MSU one of top U.S. universities in earmarked research money

Heavy science texts like "Physical Chemistry" fill bookcases in the offices of Montana State University’s vice president for research. But tucked away on one shelf is a more humorous title: "Congress for Dummies."

It’s no joke that understanding the ways of Washington, D.C., has become as essential for Montana researchers as understanding atoms or DNA.

By GAIL SCHONTZLER Chronicle Staff Writer

http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2004/08/22/news/02warriorsbzbigs.txt

Montanans aren’t dummies. Like bank robber Willie Sutton, Montana’s scientists go where the money is. And in Washington these days, the big money is in defense.

This month, President Bush signed a $416 billion defense-spending bill for 2005. A tiny fraction of that bill earmarks $66.4 million for Montana universities and technology companies to do defense-related research.

Montana has enjoyed a quantum leap in dollars earmarked for defense-research projects in the past two years — ever since Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., joined the defense subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

The state’s take from the past two years’ defense bills totals $144 million.

MSU is now one of the top U.S. universities in the nation for getting earmarked money from Congress, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education.

The Bozeman campus ranks No. 15 nationally, the journal found in a September 2003 report on the growth of earmarked funds, which it headlined, "Academic Pork Barrel Tops $2 Billion for the First Time."

In appreciation of the boost that Burns has give to research at MSU, dozens of the university’s brightest scientists crowded into a room on campus last week to thank the senator for going to bat in Congress for Montana science.

Almost a third of this year’s defense-research money for Montana, some $20 million, is coming to the Bozeman area, either to MSU or local technology companies.

Tom McCoy, MSU vice president for research, praised Burns for having the vision to see that building up science and technology is the way to strengthen Montana’s economy, and for recognizing that the way to do that is by getting himself on the Appropriations Committee.

Money earmarked by members of Congress for specific projects for their constituents is often criticized in the press as pork-barrel spending because approval depends on political clout or seniority.

Earmarked projects don’t go through the same scrutiny as projects that must compete for funds and be evaluated by peer scientists, for example, at the National Institutes of Health or National Science Foundation.

People say, "’You send a lot of pork to Montana,’" Burns told the MSU crowd jovially. "Let me tell you, pork goes to Minnesota. Infrastructure comes to Montana."

Now Montana can offer economic opportunities to its young people that didn’t exist before, Burns said, and bright college graduates no longer have to leave the state forever to find good-paying jobs.

Later, Burns told a reporter that sometimes it’s hard for Montanans to gain even an audience with the people in Washington who make the funding decisions.

Why not use earmarks, he said, to make sure "we get the money in the right place."

"It’s going to be spent somewhere," the senator said. "I want to get my share. Before, we’ve not had people with the guts to fight for it."

Will Swearingen is executive director of TechLink, which helps Montana and regional companies access NASA and Defense technologies that they can turn into marketable products. TechLink is getting $2 million.

The $66 million for Montana in the new defense bill "represents an enormous shot in the arm for the technology sector" of Montana’s economy, Swearingen said, adding that it’s far more than the few million the state of Montana can invest in boosting the economy.

"This is probably the single greatest contribution to economic development in the state this year," Swearingen said.

The money will result in new inventions, new companies, new high-paying jobs in clean industries, he said. "I believe that, really, Montana’s best hope for a vibrant, strong, future economy lies in the technology sector."

Ralph Hutcheson is founder of Scientific Materials Inc. in Bozeman, which is receiving $3.85 million from the new defense bill.

"Montana is extremely fortunate to have Conrad Burns on the Defense Appropriations subcommittee," Hutcheson said. "It opens doors that otherwise would be very, very difficult to open."

Montana companies are not on an even playing field with defense giants like Northrop Grumman Corp., Hutcheson said. If a small private Montana company on its own proposed technology to the Defense Department, chances are slim anyone in Washington would pay an attention, he said.

Burns’ staff, Hutcheson said, is "very discriminatory. They do not just take anything." Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., has also been extremely supportive, Hutcheson added. "For Montana to have two senior senators is very fortunate. Senator Burns, because of his committee positions, is extremely well-placed."

Since Sept. 11, the federal government has been putting more money into homeland security and anti-terrorism. Over the decades, national priorities have shifted several times, from fighting cancer to fighting AIDS, environmental cleanup now to bioterrorism. As Congress shifts money to meet new priorities, scientists tend to shift the direction of their research or seek uses for their basic research that fit the new priority.

Of all federal agencies, the Defense Department receives the most earmarked funds for academic projects, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education.

The president signed the 2005 defense bill, although his administration tried to slash defense-research dollars by nearly 10 percent. Congress instead increased the money by 10 percent.

The dollar value of congressional earmarks, from defense and all federal budget bills, has escalated dramatically — roughly doubling in four years.

Burns and MSU officials reject the implication that earmarked projects are of questionable value.

There are plenty of checks and balances, they insist, to ensure the earmarked money coming to Montana is only used for valuable research.

"We get results," Burns said. "That’s the acid test."

MSU filters out its best projects before asking Burns for help, McCoy said.

The projects undergo scrutiny within the Appropriations Committee, Burns said. The senators have knowledgeable staffs who debate the merits of their bosses’ competing earmarks.

"It has to stand the test of the rest of the committee," Burns said. And the senators have to stay within budget caps, he added. "We don’t bust the budget."

Once Congress approves an earmark for MSU, McCoy said, the university doesn’t get any money until the project is reviewed by the agency, such as NASA.

If a project is weak, he said, the agency will "fight tooth and nail" to ensure the project doesn’t get any more money.

The proof that MSU’s earmarks are put to good use, McCoy said, is that research projects that started here with earmarks have shown their worth and then won competitive grants.

McCoy pointed to the Thermal Biology Institute, which is studying organisms that thrive in the boiling-acid environment of Yellowstone National Park’s geysers. The institute started with earmarked funds, and has since brought in $17 million in competitive federal research grants.

Another example is TechLink, which started with a defense earmark in 1996 and recently "graduated" to become a permanent part of the Defense Department budget.

People may complain about earmarked money, McCoy said, but "there isn’t an institution in the nation that would turn it down."