This book should have been reviewed in Prometheus several years ago, but I didn’t know about it until I found two copies on the “New Acquisitions” shelf in the American Center Library here in Warsaw.

LFS member Joseph P. Martino is a senior research scientist at the Research Institute of the University of Dayton in Ohio. His book is extremely useful for those interested in the history of science funding in this country and how the intrusion of politics into the funding process has in recent years distorted scientific research and science itself.

The book boasts as clear an explanation of the economics of public choice as I’ve ever read, and a more preachy, non-ideological style that is very suitable for the subject matter. Using a 1986 survey of research scientists, carried out by Martino and Nicholas Engler on government sponsorship of science, and a wealth of history about the evolution of government funding, Martino simply presents facts and allows readers to draw their own conclusions.

The major thrust of government intervention into the scientific process came after World War II, as Vannevar Bush and Franklin Roosevelt noted the work done for defense during the war and decided to apply that successful partnership to peacetime. Several agencies were set up—to allow for some competition—for the purpose of funneling government money into scientific projects. Since then, the process has been thoroughly politicized, with states and their representatives squabbling over proposed projects like the Superconducting Supercollider, and the scientific ends becoming entirely obscured by the race for jobs and votes.

The main problems caused by porkbarrel research are the corruption and politicization of the scientific enterprise, the diversion of funds from innovative small science to bloated, often outdated “big” science, the addition of layers of time-wasting red tape which turns our scientists into paper pushers, and the elimination of the most innovative projects because choices are made by the peer review system—when for truly ingenious projects there may be no peers. Government agencies avoid risk because, unlike businesses, they have little to gain if a risky project succeeds, and thus truly pathbreaking ideas get pushed aside.

Most interesting is Martino’s clear demonstration that these problems are inherent in government funding and cannot be overcome by “vigilance” or “congressional oversight,” two often cited non-cures for predicaments caused by government.

Instead, Martino made several suggestions to aid the privatization of research. First, the patent law system must be strengthened. Right now, patents are as strong as the courts which uphold them, and that support wavers from decade to decade.

Second, accounting standards should be changed to allow research to be recorded as an asset rather than a cost for tax purposes—tax law already allows this, but accounting standards have not reflected the change.

Third, industrial consortia must be able to fund research without anti-trust concerns. Fourth, tax deductions for contributions to all kinds of scientific research must be provided.

Given the very real interest by the public in scientific enterprises, especially astronomy—all the astronomical observatories in this nation, except one, were funded by private money—tax breaks mixed with innovative fund-raising could encourage a great outpouring of private money for scientific research.