{"id":1358,"date":"2021-02-02T11:00:46","date_gmt":"2021-02-02T16:00:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/?p=1358"},"modified":"2021-01-31T10:21:58","modified_gmt":"2021-01-31T15:21:58","slug":"the-massive-omnibus-funding-bill-and-what-it-means-for-the-math-community","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/capitalcurrents\/2021\/02\/02\/the-massive-omnibus-funding-bill-and-what-it-means-for-the-math-community\/","title":{"rendered":"The massive omnibus funding bill and what it means for the math community"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

 <\/p>\n

As always, this post reflects only my own views.<\/p>\n

This post is a bit late. In the days before Christmas, President Trump signed into law final appropriations of \\$1.4 trillion for fiscal year 2021 (FY21). This includes roughly \\$900 billion in pandemic-response funding. The House passed the bill with a vote of 359 to 53<\/a> and the Senate with a vote of\u00a092 to 6<\/a>. The 19 non-voting members were all Republican.<\/p>\n

A very short overview of the annual appropriations process<\/a> is found at the Office of Government Relations website (which now needs updating\u2014the basic process and timeline are the same every year, but the numbers need updating).<\/p>\n

In the pandemic relief, we were very much hoping to see provisions to address disruptions to research projects, which the\u00a0Research Investment to Secure the Economy (RISE) Act<\/a> had called for. Such provisions were not included. I understand that the RISE Act will likely be re-introduced soon.<\/p>\n

Because the National Science Foundation provides more federal funding to mathematicians to pursue their research than any other federal agency, I point out that this huge appropriations package increases the NSF\u2019s budget 2.5% to nearly \\$8.5 billion. Once again, Congress did not accept President Trump\u2019s proposal to cut the NSF budget (he had proposed a 6% decrease for FY21).<\/p>\n

\"\"The American Mathematical Society had supported a request of \\$9 billion for NSF in FY21,[1]<\/a> seeking to address the effects of years of high-quality grant proposals that go unfunded due to limited funding. Those unmet needs continue. A 2019 National Science Board report stated that in FY18, \u201capproximately \\$3.4 billion was requested for declined proposals that were rated Very Good or higher in the merit review process.\u201d The U.S. is leaving potentially transformative scientific research and efforts to enhance STEM education unfunded, while other countries are making significant investments.<\/p>\n

With the final FY21 appropriations, NSF\u2019s Research and Related Activities account\u2014which funds six disciplinary research directorates\u2014is increasing 2.6% to \\$6.91 billion. One of these directorates is the Directorate for Physical and Mathematical Sciences (MPS), in which the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) is housed. The Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) is funded separately (it is the only research directorate with its own funding line), and its budget is increasing 3% to \\$968 million.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Congress does not specify how NSF should distribute funding across the six disciplinary research directorates (excluding EHR), and it remains to be seen how much of this money will go to MPS and then to DMS. However, Congress does provide instruction in an\u00a0explanatory statement<\/a>\u00a0accompanying the bill.<\/p>\n

From this statement, here are prioritization highlights of potential interest to you.<\/p>\n