[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 106 (Monday, July 26, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9304-S9309]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    FEDERAL RESEARCH INVESTMENT ACT

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
now proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 205, S. 296.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 296) to provide for continuation of the Federal 
     research investment in a fiscally sustainable way, and for 
     other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation, with amendments, as 
     follows:

  (The parts of the bill intended to be stricken are shown in boldface 
brackets and the parts of the bill intended to be inserted are shown in 
italic.)

                                 S. 296

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Research Investment 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. GENERAL FINDINGS REGARDING FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN 
                   RESEARCH.

       (a) Value of Research and Development.--The Congress makes 
     the following findings with respect to the value of research 
     and development to the United States:
       (1) Federal investment in research has resulted in the 
     development of technology that saved lives in the United 
     States and around the world.
       (2) Research and development investment across all Federal 
     agencies has been effective in creating technology that has 
     enhanced the American quality of life.
       (3) The Federal investment in research and development 
     conducted or underwritten by both military and civilian 
     agencies has produced benefits that have been felt in both 
     the private and public sector.
       (4) Discoveries across the spectrum of scientific inquiry 
     have the potential to raise the standard of living and the 
     quality of life for all Americans.
       (5) Science, engineering, and technology play a critical 
     role in shaping the modern world.
       (6) Studies show that about half of all United States post-
     World War II economic growth is a direct result of technical 
     innovation; and science, engineering, and technology 
     contribute to the creation of new goods and services, new 
     jobs and new capital.
       (7) Technical innovation is the principal driving force 
     behind the long-term economic growth and increased standards 
     of living of the world's modern industrial societies. Other 
     nations are well aware of the pivotal role of science, 
     engineering, and technology, and they are seeking to exploit 
     it wherever possible to advance their own global 
     competitiveness.
       (8) Federal programs for investment in research, which lead 
     to technological innovation and result in economic growth, 
     should be structured to address current funding disparities 
     and develop enhanced capability in States and regions that 
     currently underparticipate in the national science and 
     technology enterprise.
       (b) Status of the Federal Investment.--The Congress makes 
     the following findings with respect to the status of the 
     Federal Investment in research and development activities:
       (1) Federal investment of approximately 13 to 14 percent of 
     the Federal discretionary budget in research and development 
     over the past 11 years has resulted in a doubling of the 
     nominal amount of Federal funding.
       (2) Fiscal realities now challenge Congress to steer the 
     Federal government's role in science, engineering, and 
     technology in a manner that ensures a prudent use of limited 
     public resources. There is both a long-term problem--
     addressing the ever-increasing level of mandatory spending--
     and a near-term challenge--apportioning a dwindling amount of 
     discretionary funding to an increasing range of targets in 
     science, engineering, and technology. This confluence of 
     increased national dependency on technology, increased 
     targets of opportunity, and decreased fiscal flexibility has 
     created a problem of national urgency. Many indicators show 
     that more funding for science, engineering, and technology is 
     needed but, even with increased funding, priorities must be 
     established among different programs. The United States 
     cannot afford the luxury of fully funding all deserving 
     programs.
       (3) Current projections of Federal research funding show a 
     downward trend.

     SEC. 3. SPECIAL FINDINGS REGARDING HEALTH-RELATED RESEARCH.

       The Congress makes the following findings with respect to 
     health-related research:
       (1) Health and economic benefits provided by health-related 
     research.--Because of health-related research, cures for many 
     debilitating and fatal diseases have been discovered and 
     deployed. At present, the medical research community is on 
     the cusp of creating cures for a number of leading diseases 
     and their associated burdens. In particular, medical research 
     has the potential to develop treatments that can help manage 
     the escalating costs associated with the aging of the United 
     States population.
       (2) Funding of health-related research.--Many studies have 
     recognized that clinical and basic science are in a state of 
     crisis because of a failure of resources to meet the 
     opportunity. Consequently, health-related research has 
     emerged as a national priority and has been given 
     significantly increased funding by Congress in fiscal year 
     1999. In order to continue addressing this urgent national 
     need, the pattern of substantial budgetary expansion begun in 
     fiscal year 1999 should be maintained.
       (3) Interdisciplinary nature of health-related research.--
     Because all fields of science and engineering are 
     interdependent, full realization of the nation's historic 
     investment in health will depend on major advances both in 
     the biomedical sciences and in other science and engineering 
     disciplines. Hence, the vitality of all disciplines must be 
     preserved, even as special considerations are given to the 
     health research field.

     [SEC. 4.] SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REGARDING THE LINK 
                   BETWEEN THE RESEARCH PROCESS AND USEFUL 
                   TECHNOLOGY.

