have you any figures for how much of that funding is commercially funded as opposed to nsf funding and how much of an influence is that on the overall quality of research? >> if you look globally at funding for biomedical research, a lot of the research starts in the university but then gets picked up for drug companies but if you look at the drug companies are doing to spend their own money to develop drugs that then they are going to sell, that's probably the biggest single pool of money. the next biggest pool of money is the nih funding. it's up to $37 billion. year now. there's lots of associations and things like that, but there's still a fairly minor share of the total funding. the question you are raising is how much can we trust research done at universities if it is funded by drunk drug companies. in think we need to be mindful of where it comes from to make sure they are grants and research that's trying to expand knowledge and not trying to promote a particular product. we do think about those questions, where's the money coming from, there's a study published in the new eng

wall came down and when the soviet union dissolved i had not yet gone over to my third incarnation nsf. so watching those events from the seats in the pentagon as a deputy at the strategic defense organization watching these events occur, i will say and not as a monday morning quarterback it bothered me a lot because we started talking about the peace dividend as if that would be a perpetual entitlement. and there is a saying about optimists and pessimists which i love is that the optimist is the person who believes in the best of all possible worlds but the pessimists us -- is the person who feels that might be true. [laughter] in the early and mid- 90s frankly i was quite cynical about the piece dividend and quite cynical about the practice of the defense department and other agencies aiding and abetting for other companies to merge from many competitors into a few large companies. i did not think that and i do not believe there would be a piece dividend to last the rest of my life let alone my children or grandchildren and i did not believe reducing our ability to have competition a

we were shocked, i was shocked to learn $37 billion to the nih, $7 billion to nsf, nasa gets $21 billion a lot more money than last year. is the problem that you isolated misstatements, wrong incidents, contract disputes, going to get better or worse in light of new funding? >> our experience from 1998-2003 as the budget was doubled is a cautionary note. science says we could use more money and we have a hypercompetitive world to put more money into it. you can alleviate that and that is good. many scientists, the printable investigator in the laboratory, you may spend 3 corners of your time writing grants to get more money, not just focusing on science but hope the lab is running along and doing that work. to the extent this money goes to alleviating that pressure is good. to expand unsustainable funding structure is treacherous. it really depends how the nh and other agencies use that funding. >> the white house may have announced it but congress did it. the white house would never have done that. they didn't want to sign a bill into law -- in nih, in the current year, it is all great,