Science magazine analyzes each political party platform’s science outlook
DOI: 10.1063/PT.4.0153
With due recognition of the differences between a party’s platform and actual political practice, Science magazine’s Science Insider — an online feature with ‘breaking news and analysis from the world of science policy’ — has offered a pair of lengthy, bullet-list-style articles detailing science mentions in the parties’ platforms.
On 29 August, David Malakoff’s ‘Republican Party platform has a lot to say about science ’ began, ‘Addressing climate change and reducing demand for fossil fuels are out, and more neuroscience research and space science missions are in.’ Malakoff is not surprised, he says, that science doesn’t get its own platform chapter. He notes that ‘references to it are sprinkled throughout sections on education, natural resources, and government reform.’ He lists and discusses highlights:
* ‘Climate change does a disappearing act.’ In this section, Malakoff recalls the party’s 2008 platform’s frank engagement of climate. He discusses the present platform’s opposition to cap and trade, to much about the Environmental Protection Agency, and to the Obama administration’s view of climate change as a severe national security threat.
* ‘Alternative energy gets a qualified vote of confidence.’ Here Malakoff quotes the party’s official words encouraging advances in renewable energy but criticizing Democrats for trying ‘to pick winners and losers in the energy sector’ and for stopping the Keystone XL Pipeline.
* ' ‘Strategic immigration’ of scientists and engineers gets a plug.’ The article says that ‘the 2012 platform gives much more attention than the 2008 platform to the fate of immigrants who earn advanced degrees in science and engineering fields from U.S. universities.’
* ‘A warning against politicized science.’ This part reports that the platform calls for ‘restor[ing] scientific integrity to our public research institutions and remov[ing] political incentives from publicly funded research.’ Malakoff adds:
In a section entitled, ‘Reining in the EPA,’ the platform also links ‘liberty’ to scientific progress. ‘Liberty alone fosters scientific inquiry, technological innovation, entrepreneurship, and information exchange,’ it says. ‘Liberty must remain the core energy behind America’s environmental improvement.’
* ‘Continued support for biomedical research, and opposition to human embryonic stem cell studies.’ The platform emphasizes neuroscience, Malakoff writes, and mentions autism, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s. It also repeats past opposition to ‘destruction of embryonic human life’ in, and federal funding for, stem cell research.
* ‘A retreat from human space flight?’ The article portrays the Republican Party as ambiguous on NASA’s future.
* ‘Unhappiness with stockpile stewardship and missile defense.’ The gist here involves Republican allegations that the Obama administration is failing on crucial national security concerns.
* ‘Kudos for African health program.’ Malakoff quotes the platform’s praise for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief: ‘PEPFAR, President George W. Bush’s Plan for AIDS Relief, is one of the most successful global health programs in history’ in that it ‘has saved literally millions of lives.’
* ‘Make the R&D tax credit permanent.’ Malakoff explains that President Obama agrees with Republicans that ‘policy lurches’ inherent in year-by-year renewal of the credit cause too much uncertainty, thereby inhibiting innovation.
On 4 September, Malakoff and Meghna Sachdev published ‘Democratic Party platform mostly looks back on science .’ They began this way:
What a difference an election makes. In 2008, Barack Obama ran for president on a Democratic Party platform that emphasized the need to ‘end the [George W.] Bush Administration’s war on science.’ The document used lofty language in promising new climate change policies, more research with human embryonic stem cells, and an energy strategy that would ‘solve the problem of four-dollar-a-gallon gas.’
But in 2012, President Obama now has a record to defend, so this edition of the party platform has a much different feel. Instead of sweeping promises and grand goals, it emphasizes what the incumbent has managed to achieve despite governing during a historic economic downturn. There is no mention of a few failed Democratic initiatives, including an effort to pass ‘cap-and-trade’ legislation to curb U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases, and his opponent, Mitt Romney, is criticized for what he has said, not what he has done.
As in the Republican case, this article discusses highlights in a bullet-list format and at some length. Here’s a distillation:
* ‘On climate, a retreat from cap and trade.’ The authors observe that the Democrats have backed off on cap and trade since 2008 but that they say they ‘will seek to implement agreements and build on the progress made during climate talks in Copenhagen, Cancun, and Durban, working to ensure a response to climate change policy that draws upon decisive action by all nations.’ They spotlight one Democatic platform line in particular: ‘Our opponents have moved so far to the right as to doubt the science of climate change.’
* ‘Backing alternative energy, but using a different yardstick to measure progress.’ Here the authors again note some Democratic retreating from 2008, but note also that the platform ‘trumpets’ various developments.
* ‘Mixed report on basic research spending, space, and tax policy goals.’ The authors summarize Democratic declarations concerning stem cells, NASA, biomedical research, and federal research funding in general.
* ‘A call for an immigration policy that helps the economy.’ The authors quote the platform’s affirmation of the need ‘for foreign students earning advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to stay and help create jobs here at home.’ They note, though, that the Democrats stop ‘short of explicitly endorsing proposals to automatically give work and residency permits to foreign students who complete advanced technical degrees at U.S. universities, an idea that both Obama and Romney have trumpeted on the campaign stump.’
* ‘A more muted nuclear weapons policy?’ The authors see evidence that the Democrats have found the challenges of nonproliferation and the elimination of nuclear weaponry to be more daunting than they believed in 2008.
* ‘A bipartisan nod to international public health.’ The Democratic platform ‘heaps praise on a global health program originally created under Bush — and takes credit for expanding the bipartisan initiative,’ the authors report. It also states that the administration ‘lifted the 25-year ban that prevented non-citizens living with HIV from entering the United States, allowing the world’s largest group of HIV/AIDS researchers, policymakers, medical professionals, and advocates to convene in Washington [this year] to continue their efforts to improve prevention and treatment.’
* ‘Support for science and math teachers.’ The authors report the platform’s declaration about preparing 100 000 math and science teachers over the coming decade. But they add that the universities might already be achieving that rate and that’the country’s decentralized approach to teachers’ training and certification makes it difficult to pin down any such number.’
Steven T. Corneliussen, a media analyst for the American Institute of Physics, monitors three national newspapers, the weeklies Nature and Science, and occasionally other publications. He has published op-eds in the Washington Post and other newspapers, has written for NASA’s history program, and is a science writer at a particle-accelerator laboratory.