Image: MATT COLLINS
The U.S. Congress has long been a slow and irresolute institution, especially when it comes to science issues. Unfortunately, the Democratic majority that came to power in the 2006 midterm election has so far done little to change that reputation. Nearly a year after the Democrats took over the legislative branch, America continues to escalate its emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are slowly roasting the globe. Furthermore, although Congress has proposed funding increases for many scientific agencies and national laboratories, researchers still have no reassurance that Uncle Sam will actually deliver its promised grants and budgets. Here are some highlights of how the 110th Congress has handled science measures over the past year.
Energy. Promoting energy efficiency and renewable sources is vital to curbing greenhouse gases, but as of early November Congress’s much anticipated energy bill was stuck in legislative limbo. In June the Senate passed a promising measure that would raise the fuel economy of cars and light trucks from the current average of 26 miles per gallon to 35 mpg by 2020; in August the House approved a bill that would repeal subsidies for the oil and gas industry and require utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources such as wind power. Unfortunately, the House and Senate bills were wildly different, and the usual process for reconciling the measures—negotiations in a House-Senate conference committee—broke down. Claiming that Senate Republicans had blocked efforts to appoint committee members, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California announced in October that Democratic leaders in the House and Senate would hammer out a compromise. In the face of veto threats from President George W. Bush, will the tough efficiency proposals survive? The chances look dim.
Global warming. As the energy bill falters, Congress has launched a parallel effort to fight global warming by proposing a “cap and trade” system for industrial polluters. Sponsored by Senators John Warner of Virginia and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, America’s Climate Security Act is aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 60 percent of current levels by 2050. Although the bill has bipartisan support, it has only just entered the legislative mill and may also face opposition from the White House.
Drug safety reform. One of the modest victories of the 2007 session was a law giving the U.S. Food and Drug Administration more power to monitor the safety of newly introduced pharmaceuticals. Spurred by the Vioxx debacle of 2004, the reform legislation enables the FDA to force drugmakers to conduct long-term studies of drugs whose side effects may not become apparent until they are in widespread use. The law also orders the pharmaceutical industry to pony up $225 million over the next five years to pay for the new safety monitoring.
Science funding. In his State of the Union address last January, President Bush announced the American Competitiveness Initiative, an ambitious plan to beef up federal funding for the physical sciences. Congress responded by significantly boosting the proposed budgets for the National Science Foundation, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science. The extra money would be a particularly great boon for researchers investigating climate change, but because Congress approved the budget increases without cutting funding in other areas, President Bush is now threatening to veto the appropriations bills. Many of the proposed increases may vanish before the bills become law, and in the meantime federal agencies have to operate at last year’s funding levels.
Who’s to blame? Our government’s dismal science record for 2007 is partly the result of the political gridlock that occurs whenever one party controls Congress and the other rules the White House. Last June, for example, President Bush vetoed legislation that would have expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. But some Democratic lawmakers have also obstructed progress. Representative John Dingell of Michigan, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, fought the increase in fuel economy standards proposed in the Senate’s energy bill, saying it would devastate U.S. automakers. Internal divisions among Democrats led to the current logjam on the energy issue, which must be untangled for the sake of our planet.
This article was originally published with the title Congress Fails Science.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
7 Comments
Add CommentThis article is horrible. The first half of it needs to be editted because Congress DID pass the fuel economy bill, and George Bush has promised to sign it. Furthermore, the rest of the article goes on to list good things Congress did for the environment. The facts presented don't match the conclusions, I'm honestly confused.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUS has failed to take any nessary step to combat the climate change( environmental terrorism).Mr. Bush next Gen. yell donnot push us to hell.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think that it´s time to produce a paper with scientist showing experimental data proving global warming and scientist who are skeptical about and their reasons to,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPerhaps a magazine published monthly shouldn't include commentary on legislation that's on congress' front burner. Time to bring in Emily Litella to do a follow-up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is going to get worse! The new Republican frontrunner for president believe the earth is 6000 years old. I pity the scientific advisor explaining ice-core data to him.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Republicans blocked almost all science funding for nearly thirty years now because of their fundamentalist Christian base so fire them and go with the Democrats. It will take at least four terms of mostly Democrats to erase the dismal record of the Republican party. One year is barely enough time to cover the damage done to America by the anti science party over the past 30 years of mostly Republican control of Congress and they cannot work with George Bush on science issues because he blocks most science research because it does not support funamentalist Christian values. Fire all Republicans if you want science to thrive you have to remove people with 19th century ideas and ideals.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs long as there is this black-white "conservative-liberal" Rep.- Dem. dichotomy where both parties are actually just millionaires pandering to other millionaires progress is not possible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this