Blogs / Reality Base

What Must the Next President Do to Save Science? DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project 2008

What are the most important things the next U.S. president needs to do for science? Earlier this year, an impressive group of scientists and media types got behind the idea that the presidential candidates should have a debate on this very topic. Several months later, it’s clear that their goal won’t be met.

So where do we go from here? The prospects for elevating the public political discussion on science aren’t great, given the circumstances: Campaign strategists—and likely the nominees themselves—see science as a policy area with a world of downside and not much upside.

But when either Barack Obama or John McCain is sworn in as the next commander-in-chief, he will inherit a cauldron of serious problems, from energy to the environment to health care, that will take significant science research and knowledge to solve. As such, we figured it was a good idea to scratch the debates and get right to the recommendations.

With that goal in mind, we bring you the DISCOVER Science Policy Project, in which we give a group of the country’s most celebrated scientists and thinkers the chance to answer the following question:

What are the three most important things the next president can do to positively impact scientific research in the United States?

In the November issue of DISCOVER, we compile and analyze the results. In the meantime, we will be posting each response in its entirety here on Reality Base, as well as additional answers from authors, conservationists, geneticists, and more. Feel free to offer your own ideas and analysis in the comments section.

The time for debate is over. Let’s start providing some answers. All past responses can be found here.

EDWARD O. WILSON
Pulitzer Prize-winning conservation biologist

Start with the inauguration address, and repeat the theme in later addresses—combined with action—that the United States is determined to lead in science and technology, as a major thrust on behalf of this nation’s cultural and economic health.

Set up commissions, composed primarily of distinguished scientists and business leaders, to provide guidance on how such leadership can be widened and strengthened. The commissions would cover, respectively, medicine, environment, alternative energy, basic science, and science education.

Urge Congress to join you in a bipartisan manner to achieve the aforementioned goals.

September 9th, 2008 Tags: Discover's Science Policy Project
by Melissa Lafsky in Discover's Science Policy Project, Science Goes to Washington, The 2008 Election | 5 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

5 Responses to “What Must the Next President Do to Save Science? DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project 2008”

1. 1.   Sam Lowry Says:
   September 9th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

   With all due respect to E.O. Wilson, these kinds of suggestions are why the candidates are debating at Rick Warren’s church at the same time there is no prospect of a Science Debate.

   Speeches, commissions and bipartisanship aren’t going to unwind the current administration’s eight years of active and diligent anti-science work. Hopefully the other proposals are going to be a little more forceful than this one.

2. 2.   Darlene Cavalier Says:
   September 9th, 2008 at 3:11 pm

   I’m glad Discover’s keeping science in the election equation. GOOOO Discover and Melissa! It’s important to keep this dialogue alive.
   However, I agree with Sam, this first example is a little lacking. Unless, of course, E.O. Wilson is suggesting Congress reopens the Office of Technology Assessment (w/citizen input), in which case I’d be his #1 fan.
   While it’s important for Discover’s readers to be exposed to all of this and get a taste of the many ways federal policies can impair or repair science research in the U.S., the real fact of the matter is this: The candidates are bombarded with this type of advice. Folks at the National Academies, AAAS, Union of Concerned Scientists, Scientists and Engineers for America and everyone in between has presented the candidates with their “top things to do to improve science research” in the U.S. (in some form or fashion). The question is whether or not either of these candidates will adopt any recommendations, including those Discover has forthcoming.
   That’s precisely why the time for the candidates to present their positions on critical matters of science policy is NOW. I want to hear them debate their visions for science and innovation in the U.S. THEY need to provide their answers — and unless it’s coming from them, it’s not an answer, just another recommendation–to demonstrate which course of action they intend to take over the next four years. Or, we can continue to spin our wheels listening to ourselves pontificate on these matters. Unless McCain and Obama start posting comments here on this blog (which would be awesome…consider it a dare, boys!), I’m afraid we’ll still be left in the dark as to how the next four years will impact science research.
   Are there plans to have the candidates respond to these recommendations?

3. 3.   DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project: Craig Venter | Reality Base | Discover Magazine Says:
   September 10th, 2008 at 12:24 pm

   […] Reality Base to your RSSObesity May Be In Your Genes, But It Isn’t Your DestinyWhat Must the Next President Do to Save Science? DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project 2008Why Fight Curable STDs? Because They Increase the Risk of Incurable STDsWeekly Science & […]

4. 4.   DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project: Phil Plait | Reality Base | Discover Magazine Says:
   September 12th, 2008 at 10:58 am

   […] Science Policy Project: Craig VenterObesity May Be In Your Genes, But It Isn’t Your DestinyWhat Must the Next President Do to Save Science? DISCOVER’s Science Policy Project 2008 […]

5. 5.   Sanka Says:
   September 15th, 2008 at 5:19 pm

   EO and Darlene are both right — the Office of Technology Assessment should be reopened and should include citizen input and we should hear from our potential future leaders now but more importantly, science and research and the fundamental necessity and value of discovery must be reborn in our government. It’s not just about specific programs — that’s too small. Government gets bogged down in the practicalities of research — corporations will take care of practicalities. The government needs to back true, honest scientific inquiry — it is the only body that can. The investment is justified in the next generations not in the next fiscal year. This is a concept that must be supported and discussed and fought for on a regular basis not just once a year in the SOTU. AIDS research, cyber terrorism, energy research, water conservation — all areas that our nation desperately needs to lead, but requires a commitment beyond politics, a commitment to stay above the either/or logic of the Congressional budget process and treat this research as as essential to our national well-being and security as national defense.

Leave a Reply