       The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Flow of science, engineering, and technology.--The 
     process of science, engineering, and technology involves many 
     steps. The present Federal science, engineering, and 
     technology structure reinforces the increasingly artificial 
     distinctions between basic and applied activities. The result 
     too often is a set of discrete programs that each

[[Page S9305]]

     support a narrow phase of research or development and are not 
     coordinated with one another. The government should maximize 
     its investment by encouraging the progression of science, 
     engineering, and technology from the earliest stages of 
     research up to a pre-commercialization stage, through funding 
     agencies and vehicles appropriate for each stage. This 
     creates a flow of technology, subject to merit review at each 
     stage, so that promising technology is not lost in a 
     bureaucratic maze.
       (2) Excellence in the american research infrastructure.--
     Federal investment in science, engineering, and technology 
     programs must foster a close relationship between research 
     and education. Investment in research at the university level 
     creates more than simply world-class research. It creates 
     world-class researchers as well. The Federal strategy must 
     continue to reflect this commitment to a strong 
     geographically-diverse research infrastructure. Furthermore, 
     the United States must find ways to extend the excellence of 
     its university system to primary and secondary educational 
     institutions and to better utilize the community college 
     system to prepare many students for vocational opportunities 
     in an increasingly technical workplace.
       (3) Commitment to a broad range of research initiatives.--
     An increasingly common theme in many recent technical 
     breakthroughs has been the importance of revolutionary 
     innovations that were sparked by overlapping of research 
     disciplines. The United States must continue to encourage 
     this trend by providing and encouraging opportunities for 
     interdisciplinary projects that foster collaboration among 
     fields of research.
       (4) Partnerships among industry, universities, and federal 
     laboratories.--Each of these contributors to the national 
     science and technology delivery system has special talents 
     and abilities that complement the others. In addition, each 
     has a central mission that must provide their focus and each 
     has limited resources. The nation's investment in science, 
     engineering, and technology can be optimized by seeking 
     opportunities for leveraging the resources and talents of 
     these three major players through partnerships that do not 
     distort the missions of each partner. For that reason, 
     Federal dollars are wisely spent forming such partnerships.

     [SEC. 4.] SEC. 5. MAINTENANCE OF FEDERAL RESEARCH EFFORT; 
                   GUIDING PRINCIPLES.

       (a) Maintaining United States Leadership in Science, 
     Engineering, and Technology.--It is imperative for the United 
     States to nurture its superb resources in science, 
     engineering, and technology carefully in order to maintain 
     its own globally competitive position.
       (b) Guiding Principles.--Federal research and development 
     programs should be conducted in accordance with the following 
     guiding principles:
       (1) Good science.--Federal science, engineering, and 
     technology programs include both knowledge-driven science 
     together with its applications, and mission-driven, science-
     based requirements. In general, both types of programs must 
     be focused, peer- and merit-reviewed, and not unnecessarily 
     duplicative, although the details of these attributes must 
     vary with different program objectives.
       (2) Fiscal accountability.--The Congress must exercise 
     oversight to ensure that programs funded with scarce Federal 
     dollars are well managed. The United States cannot tolerate 
     waste of money through inefficient management techniques, 
     whether by government agencies, by contractors, or by 
     Congress itself. Fiscal resources would be better utilized if 
     program and project funding levels were predictable across 
     several years to enable better project planning; a benefit of 
     such predictability would be that agencies and Congress can 
     better exercise oversight responsibilities through 
     comparisons of a project's and program's progress against 
     carefully planned milestones.
       (3) Program effectiveness.--The United States needs to make 
     sure that government programs achieve their goals. As the 
     Congress crafts science, engineering, and technology 
     legislation, it must include a process for gauging program 
     effectiveness, selecting criteria based on sound scientific 
     judgment and avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy. The Congress 
     should also avoid the trap of measuring the effectiveness of 
     a broad science, engineering, and technology program by 
     passing judgment on individual projects. Lastly, the Congress 
     must recognize that a negative result in a well-conceived and 
     executed project or program may still be critically important 
     to the funding agency.
       (4) Criteria for government funding.--Program selection for 
     Federal funding should continue to reflect the nation's 2 
     traditional research and development priorities: (A) basic, 
     scientific, and technological research that represents 
     investments in the nation's long-term future scientific and 
     technological capacity, for which government has 
     traditionally served as the principle resource; and (B) 
     mission research investments, that is, investments in 
     research that derive from necessary public functions, such as 
     defense, health, education, environmental protection, and 
     raising the standard of living, which may include pre-
     commercial, pre-competitive engineering research and 
     technology development. Additionally, government funding 
     should not compete with or displace the short-term, market-
     driven, and typically more specific nature of private-sector 
     funding. Government funding should be restricted to pre-
     competitive activities, leaving competitive activities solely 
     for the private sector. As a rule, the government should not 
     invest in commercial technology that is in the product 
     development stage, very close to the broad commercial 
     marketplace, except to meet a specific agency goal. When the 
     government provides funding for any science, engineering, and 
     technology investment program, it must take reasonable steps 
     to ensure that the potential benefits derived from the 
     program will accrue broadly.

     [SEC. 5.] SEC. 6. POLICY STATEMENT.

