The appropriations bill that was passed earlier this month sets the federal government’s budget for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2014, and is regarded by many as a sign of good things to come. Congress demonstrated its oft-doubted ability to work cooperatively by passing this bi-partisan bill, and many of the funding cuts that were made during the “sequester” this past March were softened. In particular, the new appropriations bill allocated more money for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), among other research-sponsoring agencies. In many cases, however, total funds still did not match pre-sequester numbers. While we recognize this restoration of funding as a step in the right direction, Congress must continue to restore funding to the various catalysts of research in the United States. Congress should recognize the scientific and economic benefits of research and look to other areas, such as entitlements and defense, to find savings.

Though the bill gives back some of the funding to the NIH and NSF that was lost after the sequester, it does not restore federal funding to its pre-sequester level. Limiting the ability of these organizations to give grants and fund important research affects research institutions across the nation, and Harvard is no exception. Increasing the federal contribution to the NIH and NSF is certainly beneficial, but until funding reaches or surpasses the levels of pre-sequester, we will continue to have to understaff labs or turn away projects entirely. Continuing to underfund research institutions can only result in fewer contributions to science and technology during a time when both are incredibly important to the world economy; now is the time to actually increase the number of opportunities for American scientists, as important discoveries are waiting to be made in medicine, energy, and countless other fields.

Indeed, evidence suggests that funding scientific research is actually beneficial to the economy, creating high-paying jobs and brighter futures. This would suggest that instead of including scientific research in budget cut proposals, Congress should invest in research, even in the face of large deficits. Although increased spending is unpopular in a still fragile economy, it will yield long-term dividends.

We understand, however, that demanding more funding for certain areas without reducing funding in others does not compute. Instead of cutting scientific research, however, we invite Congress to revisit other areas and organizations that receive funding from the federal government. Our lawmakers should focus on removing inefficiencies in the system, which are especially notorious in the Department of Defense. Additionally, we encourage Congress to also look at entitlement programs more closely, as we have opined in the past.

Although the newly passed appropriations bill is not perfect, we do appreciate that it is a step towards restoring funding to research. If this trend continues, we can expect to see actual economic benefit backed by exciting advances in areas from basic science to cancer treatment.