Worst. Broader Impacts Assessment. Ever.

Apologies to Comic Book Guy (if you have to look it up…).

Senator Tom Coburn is a patient man.  Over three years ago he started on a quest to defund federal political science research, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF).  Yesterday he succeeded.

In part because of the persistent failure of Congress to deal with a budget in anything resembling a rational process, the Senate was under pressure to pass a continuing resolution to fund the government through the rest of the fiscal year (ending September 30).  The current funding runs out next week, when Congress leaves town for Easter.  Senator McCain (a fellow fan of sound-bite science research criticism) joined Senator Coburn in supporting the amendment, which passed by a voice vote (it would likely not have passed a roll call vote).  Those who follow Congressional maneuvering more closely than I find it likely that the timing of the continuing resolution, and the need to address other budgetary pressures, made it necessary to cave to Coburn’s demands on this matter.

The amendment initially would shift $7 million in political science research funding directly to cancer research (the bill had to be revenue-neutral).  Thankfully the likely disciplinary funding fight was averted.  The revised amendment requires that any political research funded by the NSF be certified by the Director “as promoting national security or the economic interests of the United States.”

How’s that for your broader impacts criteria?