stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
satishbsk
08-05 11:01 AM
When was ur recent visa issued?
If it is more than 1 year then G-825A wont be cross checked with the info what you gave on DS-157.
____________________
Contirbuted $280 so far
If it is more than 1 year then G-825A wont be cross checked with the info what you gave on DS-157.
____________________
Contirbuted $280 so far
Krilnon
02-08 04:45 PM
Voters: 89
freeskier89
Suspicious. :P
Anyways, yay.
freeskier89
Suspicious. :P
Anyways, yay.
Jaime
09-12 05:02 PM
Come to DC or we will send "Churi Chikkanna" after you...LOL
Not exactly sure who Churi Chikkanna is, but we will definitely recruit him/her and send him after anyone who does not attend the rally!!!
Only kidding of course
SERIOUSLY GUYS THIS IS THE TIME TO ACT! EVERYONE TO WASHINGTON!!! ALREADY MANY PEOPLE CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND DECIDED TO ATTEND!!! WHAT IS STOPPING YOU??? TELL US AND WE'LL HELP YOU IN ANY WAY (EVEN WITH TRAVEL MONEY) SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE IT!!!!
Not exactly sure who Churi Chikkanna is, but we will definitely recruit him/her and send him after anyone who does not attend the rally!!!
Only kidding of course
SERIOUSLY GUYS THIS IS THE TIME TO ACT! EVERYONE TO WASHINGTON!!! ALREADY MANY PEOPLE CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND DECIDED TO ATTEND!!! WHAT IS STOPPING YOU??? TELL US AND WE'LL HELP YOU IN ANY WAY (EVEN WITH TRAVEL MONEY) SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE IT!!!!
more...
reddymjm
03-16 01:26 PM
Why he should expect an RFE in a Month or Two ?
Any rational reason ?
One way of reducing backlog is by issuing an RFE and a possible denial. Most of the EB3 with very old PD I would say before 2004 there is a standard RFE for an employment letter, resulting in a AC21 or some chance where they can deny some cases.
Any rational reason ?
One way of reducing backlog is by issuing an RFE and a possible denial. Most of the EB3 with very old PD I would say before 2004 there is a standard RFE for an employment letter, resulting in a AC21 or some chance where they can deny some cases.
bkn96
02-18 10:58 AM
My MTR got approved in 2 months from TSC.
But online status for I485 is not changed yet...... Does anyone has any idea of what process they follow for MTR reopening and I485 status update?
I am in same situation. MTR approved to reopen 485 but online status not changed still shows 'denial notice sent'.
But online status for I485 is not changed yet...... Does anyone has any idea of what process they follow for MTR reopening and I485 status update?
I am in same situation. MTR approved to reopen 485 but online status not changed still shows 'denial notice sent'.
more...
mnkaushik
05-14 11:11 AM
FYI - last year I was current on August 1st and got my green card email on August 30th. There were plenty of people who did not get it that month and got it following month.
If I were you, I would what ever you think helps your case but looking at how things happend last year, I really dont think anything helped. But I did talk to my congressman and also created SR. I think, if you search for threads titled August 2010 approvals etc you will find everyone went through what you are all going through now.
If I were you, I would what ever you think helps your case but looking at how things happend last year, I really dont think anything helped. But I did talk to my congressman and also created SR. I think, if you search for threads titled August 2010 approvals etc you will find everyone went through what you are all going through now.
devamanohar
10-07 01:33 PM
When she was 19, I applied for her on behalf of me.
She was my dependent.
She was my dependent.
more...
gcformeornot
12-06 12:24 PM
case transfered from CSC to NSC. See signature for details.
willwin
07-10 09:21 AM
I got my PWD today!!
Filed on 5th Jan and received today.
Next, the LC waiting period starts!!
My LC was approved on 07/07/2010.
On to I140+485 stage next.
Filed on 5th Jan and received today.
Next, the LC waiting period starts!!
My LC was approved on 07/07/2010.
On to I140+485 stage next.
more...
looivy
07-17 01:34 AM
I can re-apply, but my 485 is already approved on July 8th!
Sorry to hear that. What does your lawyer have to say?
Also, why did they not inform you until now. You must have filed hers around Feb 2005.