       [(a) Policy.--This Act is intended--
       [(1) to encourage, as an overall goal, the doubling of the 
     annual authorized amount of Federal funding for basic 
     scientific, medical, and pre-competitive engineering research 
     over the 11-year period following the date of enactment of 
     this Act;
       [(2) to invest in the future of the United States and the 
     people of the United States by expanding the research 
     activities referred to in paragraph (1);
       [(3) to enhance the quality of life for all people of the 
     United States;
       [(4) to guarantee the leadership of the United States in 
     science, engineering, medicine, and technology; and
       [(5) to ensure that the opportunity and the support for 
     undertaking good science is widely available throughout the 
     States by supporting a geographically-diverse research and 
     development enterprise.]
       (a) Policy.-- This Act is intended to--
       (1) assure a base level of Federal funding for basic 
     scientific, biomedical, and pre-competitive engineering 
     research, with this base level defined as a doubling of 
     Federal basic research funding over the 11 year period 
     following the date of enactment of this Act;
       (2) invest in the future economic growth of the United 
     States by expanding the research activities referred to in 
     paragraph (1);
       (3) enhance the quality of life and health for all people 
     of the United States through expanded support for health-
     related research;
       (4) allow for accelerated growth of agencies such as the 
     National Institutes of Health to meet critical national 
     needs;
       (5) guarantee the leadership of the United States in 
     science, engineering, medicine, and technology; and
       (6) ensure that the opportunity and the support for 
     undertaking good science is widely available throughout the 
     United States by supporting a geographically-diverse research 
     and development enterprise.
       (b) Agencies Covered.--The agencies intended to be covered 
     to the extent that they are engaged in science, engineering, 
     and technology activities for basic scientific, medical, or 
     pre-competitive engineering research by this Act are--
       (1) the National Institutes of Health, within the 
     Department of Health and Human Services;
       (2) the National Science Foundation;
       (3) the National Institute for Standards and Technology, 
     within the Department of Commerce;
       (4) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
       (5) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     within the Department of Commerce;
       (6) the Centers for Disease Control, within the Department 
     of Health and Human Services;
       (7) the Department of Energy (to the extent that it is not 
     engaged in defense-related activities);
       (8) the Department of Agriculture;
       (9) the Department of Transportation;
       (10) the Department of the Interior;
       (11) the Department of Veterans Affairs;
       (12) the Smithsonian Institution;
       (13) the Department of Education;
       (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; and
       (15) the [Federal] Food and Drug Administration, within the 
     Department of Health and Human Services.
       [(c) Current Investment.--The investment in civilian 
     research and development efforts for fiscal year 1998 was 2.1 
     percent of the overall Federal budget.]
       [(d)] (c) Damage to Research Infrastructure.--A continued 
     trend of funding appropriations equal to or lower than 
     current budgetary levels will lead to permanent damage to the 
     United States research infrastructure. This could threaten 
     American dominance of high-technology industrial leadership.
       [(e) Increase Funding.--In order to maintain and enhance 
     the economic strength of the United States in the world 
     market, funding levels for fundamental, scientific, and pre-
     competitive engineering research should be increased to equal 
     approximately 2.6 percent of the total annual budget.
       [(f) (d) Future Fiscal Year Allocations.--
       (1) Goals.--The long-term strategy for research and 
     development funding under this section would be achieved by a 
     steady 2.5 percent annual increase above the rate of 
     inflation throughout a 11-year period.
       (2) Inflation assumption.--The authorizations contained in 
     paragraph (3) assume that the rate of inflation for each year 
     will be 3 percent.
       (3) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     for civilian research and development in the agencies listed 
     in subsection (b)--
       (A) $39,790,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;
       (B) $41,980,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;

[[Page S9306]]

       (C) $42,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       (D) $46,720,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (E) [$49,290,000,000] $44,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (F) $52,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (G) $54,870,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (H) $57,880,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
       (I) $61,070,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       (J) $64,420,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
       (K) $67,970,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
       (4) Acceleration to meet national needs.--
       (A) In general.--If the amount appropriated for any fiscal 
     year to an agency for the purposes stated in paragraph (3) 
     increases by more than 8 percent over the amount appropriated 
     to it for those purposes for the preceding fiscal year, then 
     the amounts authorized by paragraph (3) for subsequent fiscal 
     years for that agency and other agencies shall be determined 
     under subparagraphs (B) and (C).
       (B) Exclusion of agency in determining other agency amounts 
     for next fiscal year.--For the next fiscal year after a 
     fiscal year described in subparagraph (A), the amount 
     authorized to be appropriated to other agencies under 
     paragraph (3) shall be determined by excluding the agency 
     described in subparagraph (A). Any amount that would, but for 
     this subparagraph, be authorized to be appropriated to that 
     agency shall not be appropriated.
       (C) Resumption of regular treatment.--Notwithstanding 
     subparagraph (B), an agency may not be excluded from the 
     determination of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
     under paragraph (3) for a fiscal year following a fiscal year 
     for which the sum of the amounts appropriated to that agency 
     for fiscal year 2000 and all subsequent fiscal years for the 
     purposes described in paragraph (3) does not exceed the sum 
     of--
       (i) the amount appropriated to that agency for such 
     purposes for fiscal year 2000; and
       (ii) the amounts that would have been appropriated for such 
     purposes for subsequent fiscal years if the goal described in 
     paragraph (1) had been met (and not exceeded) with respect to 
     that agency's funding.
       (D) No limitation on other funding.--Nothing in this 
     paragraph limits the amount that may be appropriated to any 
     agency for the purposes described in paragraph (3).
       [(g)] (e) Conformance with Budgetary Caps.--Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, no funds may be made available 
     under this Act in a manner that does not conform with the 
     discretionary spending caps provided in the most recently 
     adopted concurrent resolution on the budget or threatens the 
     economic stability of the annual budget.
       [(h)] (f) Balanced Research Portfolio.--Because of the 
     interdependent nature of the scientific and engineering 
     disciplines, the aggregate funding levels authorized by the 
     section assume that the Federal research portfolio will be 
     well-balanced among the various scientific and engineering 
     disciplines, and geographically dispersed throughout the 
     States.

     [SEC. 6.] SEC. 7. PRESIDENT'S ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST.

