MRS: Carrying the Materials Message Up the Hill
- PDF / 278,353 Bytes
- 1 Pages / 612 x 792 pts (letter) Page_size
- 88 Downloads / 156 Views
Letter from the President
MRS: Carrying the Materials Message Up the Hill U.S. government support for the physical science research enterprise, including materials science and engineering, is dependent on continual nurturing and advocacy. The immediate and pressing need to state and restate our case has been emphasized in this space and in many other science-oriented media. Outreach to Washington has been a major theme of the current Materials Research Society leadership and of several recent MRS presidencies. This past summer, the MRS Board of Directors took the unprecedented step of holding its summer meeting in Washington, D.C. In addition to covering the regular Society business that arises at this time of year, we devoted a full day to an extensive program of 27 congressional office visits as well as a meeting with officials at the State Department. A large majority of board members, MRS staff directors, and selected delegates of the MRS Government Affairs Committee participated under the leadership and guidance of our Washington consultant. This was by far the largest single-day advocacy effort in MRS history. Many valuable contacts were made, and important information was gleaned on how to leverage our resources for future advocacy. A few of us had some previous congressional visit experience from which to draw, either from our day jobs, multisociety visit days, or previous experience working with our consultant. Many others were complete novices going into the activity, but quickly caught onto the routine and the methods for effectively conveying the most beneficial and persuasive points. It quickly became apparent that each visit would be unique. Some representatives and senators are already so committed to science and employ such knowledgeable staffers (including our own Congressional Fellows!) that we end up learning from them. Other legislators are extremely skeptical and need to be walked through the reasons why science and engineering might matter to them or their constituents. It is not necessarily the case that the visits to “friendly” offices are the most productive or enjoyable. In one ostensibly friendly office, rather than being admired for being science supporters, we were implicitly criticized for not having done
“Support for the physical science research enterprise is dependent on continual nurturing and advocacy”
enough to oppose the tax cuts that have contributed to the current funding crunch. Another allied office would only accept numerical evidence to present to the legislator, while still another seemed interested only in the “people side” of issues. In contrast, some of the initially resistant offices offered opportunities to advance our case. For example, the office of one particular appropriator was receptive to discussion about the importance of the National Science Foundation in seeding technologies that offer his low-tech, declining industries a viable chance at reinvention and staving off further layoffs. We discovered the occasional personal touch that helped connect with sci
Data Loading...
