Scientists initiate grassroots efforts to show importance of STEM to US government
- PDF / 423,848 Bytes
- 3 Pages / 585 x 783 pts Page_size
- 31 Downloads / 134 Views
Scientists initiate grassroots efforts to show importance of STEM to US government
P
olicymakers in the United States over the years have held many discussions about what “type” of science the US government should be supporting— from the most basic research, to development and commercialization of more advanced research, to moonshot technology ideas. In addition, debates have raged in Congress on using funding and incentives to pick “winners and losers” in certain technology areas (i.e., funding clean energy technologies versus supporting fossil fuels) or finding ways to provide general support and let the market decide technology outcomes. Lastly, with the need to cut the national deficit, all budgets, including those that support science, have come under scrutiny and faced cuts or flat funding in many areas. Despite these issues, science has received relatively broad bipartisan support within the US government. The landmark bill that authorized and guided
science policy over the last decade, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (COMPETES) Act was first passed in 2007 with a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress and under Republican President George W. Bush. Reauthorized in 2010, COMPETES never quite reached its goal to double the basic sciences research budget, but bipartisan support for science continued with the January 2017 passage of the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (AICA). A successor to COMPETES, the AICA was passed by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Democratic President Barak Obama in the final days of his presidency (reported in the March 2017 issue of MRS Bulletin, doi:10.1557/mrs.2017.43). From economic growth, to improved health and quality of life, to enhanced national security—politicians generally
Participants in the March for Science in San Francisco on April 22, 2017, call for nonpartisan support for science in policy decisions. Photo credit: Alison Hatt.
recognize the overarching results of government investment in science. A clear example of this can be found in the AICA, which characterizes contributions of federally funded basic research conducted by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as “scientifically and societally relevant,” and specifically calls out economic growth, human health benefits, and contributions to national security. However, while some of the benefits of federally funded science are largely acknowledged across party lines, funding science has become increasingly politicized over the last several years. A looming example of this is the partyline division of politicians on the issue of climate change. Democrats largely acknowledge the scientific consensus that human-made pollution is the predominant factor driving climate change. Conversely, Republicans range from questioning the science behind climate change to outright denial that humans have any impact on it. The politicization of this issue has led to vastly different ideas within Congress of whether federal
Data Loading...