       The President of the United States shall, in coordination 
     with the President's annual budget request, include a report 
     that parallels Congress' commitment to support Federally-
     funded research and development by providing--
       (1) a detailed summary of the total level of funding for 
     research and development programs throughout all civilian 
     agencies;
       (2) a focused strategy that reflects the funding 
     projections of this Act for each future fiscal year until 
     2010, including specific targets for each agency that funds 
     civilian research and development;
       (3) an analysis which details funding levels across Federal 
     agencies by methodology of funding, including grant 
     agreements, procurement contracts, and cooperative agreements 
     (within the meaning given those terms in chapter 63 of title 
     31, United States Code); and
       (4) specific proposals for infrastructure development and 
     research and development capacity building in States with 
     less concentrated research and development resources in order 
     to create a nationwide research and development community.

     [SEC. 7.] SEC. 8. COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNTABILITY STUDY FOR 
                   FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH.

       (a) Study.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy, in consultation with the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget, shall enter into agreement 
     with the National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to 
     conduct a comprehensive study to develop methods for 
     evaluating Federally-funded research and development 
     programs. This study shall--
       (1) recommend processes to determine an acceptable level of 
     success for Federally-funded research and development 
     programs by--
       (A) describing the research process in the various 
     scientific and engineering disciplines;
       (B) describing in the different sciences what measures and 
     what criteria each community uses to evaluate the success or 
     failure of a program, and on what time scales these measures 
     are considered reliable--both for exploratory long-range work 
     and for short-range goals; and
       (C) recommending how these measures may be adapted for use 
     by the Federal government to evaluate Federally-funded 
     research and development programs;
       (2) assess the extent to which agencies incorporate 
     independent merit-based review into the formulation of the 
     strategic plans of funding agencies and if the quantity or 
     quality of this type of input is unsatisfactory;
       (3) recommend mechanisms for identifying Federally-funded 
     research and development programs which are unsuccessful or 
     unproductive;
       (4) evaluate the extent to which independent, merit-based 
     evaluation of Federally-funded research and development 
     programs and projects achieves the goal of eliminating 
     unsuccessful or unproductive programs and projects; and
       (5) investigate and report on the validity of using 
     quantitative performance goals for aspects of programs which 
     relate to administrative management of the program and for 
     which such goals would be appropriate, including aspects 
     related to--
       (A) administrative burden on contractors and recipients of 
     financial assistance awards;
       (B) administrative burdens on external participants in 
     independent, merit-based evaluations;
       (C) cost and schedule control for construction projects 
     funded by the program;
       (D) the ratio of overhead costs of the program relative to 
     the amounts expended through the program for equipment and 
     direct funding of research; and
       (E) the timeliness of program responses to requests for 
     funding, participation, or equipment use.
       (6) examine the extent to which program selection for 
     Federal funding across all agencies exemplifies our nation's 
     historical research and development priorities--
       (A) basic, scientific, and technological research in the 
     long-term future scientific and technological capacity of the 
     nation; and
       (B) mission research derived from a high-priority public 
     function.
       (b) Alternative Forms for Performance Goals.--Not later 
     than 6 months after transmitting the report under subsection 
     (a) to Congress, the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, after public notice, public comment, and approval by 
     the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 
     and in consultation with the National Science and Technology 
     Council shall promulgate one or more alternative forms for 
     performance goals under section 1115(b)(10)(B) of title 31, 
     United States Code, based on the recommendations of the study 
     under subsection (a) of this section. The head of each agency 
     containing a program activity that is a research and 
     development program may apply an alternative form promulgated 
     under this section for a performance goal to such a program 
     activity without further authorization by the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget.
       (c) Strategic Plans.--Not later than one year after 
     promulgation of the alternative performance goals in 
     subsection (b) of this section, the head of each agency 
     carrying out research and development activities, upon 
     updating or revising a strategic plan under subsection 306(b) 
     of title 5, United States Code, shall describe the current 
     and future use of methods for determining an acceptable level 
     of success as recommended by the study under subsection (a).
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
     the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
       (2) Program activity.--The term ``program activity'' has 
     the meaning given that term by section 1115(f)(6) of title 
     31, United States Code.
       (3) Independent merit-based evaluation.--The term 
     ``independent merit-based evaluation'' means review of the 
     scientific or technical quality of research or development, 
     conducted by experts who are chosen for their knowledge of 
     scientific and technical fields relevant to the evaluation 
     and who--
       (A) in the case of the review of a program activity, do not 
     derive long-term support from the program activity; or
       (B) in the case of the review of a project proposal, are 
     not seeking funds in competition with the proposal.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out the study required by 
     subsection (a) $600,000 for the 18-month period beginning 
     October 1, 2000.

     [SEC. 8.] SEC. 9. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FOR 
                   FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 11 of title 31, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

     ``Sec.  1120. Accountability for research and development 
       programs

       ``(a) Identification of Unsuccessful Programs.--Based upon 
     program performance reports for each fiscal year submitted to 
     the President under section 1116, the Director of the Office 
     of Management and Budget shall identify the civilian research 
     and development program activities, or components thereof, 
     which do not meet an acceptable level of success as defined 
     in section 1115(b)(1)(B). Not later than 30 days after the 
     submission of the reports under section 1116, the Director 
     shall furnish a copy of a report listing the program 
     activities or component identified under this subsection to 
     the President and the Congress.
       ``(b) Accountability if No Improvement Shown.--For each 
     program activity or component that is identified by the 
     Director under subsection (a) as being below the acceptable 
     level of success for 2 fiscal years in a row, the head of the 
     agency shall no later than 30 days after the Director submits 
     the second report so identifying the program, submit to the 
     appropriate congressional committees of jurisdiction:

