Congress and NSF face off

The chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Republican Lamar Smith of Texas, has recently prepared a bill entitled "The High-Quality Research Act" that aims to revise the criteria by which the National Science Foundation would award grants. According to ScienceInsider, the new bill would:

require the NSF director to post on NSF's website, prior to any award, a declaration that certifies the research is (1)...in the interests of the United States to advance the national health, prosperity, or welfare, and to secure national defense by promoting the progress of science; (2)...the finest quality, is groundbreaking, and answer questions or solves problems that are of utmost importance to society at large; (3)...not duplicative of other research projects being funded by the Foundation or other Federal agencies.

The bill is being proposed in response to several social science grants that were identified as a waste of tax-payer money. I am in agreement with arstechnica's John Timmer who, in response to points (2) and (3) of the bill's criteria, argues:

The other two requirements, however, completely misunderstand both basic research and the role of the National Science Foundation. Basic research is largely about exploring the unknown; by definition, it's almost impossible to tell which areas of research will end up being groundbreaking of have commercial applications. And the NSF is specially tasked with funding basic research and science education.

Should NSF and other government funding agencies be required to justify their decisions? Absolutely. But who is best qualified to judge the merit of these projects? I'd say the hard-working, anonymous reviewers who have expertise in each particular field. I'll be keeping an eye on this...