Sorry to hear that. What does your lawyer have to say?
Also, why did they not inform you until now. You must have filed hers around Feb 2005.
reddymjm
01-09 11:39 PM
I would have said 2020 but as you are not part of India or china may be 2015.
more...
no-tec
10-14 07:28 PM
i think its like that for everyone. theres always 100
s of ppl on at once. :(
s of ppl on at once. :(
mambarg
08-02 04:50 PM
They are predicting and dont know the truth.
So in prediction, they are competing with us.
Ignore it.
They are making it official on their website.
They should have a warning sign: Reading this article may be injurious to your health OR something.
Everyday things change. They did not predict that July 2 will get revised ?
They why bother reading their site now ????????????????????????
So in prediction, they are competing with us.
Ignore it.
They are making it official on their website.
They should have a warning sign: Reading this article may be injurious to your health OR something.
Everyday things change. They did not predict that July 2 will get revised ?
They why bother reading their site now ????????????????????????
more...
gsc999
04-02 12:54 PM
Hi,
I am in the Peninsula, in Nor. Cal. My congress woman is Anna Eshoo. Please let me know how I can help. I have called her office and asked for support for the STRIVE bill. I will call her office again and set up a meeting. Need the collateral from IV. Anyone near around this area?
I am in the Peninsula, in Nor. Cal. My congress woman is Anna Eshoo. Please let me know how I can help. I have called her office and asked for support for the STRIVE bill. I will call her office again and set up a meeting. Need the collateral from IV. Anyone near around this area?
sachug22
07-21 05:12 PM
As it is mentioned in the RFE, I have to reply with the sealed envlope and copy of letter and the yellow paper attached. I did not receive any yellow paper along with the mail. Did any one received like this ?
The gold coversheet is sent to lawyer, you only get a copy of the RFE letter. You can still respond to RFE without this letter just make sure you provide all the details (Receipt number, Alien number, RFE refernce, copy of RFE) when responding to this RFE.
The gold coversheet is sent to lawyer, you only get a copy of the RFE letter. You can still respond to RFE without this letter just make sure you provide all the details (Receipt number, Alien number, RFE refernce, copy of RFE) when responding to this RFE.
more...
dbevis
March 3rd, 2004, 07:22 PM
Very cool. Gets the Vertigo award from me. That has to be the tallest spiral staircase I've ever seen. They don't design em like that much over here - probably to minimize the possibility of jumpers.
saxx
01-26 05:05 AM
Perlin circles man, that's great.
ashkam
08-03 07:49 AM
What do you mean by infinite? Only till your PD gets current. After that 1 year extensions.
anilkumar0902
11-01 12:05 AM
PVGanesh,
Yes, affidavits or letter on employer letterheads from your colleagues about your progressive experience should suffice.For EB2 you need to prove that you have Masters or Bachelors with five years of progressive experience.
Good luck.
Cheers
Yes, affidavits or letter on employer letterheads from your colleagues about your progressive experience should suffice.For EB2 you need to prove that you have Masters or Bachelors with five years of progressive experience.
Good luck.
Cheers
Charleh
05-30 04:14 AM
Most of the time you will hanlde referential integrity checks via SQL constraints or a double layer via your business objects and constraints together. If you wrap your update statements in a try/catch you can always catch any SQLExceptions first.
Self incrementing IDs shouldn't be a problem - the data objects should be smart enough to know not to try to insert a key, and they will let SQL pick it. You shouldn't need to worry about these at all.
As long as SQL has the constraints you shouldn't have any problems introduced by the application - the worst case is that the application throws an unhandled exception after trying to do an illegal insert. Of course if this causes any problems within the application and the data display it should be handled, but the actual underlying data shouldn't be affected.
Self incrementing IDs shouldn't be a problem - the data objects should be smart enough to know not to try to insert a key, and they will let SQL pick it. You shouldn't need to worry about these at all.
As long as SQL has the constraints you shouldn't have any problems introduced by the application - the worst case is that the application throws an unhandled exception after trying to do an illegal insert. Of course if this causes any problems within the application and the data display it should be handled, but the actual underlying data shouldn't be affected.
No comments:
Post a Comment