Washington

Science lobbyists have launched a last-ditch attempt to win funding increases for research in President Bush's 2004 budget proposal. But the weak economic outlook and possibility of war mean it could be a disappointing year for US science agencies.

On 27 December, 32 societies signed a letter to Bush and his budget director, Mitch Daniels, urging them to increase research funding in their budget, which will be released on 4 February. “We strongly urge you to increase support for science programmes,” says the letter, which cited a string of statements from administration officials and advisers pledging improved science funding.

Earlier in 2002, it points out, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology called for more support for research in the physical sciences (see Nature 419, 3; 200210.1038/419003b). And on 19 December, President Bush signed into law an act authorizing a doubling of the budget for the National Science Foundation (NSF) over five years.

But all the indications are that next month's budget won't deliver on these pledges. Because Congress has yet to finalize the budget for the 2003 fiscal year — which began last October — the Bush administration will use its own 2003 budget proposal as a guideline for next year's funding levels. And in some cases, those 2004 numbers are less than what Congress might appropriate for the agencies in 2003. For example, one congressional source says that Bush will propose an NSF budget of about $5.4 billion in 2004. This is 9% more than he proposed in 2003 — but actually no more than Congress is planning to give the agency this year.

Other agencies may face similar woes. Several reports suggest that the National Institutes of Health could win an increase of as little as 0.3% to its $27-billion budget. And a Pentagon source says that laboratories in the defence department are fighting to preserve their fundamental research budgets in the face of a possible war with Iraq.

Meanwhile, the lack of a finalized budget meant that research agencies rang in the New Year still stuck at 2002 budget levels. But it is likely that their 2003 budgets will be agreed in the next few weeks (see Nature 419, 657; 200210.1038/419657b).

Given the uncertainty of the year ahead, “people have yet to believe that the administration is committed to increasing science funding”, says Samuel Rankin, head of government relations at the American Mathematical Society. “It's sort of like 'the cheque's in the mail'.”