This report examines New York State's experience with multi-element formulas in budgeting for the State University of New York, and considers some of the obstacles confronting scientific budgeting in a political environment. A specific budgeting formula (the Academic Discipline Model) is examined, its evolution and application discussed, and the measurement of its success outlined. The report concludes with several observations: (1) that formula budgeting carries no guarantees of rational decision making, the Academic Discipline Model being no exception; (2) that the expression of resource allocation via formulas permits constructive debate to ensue; and (3) that the quantified nature of the rationale focuses negotiations on discrete issues. It is noted that the Academic Discipline Model has been utilized for the past 6 years and has spawned competing models, thereby attesting to its usefulness as a mechanism for resolution of conflicts. (GLR)