[[Page S9307]]

       ``(1) a concise statement of the steps necessary to--
       ``(A) bring such program into compliance with performance 
     goals; or
       ``(B) terminate such program should compliance efforts 
     fail; and
       ``(2) any legislative changes needed to put the steps 
     contained in such statement into effect.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) The chapter analysis for chapter 11 of title 31, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the 
     following:

``1120. Accountability for research and development programs''.
       (2) Section 1115(f) of title 31, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``through 1119,'' and inserting ``through 
     1120''.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee 
amendments be agreed to.
  The committee amendments were agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 1349

             (Purpose: To provide minor technical changes)

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf 
of Senator Frist and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Mr. Gorton], for Mr. Frist, 
     for himself and Mr. Rockefeller, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1349.
       On page 15, line 15, strike ``$42,290,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$44,290,000,000''.
       On page 15, line 17, strike ``$44,290,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$49,290,000,000''.

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment 
be agreed to, the bill be read the third time, and passed, the motion 
to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating 
to the bill appear in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 1349) was agreed to.
  The bill (S. 296), as amended, was read the third time and passed, as 
follows:

                                 S. 296

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Research Investment 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. GENERAL FINDINGS REGARDING FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN 
                   RESEARCH.

       (a) Value of Research and Development.--The Congress makes 
     the following findings with respect to the value of research 
     and development to the United States:
       (1) Federal investment in research has resulted in the 
     development of technology that saved lives in the United 
     States and around the world.
       (2) Research and development investment across all Federal 
     agencies has been effective in creating technology that has 
     enhanced the American quality of life.
       (3) The Federal investment in research and development 
     conducted or underwritten by both military and civilian 
     agencies has produced benefits that have been felt in both 
     the private and public sector.
       (4) Discoveries across the spectrum of scientific inquiry 
     have the potential to raise the standard of living and the 
     quality of life for all Americans.
       (5) Science, engineering, and technology play a critical 
     role in shaping the modern world.
       (6) Studies show that about half of all United States post-
     World War II economic growth is a direct result of technical 
     innovation; and science, engineering, and technology 
     contribute to the creation of new goods and services, new 
     jobs and new capital.
       (7) Technical innovation is the principal driving force 
     behind the long-term economic growth and increased standards 
     of living of the world's modern industrial societies. Other 
     nations are well aware of the pivotal role of science, 
     engineering, and technology, and they are seeking to exploit 
     it wherever possible to advance their own global 
     competitiveness.
       (8) Federal programs for investment in research, which lead 
     to technological innovation and result in economic growth, 
     should be structured to address current funding disparities 
     and develop enhanced capability in States and regions that 
     currently underparticipate in the national science and 
     technology enterprise.
       (b) Status of the Federal Investment.--The Congress makes 
     the following findings with respect to the status of the 
     Federal Investment in research and development activities:
       (1) Federal investment of approximately 13 to 14 percent of 
     the Federal discretionary budget in research and development 
     over the past 11 years has resulted in a doubling of the 
     nominal amount of Federal funding.
       (2) Fiscal realities now challenge Congress to steer the 
     Federal government's role in science, engineering, and 
     technology in a manner that ensures a prudent use of limited 
     public resources. There is both a long-term problem--
     addressing the ever-increasing level of mandatory spending--
     and a near-term challenge--apportioning a dwindling amount of 
     discretionary funding to an increasing range of targets in 
     science, engineering, and technology. This confluence of 
     increased national dependency on technology, increased 
     targets of opportunity, and decreased fiscal flexibility has 
     created a problem of national urgency. Many indicators show 
     that more funding for science, engineering, and technology is 
     needed but, even with increased funding, priorities must be 
     established among different programs. The United States 
     cannot afford the luxury of fully funding all deserving 
     programs.
       (3) Current projections of Federal research funding show a 
     downward trend.

     SEC. 3. SPECIAL FINDINGS REGARDING HEALTH-RELATED RESEARCH.

       The Congress makes the following findings with respect to 
     health-related research:
       (1) Health and economic benefits provided by health-related 
     research.--Because of health-related research, cures for many 
     debilitating and fatal diseases have been discovered and 
     deployed. At present, the medical research community is on 
     the cusp of creating cures for a number of leading diseases 
     and their associated burdens. In particular, medical research 
     has the potential to develop treatments that can help manage 
     the escalating costs associated with the aging of the United 
     States population.
       (2) Funding of health-related research.--Many studies have 
     recognized that clinical and basic science are in a state of 
     crisis because of a failure of resources to meet the 
     opportunity. Consequently, health-related research has 
     emerged as a national priority and has been given 
     significantly increased funding by Congress in fiscal year 
     1999. In order to continue addressing this urgent national 
     need, the pattern of substantial budgetary expansion begun in 
     fiscal year 1999 should be maintained.
       (3) Interdisciplinary nature of health-related research.--
     Because all fields of science and engineering are 
     interdependent, full realization of the nation's historic 
     investment in health will depend on major advances both in 
     the biomedical sciences and in other science and engineering 
     disciplines. Hence, the vitality of all disciplines must be 
     preserved, even as special considerations are given to the 
     health research field.

     SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REGARDING THE LINK BETWEEN THE 
                   RESEARCH PROCESS AND USEFUL TECHNOLOGY.

