Does a nearly $1 trillion economic stimulus bill in the wake of $700 billion package that seems to have had little effect sound excessive to you? If so, you're not alone: Two U.S. senators are negotiating to cut $88 billion out of the version of the bill that passed the House of Representatives on January 28.

Sounds reasonable. Until you take a closer look at the proposed cuts, that is.

Among the biggest losers are science, energy and education. Huh? We may be biased over here at Wired Science, but in our view, science, energy and education should be at the top of the list of stimulus priorities rather than the first to go.

In September, Energy Secretary Steven Chu (when he was director of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory before his cabinet appointment) told me, "We have an option to be a leader in energy technologies, but we are not because our support system for that is on again off again. The future wealth of the United States will come from our ability to invent new technologies."

We wholeheartedly agree with this statement. Money toward science and technology, particularly alternative energy, would undoubtedly have a positive impact on the economy in the long-term and arguably in the short term as well. Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Republican Susan Collins of Maine clearly do not agree.

Below is a list of some of the cuts they have asked for.

National Science Foundation : $1.4 billion (100% cut)

Department of Energy, Efficiency and Renewable Energy: $1 billion (38% cut)

NASA exploration: $750 million (50% cut)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: $427 million (35% cut)

Department of Defense, Alternative Vehicle Tech, Procurement: $100 million (100% cut)

Department of Energy Office of Science: $100 million (100%)

And taking an even bigger hit is education with a proposed cut of $15 billion, the bulk of the funding in the House bill. And the ability of the states to make up for the short fall will be hamstrung by a proposed $40 billion reduction in funding for the State Stabilization Fund.

I don't get it. It's not as if the scientists and teachers are going to spend the money on junkets to Las Vegas and million-dollar bonuses. They'd be spending it directly on the country's future.

The senators' recommendations are especially disappointing after President Barack Obama got our hopes up with so much talk about science and energy. Let's hope the proposed cuts aren't a sign of things to come.

See Also:- Science Born Again in the White House, and Not a Moment Too Soon

Image: FLickr/Steve Rhodes