the DoD cuts and debate over it (fwd)
Hemant Desai (hdesai@unlinfo.unl.edu)
Mon, 25 Jul 1994 00:17:30 -0500 (CDT)
>  What I have seen so far in the debate over the DoD research cuts (Dave
> Johnson's memo and his response to critics) raises further questions:
> 
> 1.  What was the funding level for the last fiscal year?  A $0.9 billion cut
> measured against what the DoD requested may not accurately reflect how much
> would be cut from present levels.  Could go in either direction, could make a
> big difference in the numbers.  Remember that we are being asked to pressure
> the Senate (or was it the House; I forget) to take a bargaining position to
> arrive at a reasonable final funding level in the conference committee.  Can't
> do that unless we know what a reasonable level would be.  The previous
> funding level may be a better benchmark than the DoD proposal for this
> year.
> 
> 2.  Have the directions taken by DoD-sponsored research helped the various
> social science disciplines like psychology, or have they diverted scarce
> resources (talented people willing to earn less than they would in the
> private sector) to lines of research that at best fail to improve the
> conditions of human life?  It's not self-evident to me that giving
> people employed in psychology more incentives to study brain chemistry & brain
>     architecture helps much, when we live in a society with high rates
> of "mental illness" however defined and where few people are aware that
> we have free will and souls, concepts generally not investigated by the
> brain sciences.  Just for example.                      These things need
> to be assessed one field at a time, via debates among people familiar with
> the various fields.
> 
> 3.  Even if we accept the achievements cited by David Johnson as positive
> things, are they worth $1.8 billion a year or whatever they cost?  Could
> they be obtained for less money if they were funded in some other way,
> not through the DoD?  I know that inside the Beltway, the time horizon
> for strategic thought is something like 1-3 weeks maximum, but we are
> outside the Beltway and hence quite free to keep the broader picture in
> view.
> 
> 4.  It is possible that the DoD offers money for relatively "basic"
> research with relatively few strings attached, compared with other
> possible ways of funding research.  If so, this needs to be
> demonstrated.
> 
> Please feel free to forward this to anyone who would be interested.
> 
> Roger Karapin, Political Science Dept., Hunter College
> rskhc@cunyvm.cuny.edu
>