       The Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Flow of science, engineering, and technology.--The 
     process of science, engineering, and technology involves many 
     steps. The present Federal science, engineering, and 
     technology structure reinforces the increasingly artificial 
     distinctions between basic and applied activities. The result 
     too often is a set of discrete programs that each support a 
     narrow phase of research or development and are not 
     coordinated with one another. The government should maximize 
     its investment by encouraging the progression of science, 
     engineering, and technology from the earliest stages of 
     research up to a pre-commercialization stage, through funding 
     agencies and vehicles appropriate for each stage. This 
     creates a flow of technology, subject to merit review at each 
     stage, so that promising technology is not lost in a 
     bureaucratic maze.
       (2) Excellence in the american research infrastructure.--
     Federal investment in science, engineering, and technology 
     programs must foster a close relationship between research 
     and education. Investment in research at the university level 
     creates more than simply world-class research. It creates 
     world-class researchers as well. The Federal strategy must 
     continue to reflect this commitment to a strong 
     geographically-diverse research infrastructure. Furthermore, 
     the United States must find ways to extend the excellence of 
     its university system to primary and secondary educational 
     institutions and to better utilize the community college 
     system to prepare many students for vocational opportunities 
     in an increasingly technical workplace.
       (3) Commitment to a broad range of research initiatives.--
     An increasingly common theme in many recent technical 
     breakthroughs has been the importance of revolutionary 
     innovations that were sparked by overlapping of research 
     disciplines. The United States must continue to encourage 
     this trend by providing and encouraging opportunities for 
     interdisciplinary projects that foster collaboration among 
     fields of research.
       (4) Partnerships among industry, universities, and federal 
     laboratories.--Each of these contributors to the national 
     science and technology delivery system has special talents 
     and abilities that complement the others. In addition, each 
     has a central mission that must provide their focus and each 
     has limited resources. The nation's investment in science, 
     engineering, and technology can be optimized by seeking 
     opportunities for leveraging the resources and talents of 
     these three major players through partnerships that do not 
     distort the missions of each partner. For that reason, 
     Federal dollars are wisely spent forming such partnerships.

[[Page S9308]]

     SEC. 5. MAINTENANCE OF FEDERAL RESEARCH EFFORT; GUIDING 
                   PRINCIPLES.

       (a) Maintaining United States Leadership in Science, 
     Engineering, and Technology.--It is imperative for the United 
     States to nurture its superb resources in science, 
     engineering, and technology carefully in order to maintain 
     its own globally competitive position.
       (b) Guiding Principles.--Federal research and development 
     programs should be conducted in accordance with the following 
     guiding principles:
       (1) Good science.--Federal science, engineering, and 
     technology programs include both knowledge-driven science 
     together with its applications, and mission-driven, science-
     based requirements. In general, both types of programs must 
     be focused, peer- and merit-reviewed, and not unnecessarily 
     duplicative, although the details of these attributes must 
     vary with different program objectives.
       (2) Fiscal accountability.--The Congress must exercise 
     oversight to ensure that programs funded with scarce Federal 
     dollars are well managed. The United States cannot tolerate 
     waste of money through inefficient management techniques, 
     whether by government agencies, by contractors, or by 
     Congress itself. Fiscal resources would be better utilized if 
     program and project funding levels were predictable across 
     several years to enable better project planning; a benefit of 
     such predictability would be that agencies and Congress can 
     better exercise oversight responsibilities through 
     comparisons of a project's and program's progress against 
     carefully planned milestones.
       (3) Program effectiveness.--The United States needs to make 
     sure that government programs achieve their goals. As the 
     Congress crafts science, engineering, and technology 
     legislation, it must include a process for gauging program 
     effectiveness, selecting criteria based on sound scientific 
     judgment and avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy. The Congress 
     should also avoid the trap of measuring the effectiveness of 
     a broad science, engineering, and technology program by 
     passing judgment on individual projects. Lastly, the Congress 
     must recognize that a negative result in a well-conceived and 
     executed project or program may still be critically important 
     to the funding agency.
       (4) Criteria for government funding.--Program selection for 
     Federal funding should continue to reflect the nation's 2 
     traditional research and development priorities: (A) basic, 
     scientific, and technological research that represents 
     investments in the nation's long-term future scientific and 
     technological capacity, for which government has 
     traditionally served as the principle resource; and (B) 
     mission research investments, that is, investments in 
     research that derive from necessary public functions, such as 
     defense, health, education, environmental protection, and 
     raising the standard of living, which may include pre-
     commercial, pre-competitive engineering research and 
     technology development. Additionally, government funding 
     should not compete with or displace the short-term, market-
     driven, and typically more specific nature of private-sector 
     funding. Government funding should be restricted to pre-
     competitive activities, leaving competitive activities solely 
     for the private sector. As a rule, the government should not 
     invest in commercial technology that is in the product 
     development stage, very close to the broad commercial 
     marketplace, except to meet a specific agency goal. When the 
     government provides funding for any science, engineering, and 
     technology investment program, it must take reasonable steps 
     to ensure that the potential benefits derived from the 
     program will accrue broadly.

     SEC. 6. POLICY STATEMENT.

