Interesting: candidate stands on sci/tech...

[PeterB]

Because some have complained that it wasn't clear where the candidates stood...

This is from the journal Biotechniques:

Science research policies of 2008 presidential candidates
New York, NY, Jan. 3—As the unseasonably early presidential campaign approaches its first round of caucuses, BioTechniques summarizes the top candidates' announced positions on federal funding for science (with a sidelong look at positions on embryonic stem cell research). In alphabetical order, they say:

Hillary Clinton, Democrat
Scientific Research: Clinton proposes to "renew the nation's commitment to research; help create the premier science, engineering, technology and mathematics workforce; and upgrade our innovation infrastructure." Her plan includes the following points:
• "Increase the basic research budgets 50% over 10 years at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the Defense Department."
• "Increase the NIH budget by 50% over 5 years and aim to double it over 10 years."
• "Direct the federal agencies to award prizes in order to accomplish specific innovation goals."
• "Triple the number of NSF fellowships and increase the size of each award by 33 percent."
• "Overhaul the R&E [Research and Experimentation] tax credit to make the U.S. a more attractive location for high-paying jobs." (Source: Clinton's Innovation page)
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Clinton proposes to sign an Executive Order that: "Rescinds President Bush's ban on ethical embryonic stem cell research and promotes stem cell research that complies with the highest ethical standards." (Source: Clinton's "Ending the War on Science" press release)

John Edwards, Democrat
Scientific Research: Edwards proposes to "recharge America's competitiveness through improvements in infrastructure today and investments in research and education that will pay off tomorrow." His plan includes:
• "Make the Research and Experimentation tax credit permanent."
• "Increase spending on basic research at the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health..." (Source: Edward's Innovation page)
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Edwards proposes to "lift the stifling restrictions that President Bush imposed and provide additional federal funding for responsible embryonic stem cell research." (Source: Washington Post's Edward's profile)

Rudy Giuliani, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statements.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Giuliani states, "As long as we're not creating life in order to destroy it, as long as we're not having human cloning... there is plenty of opportunity to then use federal funds." (Source: Washington Post's Giuliani profile).

Mike Huckabee, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statements.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Huckabee is "opposed to research on embryonic stem cells." (Source: Huckabee's Sanctity of Life page)

John McCain, Republican
Scientific Research: McCain proposes to "make permanent the research and development (R&D) tax credit to keep America competitive and provide a stable environment for entrepreneurs." (Source: McCain's Tax page)
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: McCain states, "I support a public policy that balances the moral concerns of those opposed to federal funding of embryonic stem cell research with the sense of moral imperative of taxpayers who support such research. I support the increase of funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos. (Source: Washington Post's McCain profile)

Barack Obama, Democrat
Scientific Research: Obama proposes to change "the posture of our federal government from being one of the most anti-science administrations in American history to one that embraces science and technology." His plan includes the following points:
• "Doubling federal funding for basic research."
• "Make the Research and Development tax credit permanent so that firms can rely on it when making decisions to invest in domestic R&D over multi-year time frames." (Source: Obama's Economy page)
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Obama states that he is "a proud supporter of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The president was wrong to veto it, and I will make sure that it is finally signed into law when I'm president." (Source: Washington Post's Obama profile)

Mitt Romney, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statement.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Romney states, "I support federal funding for such so-called alternative methods like altered nuclear transfer and direct reprogramming. I oppose cloning and think the practice of creating human embryos for the purposes of research should be banned." (Source: Washington Post's Romney profile)

Fred D. Thompson, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statement.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research: "I support adult stem cell research. I oppose embryonic stem cell research and human cloning." (Source: Washington Post's Thompson profile)

For more information about the candidates' science policies, see Popular Mechanics' science and technology guide to the 2008 presidential election called "Geek the Vote 2008" or the Huffington Post's article "U.S. Presidential Candidates' Health Care Plans: Scientific and Medical Research Proposals," which provides annotated comparison charts.

[davester]

I propose that we change the name of the Republican Party to the "Keep the People (Including the Chief Executive) Ignorant" Party. For short, we'll just call it the "Ignorance Party".

[spearmint]

[quote davester]I propose that we change the name of the Republican Party to the "Keep the People (Including the Chief Executive) Ignorant" Party. For short, we'll just call it the "Ignorance Party".
I propose we name the Democratic Party the "Whatever you want to hear and money is free" party.

[PeterB]

[quote spearmint][quote davester]I propose that we change the name of the Republican Party to the "Keep the People (Including the Chief Executive) Ignorant" Party. For short, we'll just call it the "Ignorance Party".
I propose we name the Democratic Party the "Whatever you want to hear and money is free" party.
It's one thing to make a lot of campaign promises which you don't (or can't) live up to. It's another to not even consider those things important in the first place-- in other words, it's a matter of whether a given candidate considers something a priority (or not). For example, do I actually think Hillary (if elected) would actually be able to do everything she's proposed above? No. But the fact that she's advocating the changes she mentioned does tell me about where she stands on these issues. Likewise on the Republican side-- on this side, I find John McCain's views at least habitable... while I don't totally agree with him, we're not vastly far apart, and at least I know where he stands.

[spearmint]

Says Hillary: "upgrade our innovation infrastructure."

Gimme a break. Talk about lame campaign promises.

[PeterB]

[quote spearmint]Says Hillary: "upgrade our innovation infrastructure."

Gimme a break. Talk about lame campaign promises.
Actually, that's one the things I found the most interesting. Our infrastructure IS really lacking. People who do research know what I'm talking about-- there's a lack of understanding on the part of people who don't do it of what's really required to do good research... that it isn't just a matter of pumping in dollars (though that's required too)-- people need time, they need not to have to worry about funding every second, they need better career support, especially at lower levels, etc.

[Grateful11]

>"money is free" party.

That fits the Repubs better as of lately because sure know how to spend it without anyway
of recovering it. George a big blank checkbook in his pocket at all times. What are we like
$9,000,000,000,000.00 in debt now?

[PeterB]

Grateful, as I was watching the 'Pubs debate tonight, I wondered about why -- amongst all this debate -- there was no mention of the federal deficit, and what they intend to do about it... an issue (fiscal responsibility) that supposedly the GOP calls their own. We currently stand at ... hmmm, best graph I've been able to find so far:

[Lux Interior]

[quote PeterB]



Rudy Giuliani, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statements.


Mike Huckabee, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statements.


Fred D. Thompson, Republican
Scientific Research: No available statement.
Good lord! I guess when the answer to everything is, "because God made it that way." life is really easy (i.e. ignorance is bliss).

[spearmint]

[quote PeterB]Grateful, as I was watching the 'Pubs debate tonight, I wondered about why -- amongst all this debate -- there was no mention of the federal deficit, and what they intend to do about it... an issue (fiscal responsibility) that supposedly the GOP calls their own. We currently stand at ... hmmm, best graph I've been able to find so far: Here's a another graph and some more information on the economy.

1. President does not spend money. Congress does, and the rebuilding of the military and the war have required heavy spending. Clinton cut manpower in the military manpower 40% in a time of chaos.

2. The Republicans represent fiscal responsibility and the Dems represent big government like the promised funding above which carries an expensive price tag. Universal Health Care and bigger Government will plummet us into the recession that will be blamed on this President if the Democrats prevail.

3. My latest favorite graph demonstrates the promised by all Dem Candidates, punishment of the rich, er Tax increases is likely going to cut tax revenues. Also seems to coincide with the steep reduction of the deficit in the the past few years as Peter B's shows. Yes folks the dreaded Voodoo Economics.



http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/...feder.html