Bernstein recommend that the nation needs a large stimulus to generate substantial economic demand in the short term, but of equal importance, investments in education and basic research to maintain economic growth and competitiveness.

2. Coburn Amendment

The American Association of Museums (AAM) has issued a request that museum advocates contact their United States Senators to urge them to oppose an amendment to be offered to the economic stimulus package by Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn (R).
According to information from AAM: The measure, Senate Amendment No. 175, as filed) would ban any funds in the economic stimulus legislation from being appropriated or otherwise made available to “any casino or other gambling establishment, aquarium, zoo, golf course, swimming pool, stadium, community park, museum, theater, arts center, or highway beautification project, including renovations, remodeling, construction, salaries, furniture, zero-gravity chairs, big screen televisions, beautification, rotating pastel lights, and dry heat saunas.”

Supporters of museums (including science museums and natural science collections), zoos, and aquaria may wish to ask their Senators to oppose the Coburn Amendment (No. 175).  Senate offices may be reached through the Senate switchboard at 202-224-3121.

Additional Information:

The Natural Science Collections Alliance sent the following letter to key Senate offices on 4 February.  Excerpts from this letter are below:

The Coburn Amendment would prohibit funds from being appropriated to a number of classes of public institutions, including museums, zoos, and aquaria.  These institutions play an important role in local and state economies across the nation.  Museums, for instance, employ individuals in positions ranging from education and research to maintenance and security.  Moreover, programs conducted by museums have a direct impact on local economies.  Free or low-cost programming provides families with cost-effective, educational, family entertainment – the kind of civic entertainment that builds and strengthens our communities.  Moreover, these institutions are found in every state across the nation.

Museums also have a direct impact on local economies. I recently saw economic data from 2000 that indicated that America’s non-profits arts industry generates $134 billion in economic activity each year. Consider the Florida Museum of Natural History.  Several years ago, the museum received a small grant to help bring a traveling exhibit of the Tyrannosaurus rex, Sue, to the museum. An economic analysis conducted following the exhibit indicates that the exhibit generated at least $2.3 million for the local economy.  These funds were spent on lodging, food, and related purchases in the Gainesville, Florida area.  In short, this is one example of how investments in museums, zoos, and aquaria do indeed stimulate local economies.

Similarly, in Oklahoma the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History has become a major tourist attraction, research organization, and educational experience for pre-school children to retirees. The museum’s collections are also used in training hundreds of college students in science, including many, if not most, of our pre-med and pre-vet students. The research carried out by museum scientists and students impacts the state and region directly. Almost all natural history publications, from field guides to birds to mammals of Oklahoma to Oklahoma’s native American history, to the geology of the state is based on the collections and research of the Sam Noble Museum.

I do not write to suggest that every investment in a museum, zoo or aquarium will return a significant yield.  Projects should be evaluated for merit by federal program officials.  However, to exclude museums, zoos, and aquaria from the economic stimulus package is inappropriate.  Indeed, some of the greatest contributions to museums and their collections occurred during the Great Depression, and this was especially true in Oklahoma, where professors and large groups of WPA laborers gathered the state’s great fossil and archeology collections.  WPA workers built the buildings that housed Oklahoma’s natural history museum for more than a half century.  These were major contributions to the nation’s
infrastructure that helped protect the priceless and irreplaceable natural science collections of Oklahoma and other states.

Indeed, museums are:

– Public Works Projects.  Most of our member institutions are in dire need of capital improvements.  These are critical for our public service in receiving and educating visitors and providing science for public benefit.  Many of our members have completed or are well along in master planning for renovations.  We can move forward quickly with improvements.

– Schools.  Most of our institutions are key players for formal and informal science education in the cities and regions where they are located.  In Philadelphia, for example, the Academy of Natural Sciences often provides science education for public schools that currently lack that capability entirely.  Many other NSC Alliance members have the same functions elsewhere.

– Foundations of Environmental Sustainability.  We advance environmental protection, using innovative technology, through education and exhibits and our own capital investment.  The new California Academy of Sciences building in San Francisco is a leading example of environmental excellence in design.

– An investment in museums is a direct investment in the future of the nation, its scientific underpinnings, and its human capital that will assume leadership roles in science in the decades to come.

– Museums occur across the nation, and efforts to preserve these collections and organizations would provide a great economic stimulus to every state in the union, while helping these valuable resources become available to those scientists, government agencies, educators, and scholars who will utilize these resources to solve the enormous problems that will challenge America in the future.

Don’t even invite the Republicans to that conference committee.  The Democrats should follow the Pete Domenici model of hammering out legislation in conference:

 For the energy bill, 34 Republicans and 24 Democrats serve on the conference committee. But the negotiations have mostly been conducted by the two chief GOP chairmen — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin, R-La., and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Pete Domenici,
R-N.M. — although the ranking member on Domenici’s panel, Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., has attended some meetings.

  Back in July [2003], when Republicans resorted to pushing a Democratic energy bill through their deadlocked chamber just to get to conference, Domenici made no bones about his intentions. “I’m happy, because I’ll be rewriting that bill” in conference, Domenici said at the time. “It’s up to us. We’re in the majority, and we’ll be writing a completely new bill.”

Wow!  How about a golf clap for Bingaman!  The Republicans have shown their hand (by their blatant partisanship), I say wake up Democrats! Let’s move ahead and do what’s right for the country.  

<

p>Enjoy the full text of that 2003 article here.