       (a) Policy.-- This Act is intended to--
       (1) assure a base level of Federal funding for basic 
     scientific, biomedical, and pre-competitive engineering 
     research, with this base level defined as a doubling of 
     Federal basic research funding over the 11 year period 
     following the date of enactment of this Act;
       (2) invest in the future economic growth of the United 
     States by expanding the research activities referred to in 
     paragraph (1);
       (3) enhance the quality of life and health for all people 
     of the United States through expanded support for health-
     related research;
       (4) allow for accelerated growth of agencies such as the 
     National Institutes of Health to meet critical national 
     needs;
       (5) guarantee the leadership of the United States in 
     science, engineering, medicine, and technology; and
       (6) ensure that the opportunity and the support for 
     undertaking good science is widely available throughout the 
     United States by supporting a geographically-diverse research 
     and development enterprise.
       (b) Agencies Covered.--The agencies intended to be covered 
     to the extent that they are engaged in science, engineering, 
     and technology activities for basic scientific, medical, or 
     pre-competitive engineering research by this Act are--
       (1) the National Institutes of Health, within the 
     Department of Health and Human Services;
       (2) the National Science Foundation;
       (3) the National Institute for Standards and Technology, 
     within the Department of Commerce;
       (4) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
       (5) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     within the Department of Commerce;
       (6) the Centers for Disease Control, within the Department 
     of Health and Human Services;
       (7) the Department of Energy (to the extent that it is not 
     engaged in defense-related activities);
       (8) the Department of Agriculture;
       (9) the Department of Transportation;
       (10) the Department of the Interior;
       (11) the Department of Veterans Affairs;
       (12) the Smithsonian Institution;
       (13) the Department of Education;
       (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; and
       (15) the Food and Drug Administration, within the 
     Department of Health and Human Services.
       (c) Damage to Research Infrastructure.--A continued trend 
     of funding appropriations equal to or lower than current 
     budgetary levels will lead to permanent damage to the United 
     States research infrastructure. This could threaten American 
     dominance of high-technology industrial leadership.
       (d) Future Fiscal Year Allocations.--
       (1) Goals.--The long-term strategy for research and 
     development funding under this section would be achieved by a 
     steady 2.5 percent annual increase above the rate of 
     inflation throughout a 11-year period.
       (2) Inflation assumption.--The authorizations contained in 
     paragraph (3) assume that the rate of inflation for each year 
     will be 3 percent.
       (3) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     for civilian research and development in the agencies listed 
     in subsection (b)--
       (A) $39,790,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;
       (B) $41,980,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;
       (C) $44,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       (D) $46,720,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       (E) $49,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (F) $52,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (G) $54,870,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (H) $57,880,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
       (I) $61,070,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       (J) $64,420,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
       (K) $67,970,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
       (4) Acceleration to meet national needs.--
       (A) In general.--If the amount appropriated for any fiscal 
     year to an agency for the purposes stated in paragraph (3) 
     increases by more than 8 percent over the amount appropriated 
     to it for those purposes for the preceding fiscal year, then 
     the amounts authorized by paragraph (3) for subsequent fiscal 
     years for that agency and other agencies shall be determined 
     under subparagraphs (B) and (C).
       (B) Exclusion of agency in determining other agency amounts 
     for next fiscal year.--For the next fiscal year after a 
     fiscal year described in subparagraph (A), the amount 
     authorized to be appropriated to other agencies under 
     paragraph (3) shall be determined by excluding the agency 
     described in subparagraph (A). Any amount that would, but for 
     this subparagraph, be authorized to be appropriated to that 
     agency shall not be appropriated.
       (C) Resumption of regular treatment.--Notwithstanding 
     subparagraph (B), an agency may not be excluded from the 
     determination of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
     under paragraph (3) for a fiscal year following a fiscal year 
     for which the sum of the amounts appropriated to that agency 
     for fiscal year 2000 and all subsequent fiscal years for the 
     purposes described in paragraph (3) does not exceed the sum 
     of--
       (i) the amount appropriated to that agency for such 
     purposes for fiscal year 2000; and
       (ii) the amounts that would have been appropriated for such 
     purposes for subsequent fiscal years if the goal described in 
     paragraph (1) had been met (and not exceeded) with respect to 
     that agency's funding.
       (D) No limitation on other funding.--Nothing in this 
     paragraph limits the amount that may be appropriated to any 
     agency for the purposes described in paragraph (3).
       (e) Conformance with Budgetary Caps.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, no funds may be made available under 
     this Act in a manner that does not conform with the 
     discretionary spending caps provided in the most recently 
     adopted concurrent resolution on the budget or threatens the 
     economic stability of the annual budget.
       (f) Balanced Research Portfolio.--Because of the 
     interdependent nature of the scientific and engineering 
     disciplines, the aggregate funding levels authorized by the 
     section assume that the Federal research portfolio will be 
     well-balanced among the various scientific and engineering 
     disciplines, and geographically dispersed throughout the 
     States.

     SEC. 7. PRESIDENT'S ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST.

       The President of the United States shall, in coordination 
     with the President's annual budget request, include a report 
     that parallels Congress' commitment to support federally-
     funded research and development by providing--
       (1) a detailed summary of the total level of funding for 
     research and development programs throughout all civilian 
     agencies;
       (2) a focused strategy that reflects the funding 
     projections of this Act for each future fiscal year until 
     2010, including specific targets for each agency that funds 
     civilian research and development;
       (3) an analysis which details funding levels across Federal 
     agencies by methodology of funding, including grant 
     agreements, procurement contracts, and cooperative agreements 
     (within the meaning given those

[[Page S9309]]

     terms in chapter 63 of title 31, United States Code); and
       (4) specific proposals for infrastructure development and 
     research and development capacity building in States with 
     less concentrated research and development resources in order 
     to create a nationwide research and development community.

