Image: Wikimedia Commons
Presidential candidates snatch the most attention during election seasons, and science usually gets scant mention. Science and technology, however, underpin some of the biggest problems facing the U.S., which is why Scientific American partnered with ScienceDebate.org to ask Pres. Barack Obama and former Gov. Mitt Romney to talk about 14 top challenges facing the country that are ultimately rooted in science.
But even the most science-savvy chief executive needs scientifically literate partners in Congress to implement sound initiatives. After all, the nation's laws ultimately get debated and passed on the floors of the House of Representatives and Senate. Because most of Congress's legislative work occurs within committees, we thought it made sense to find out how the top-ranking members of those committees approach issues that have some sort of foundation in science.
We chose eight of the original 14 questions that seemed to be most clearly legislative matters. Next we identified about a dozen congressional committees (including Appropriations and Budget) and two subcommittees that were likely to pay the largest roles on these issues. We then reached out to the committee chair and ranking member of these committees as well as the House and Senate majority and minority leaders. Finally, we did not contact representatives who were retiring.
Our targeted survey produced a 28 percent response rate, which we think is pretty good for our first effort at surveying the legislative leadership on science. Naturally, we would like it to be higher.
Of the 32 congressional leaders contacted, nine responded with either complete or partial answers, six declined our requests and 17 never got back to us, despite repeated e-mail and telephone requests. Of the congressional members who responded, two are Republicans and seven are Democrats.
The responders typically took the opportunity to point out their past legislative efforts as well as support or undermine current proposals from others. If they offered possible solutions, outlines were tentative. Some responses, including Sen. Jay Rockefeller's on the government's role in managing the Internet, are involved and lengthy. At the other end of the spectrum, Rep. John Mica kept his brief: for example, he answered one question in 10 words by pointing out that innovations in technology can solve freshwater problems.
All nine acknowledged climate change. Rep. Ralph Hall, however, prevaricated about the extent of humans' influence—citing great debate and uncertainty among experts.
We turned to Web sites and past statements made by the nonresponders to fill in the gaps. For example, we used public statements of the Senate majority and minority leaders as well as the speaker of the House to cobble together approximate positions. For the remaining legislative leaders in science- and technology-related policy, we ask for your help. If you find any public statement they have made addressing any of the questions, shoot an e-mail to submit@sciam.com with a link to the source.
We sent out initial requests in late July and early August. Each congressional member received at least six e-mails and six phone calls to their press offices to remind them that we were seeking written responses. The party leaders of the House and Senate—Speaker of the House John Boehner, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell—each received at least eight e-mails and six phone calls.
By September 30 nine members of Congress had sent answers and six officials declined to address the questions; the remaining 17 have not responded at the time of this writing. The door is still open: If any of the silent legislators send replies, we will post their responses.
We have responses to all eight questions from Reps. Henry Waxman (Committee on Energy and Commerce), Chris Van Hollen (Committee on the Budget), Ralph Hall (Committee on Science, Space and Technology), Timothy Bishop (Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment) and John Mica (Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure); Senators who responded were Jay Rockefeller (Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation), Tom Harkin (Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) and Dianne Feinstein (Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development). House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi answered five of the eight questions.
The following legislators declined to participate: Sens. Michael Enzi (Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions) and Jeff Sessions (Committee on the Budget) as well as Speaker of the House John Boehner and Rep. Collin Peterson (Committee on Agriculture). Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's press secretary informed SA that the senator ultimately did not have time to get to the questions before the deadline. Sen. Ron Wyden's press team wrote that the member of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, has a policy not to respond to survey questions.
The remaining elected officials did not respond: from the House, Frank Lucas (Committee on Agriculture), Scott Garrett (Committee on the Budget), Fred Upton (Committee on Energy and Commerce), Edward J. Markey and Doc Hastings (both on the Committee on Natural Resources), Eddie Bernice Johnson (Committee on Science, Space and Technology), Bob Gibbs (Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment) and Nick Rahall (Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure); from the Senate, Pat Roberts and Debbie Stabenow (both on the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry), Patty Murray (Committee on the Budget), Jim DeMint (Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation), Lisa Murkowski (Committee on Energy and Natural Resources), James Inhofe and Barbara Boxer (both on the Committee on Environment and Public Works), Harry Reid (majority leader) and Lamar Alexander (Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development).
We posted the responses in full and we welcome your analysis in the comments. Do congressional leaders weigh science when forming their policies? How do they plan to fund and regulate research? We are not asking politicians to be scientists, but we are asking them to consider the evidence when shaping U.S. science policy for the future.
Read the presidential candidates’ answers to all 14 questions in full at either ScienceDebate.org or Scientific American Online
Election 2012 button used under Creative Commons license BY 2.0.
|
Does Congress Get a Passing Grade on Science? |
Next » 1. Innovation |
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
13 Comments
Add CommentWe are part of a Northwest civic collaboration spanning Town Hall, Pacific Science Center, startups, scientists and academic leaders - all asking our candidate for governor (Inslee and McKenna) to answer 6 questions. They have not answered yet.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.sciencedebate.org/wa2012/ Thanks to Shawn Otto for helping us.
We should not vote for someone who does not even understand the nature of the world and our problems that can only be understood though the rigorous tools of science.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's too bad that we voted so many losers in congress.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there anything we can do to remove some of them?
If you already have a panel of scientific experts, why would you want to also include the opinions of Scientific American editors? To simply eyeball the opinions and conclude that the two groups were about the same seems egregiously unscientific. Here was a great chance to use your own editors as a control group. Frankly, I'd be much more interested in seeing how much they knew or didn't know. Show us your t-test.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisShame there was no question on evolution. Thought it was settled by the Scopes trial, but political/religious meddling in the school system is putting the country at a Luddite disadvantage.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe day politic turns into science will be the beginning of paradise on Earth (and the day aliens will officialy communicate with us).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWinged pigs won't help to align the economic strategy of our species with the scientific method.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou mean the only 2 nations that remain with a banking system controlled by their governments instead of the private Bank for International Settlements?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm looking forward to the day where the only remaining dictatorship will be nature and it's laws.
'Cause at that time, Earthlings will have understood: no matter how much money you create and no matter how many laws you pass, without a global cybernated resource management system that works independently of ideologies, patriotism and all that BS, there will be no sustainability in their system and they won't make it into the era of galactic cooperation.
Consider yourself as having a fan boy. An old, fat, ugly fan boy but a fan boy never the less. Now I have to find a T-shirt with a bird, tree and dinosaur on it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you! I don't know if you can get a shirt like that, but I appreciate the sentiment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's a shame so many of our leaders, including my Senator Ron Wyden from Oregon, aren't willing to be more open about their views. He'll be hearing from me when next I see him.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGood! We need tovote all of those bums out and elect some efficient, intelligent people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe resurgence of the so called fundamentalism in every world religion is on the rise because of our inability to understand the basic law of creation discovered by scientists, and its application to knowing: the balance of our natural world, the meaning of basic human rights, the definition of terrorism, the concept of natural justice and the making of a welfare state. Anti science behavior creates not only massive economic depression but it also drifts mankind away from understanding divine religions which ordain maintaining the balance of our natural world.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe massive economic crisis due to anti science behavior in societies has made man vulnerable and an easy prey to the merchants of death. Details are given in my book, “On the Creation of A Peaceful World by Natural Means of Selection”.
Abdul Ghafoor Khan