     SEC. 8. COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNTABILITY STUDY FOR FEDERALLY-
                   FUNDED RESEARCH.

       (a) Study.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy, in consultation with the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget, shall enter into agreement 
     with the National Academy of Sciences for the Academy to 
     conduct a comprehensive study to develop methods for 
     evaluating federally-funded research and development 
     programs. This study shall--
       (1) recommend processes to determine an acceptable level of 
     success for federally-funded research and development 
     programs by--
       (A) describing the research process in the various 
     scientific and engineering disciplines;
       (B) describing in the different sciences what measures and 
     what criteria each community uses to evaluate the success or 
     failure of a program, and on what time scales these measures 
     are considered reliable--both for exploratory long-range work 
     and for short-range goals; and
       (C) recommending how these measures may be adapted for use 
     by the Federal government to evaluate federally-funded 
     research and development programs;
       (2) assess the extent to which agencies incorporate 
     independent merit-based review into the formulation of the 
     strategic plans of funding agencies and if the quantity or 
     quality of this type of input is unsatisfactory;
       (3) recommend mechanisms for identifying federally-funded 
     research and development programs which are unsuccessful or 
     unproductive;
       (4) evaluate the extent to which independent, merit-based 
     evaluation of federally-funded research and development 
     programs and projects achieves the goal of eliminating 
     unsuccessful or unproductive programs and projects; and
       (5) investigate and report on the validity of using 
     quantitative performance goals for aspects of programs which 
     relate to administrative management of the program and for 
     which such goals would be appropriate, including aspects 
     related to--
       (A) administrative burden on contractors and recipients of 
     financial assistance awards;
       (B) administrative burdens on external participants in 
     independent, merit-based evaluations;
       (C) cost and schedule control for construction projects 
     funded by the program;
       (D) the ratio of overhead costs of the program relative to 
     the amounts expended through the program for equipment and 
     direct funding of research; and
       (E) the timeliness of program responses to requests for 
     funding, participation, or equipment use.
       (6) examine the extent to which program selection for 
     Federal funding across all agencies exemplifies our nation's 
     historical research and development priorities--
       (A) basic, scientific, and technological research in the 
     long-term future scientific and technological capacity of the 
     nation; and
       (B) mission research derived from a high-priority public 
     function.
       (b) Alternative Forms for Performance Goals.--Not later 
     than 6 months after transmitting the report under subsection 
     (a) to Congress, the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, after public notice, public comment, and approval by 
     the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 
     and in consultation with the National Science and Technology 
     Council shall promulgate one or more alternative forms for 
     performance goals under section 1115(b)(10)(B) of title 31, 
     United States Code, based on the recommendations of the study 
     under subsection (a) of this section. The head of each agency 
     containing a program activity that is a research and 
     development program may apply an alternative form promulgated 
     under this section for a performance goal to such a program 
     activity without further authorization by the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget.
       (c) Strategic Plans.--Not later than one year after 
     promulgation of the alternative performance goals in 
     subsection (b) of this section, the head of each agency 
     carrying out research and development activities, upon 
     updating or revising a strategic plan under subsection 306(b) 
     of title 5, United States Code, shall describe the current 
     and future use of methods for determining an acceptable level 
     of success as recommended by the study under subsection (a).
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
     the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
       (2) Program activity.--The term ``program activity'' has 
     the meaning given that term by section 1115(f)(6) of title 
     31, United States Code.
       (3) Independent merit-based evaluation.--The term 
     ``independent merit-based evaluation'' means review of the 
     scientific or technical quality of research or development, 
     conducted by experts who are chosen for their knowledge of 
     scientific and technical fields relevant to the evaluation 
     and who--
       (A) in the case of the review of a program activity, do not 
     derive long-term support from the program activity; or
       (B) in the case of the review of a project proposal, are 
     not seeking funds in competition with the proposal.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out the study required by 
     subsection (a) $600,000 for the 18-month period beginning 
     October 1, 2000.

     SEC. 9. EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FOR 
                   FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 11 of title 31, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

     ``Sec.  1120. Accountability for research and development 
       programs

       ``(a) Identification of Unsuccessful Programs.--Based upon 
     program performance reports for each fiscal year submitted to 
     the President under section 1116, the Director of the Office 
     of Management and Budget shall identify the civilian research 
     and development program activities, or components thereof, 
     which do not meet an acceptable level of success as defined 
     in section 1115(b)(1)(B). Not later than 30 days after the 
     submission of the reports under section 1116, the Director 
     shall furnish a copy of a report listing the program 
     activities or component identified under this subsection to 
     the President and the Congress.
       ``(b) Accountability if No Improvement Shown.--For each 
     program activity or component that is identified by the 
     Director under subsection (a) as being below the acceptable 
     level of success for 2 fiscal years in a row, the head of the 
     agency shall no later than 30 days after the Director submits 
     the second report so identifying the program, submit to the 
     appropriate congressional committees of jurisdiction:
       ``(1) a concise statement of the steps necessary to--
       ``(A) bring such program into compliance with performance 
     goals; or
       ``(B) terminate such program should compliance efforts 
     fail; and
       ``(2) any legislative changes needed to put the steps 
     contained in such statement into effect.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) The chapter analysis for chapter 11 of title 31, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the 
     following:

``1120. Accountability for research and development programs''.
       (2) Section 1115(f) of title 31, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``through 1119,'' and inserting ``through 
     1120''.

                          ____________________